I wrote down my views on the whole EU subject elsewhere a month or so ago, and stand by them.
The whole idea is good, but it's improperly executed.
The EU and Euro would have worked if there was a strong central government that controlled the entire union, with the current governments reduced to the status of regions/provinces rather than countries. If we had such a central government checking and adjusting the budgets of all members, none of this would have happened.
Now, due to the lack of control and local politics being so important, some countries made a mess of it because their politicians didn't want to make cuts which would cost them votes, and the entire euro zone is suffering as a result.
Now there's this proposal to increase the EU's control over the member countries' budgets, the markets and there's the intention to bring their national deficits down to 60% of the GDP.
While the reduction of the deficits means serious cuts for now, in the long term it would be a good thing and probably the only way to get out of this crisis without causing another one in a few years.
Less deficit means that you need less money for the interest on the debt, which means that either the taxes can be lowered to kick the economy back into a higher gear, or that the saved money can be used to decrease the deficit even more, thereby saving even more money.
The main problem with this, is that 95% of the people only think about the immediate influence on their wallet rather than the long-term effect on the economy. They don't want more taxes or a lower income right now, as that will mean they have less money to spend on their next house/car/bike/playstation. And politicians know this, which is why they only think as far ahead as the next elections, where they would lose votes if they actually take measures to do something about the grim outlook.
Once again, local politics and politicians' sense of self-preservation seem more important than the entire union, which is why the problems started in the first place.
So when Cameron mentioned that the proposal wasn't in the UK's best interests, he was only talking about the next few years. With this decision he not only jeopardizes the long-term future of the UK's economy, but that of the entire EU.
There are 2 ways out of this really. Either let the EU collapse (like Sylus suggested) and let all the countries solve it by themselves, or turn it into a real "United States of Europe".
Methinks the latter option is the least painful for anyone not living in Germany, and the first one will cause several countries to go bankrupt. (Italy, Greece, probably Spain)
Belgium won't go bankrupt, but will probably split up in this scenario. The grunt of the deficit will go to Flanders, but we can handle that. wallonia on the other hand would either join France or go bankrupt.