4 ms·

1) Is a vote about leaving the EU, not joining it 2) Is not a vote about about joining the EU. It was a vote about an association agreement, which is different,

by tpm 10y ago

1) Is a vote about leaving the EU, not joining it 2) Is not a vote about about joining the EU. It was a vote about an association agreement, which is different, and also it was people in one country voting about a different country. Not a great idea really. 3) The Greek referendum is not a vote about joining the EU, and in any way the greek government, after it downed on them how disastrous would be to follow the vote, went the opposite way. 4) and 5) prove that it is a voluntary union, and are not about joining the EU - all the countries are already members. Not sure what your point is. "The EU most certainly does not have the consent of the governed." Yes it does, and its approval rating is still way over 50% in most countries. "This has got to be the stupidest move yet." Actually it sounds rather good to me, but I'd like to have a link to that decision please. Medical doctors are however free to work in any country for years already, they still make very good money and there are still shortages o medical personnel everywhere (source: friends among emigrated medical professionals). Southern Europe was given enough rope to hang itself and it did, but again this all were decisions of (corrupt and irresponsible) national governments, not of the EU. "The EU parliament has no power." It does have some, what I am saying is it has too little power. "Power exists within the European Commission" and also within the European Council (the summits), where all major decisions are taken. And this body consists of heads od the states. "The EC has the power to unilaterally impose laws on the member countries" It does not. "as was demonstrated with Greece" It was not demonstrated - Greece has to do things because otherwise the money will stop flowing and it will go bankrupt, which is a decision the Greek government can take at any time. "There are very few things that are beyond the reach of the EC." There are quite a lot of such things, national governments are still the institutions where most of the power resides. See the dictatorial tendencies of Hungarian and Polish governments, where the EC does almost nothing. "The EU has been an unmitigated disaster for normal people in the EU." Most of which currently live in the most prosperous era ever.

candiodari 10y ago
> Southern Europe was given enough rope to hang itself and it did, but again this all were decisions of (corrupt and irresponsible) national governments, not of the EU. I'm guessing you're reading the German or Dutch press ? I can only say, branch out a bit. A real analysis of what happened to Greece will yield that, when push comes to shove, it was in the same situation as 10 other EU countries, and the timing of a rate increase meant that Greece got into trouble, after which interventions happened to prevent the other countries from getting into trouble. Of the government support "given to Greece" between 80% and 90% ended up propping of foreign banks. The EU literally never deposited into an account controlled by the Greek state ... that's how bad it is. Just that fact by itself makes your calling this a decision by the Greek national government a gross misrepresentation. Is this all Greece's fault ? Yes, viewing Greece in isolation you could reasonably arrive at that conclusion, but Greece was in the same spot as others ... why didn't it cascade ? But Greece took the same actions as other EU countries until what is effectively a coincidence got them into trouble, which lead to a massive rise in interest rates, which sent them into a spiral from which they couldn't (and can't) escape. But they don't deserve their fate, their 25%+ unemployment, and their crippling bank limitations any more than Belgium, Ireland, Spain or Italy. And it's not like the debt difference with Germany was huge before this happened. Fact of the matter is that in 2012, Greece's finances were better than those of the US. So let's be clear : about 50% of the EU is in an unacceptable financial situation. Greece was picked out of the pack by random chance (effectively by the exact timing on bonds) and bludgeoned into submission, to serve as an example, a way to scare the rest into more and more concessions. Were these actions against Greece justified ? No they weren't. Greece is a sovereign state and should just have the choice not to repay it's debts. What happened to Greece can happen, in a matter of weeks, to half the EU countries and to the EU as a whole. All it takes is a stalemate at the ECB. Needless to say, depending on the newspaper/news organisation they either focus on public sector excesses in Greece, such as the early retirement age in some cases (ignoring, of course, how much of their pension they since lost). Either that or they focus on the social misery. A real analysis, from a financial perspective, of what happened can only really be found in economic papers and talks. Sucks. Holding Greece as a whole responsible for these events is ridiculous. Holding the Greek youth responsible for it, which is what's happening in practice, is outright evil. And frankly, the EU knows perfectly well what it's doing to these people and it deserves to die for what it's doing (it hasn't even stopped). Why didn't the same happen to 9 other countries ? If you're an EU citizen you have been paying an extra tax of about 120 euros per month, which has been given to banks, if they promise not to get more governments into trouble. That's why nobody but Greece got into trouble. The ECB (ie. the EU comission's finance minister) has promised, on your behalf, to keep paying this until at least December 2017, and has promised to these banks receiving the money that they stand ready with more if their profits are threatened ... (originally it was until March 2017, but -completely coincidentally I'm sure- right after the Deutsche bank profit figures were announced -and denounced- it was extended. They had the temerity to say it's now less. But paying 100 euros/month for 12 months instead of 120 euros/month for 4 months is ... well ... is how my bank would put it) > "The EC has the power to unilaterally impose laws on the member countries" It does not. Any system in which a majority of the population does not have the option to block laws is not a democracy. In the EU, that is the case, and that's why neither the EU, nor any of the member countries is a democracy. I will go into detail about what power the parliament doesn't have, but you obviously believe it does in a paragraph or two. But first, reality check : ask the Greeks whether or not democratic decisions work in the EU ... obviously the EC has the power to override measures voted in by the parliament of a "weaker" member nation which have been confirmed by referendum. But even in theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission#Powers_and_functions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission#Powers_and... Start reading there, read at least the next 2 pages, then continue here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_legislative_procedure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_legislative_pro... And read it in it's entirety. Note that the EU parliament DOES NOT HAVE THE OPTION NOT TO PASS LEGISLATION (!). The council stop is a joke, as the council is the "employer" of the commission, and really the same organisation. But you might say, the parliament can play games with amending proposals, thereby making legislation impossible to pass. That's nice, but what happens then ? Well, the commission has the option of calling for an "emergency break" procedure, after which the council can just pass the proposed not-amended proposal of the commission. Ergo, the legislative power is 100% in the hands of the EU commission ("and" the EU council). > "The EU has been an unmitigated disaster for normal people in the EU." Most of which currently live in the most prosperous era ever. This is the worst statistic, I get it, it is an extreme example, however ... claiming that this huge mass of people experiences this "era" as the "most prosperous ever" is not just disingenuous, but borders on malevolent: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemploymen... And please don't say "it's their own fault". It is not. It is neither the fault of these states, nor is it the fault of the victims of the EU.
- tpm 10y ago
  > "Greece ... was in the same situation as 10 other EU countries" not really - Greece is especially troublesome, because it was not able to collect enough taxes from its own citizens and businesses, and also there was huge corruption. > "Of the government support "given to Greece" between 80% and 90% ended up propping of foreign banks." Yes - the alternative was to cut Greece out of the loop and only save the banks. Also, you have to consider the public sentiment of helping countries: in a lot of them, people made (and sometimes still make) much less money than the average Greek. So why should we send them money, people ask? Now don't get me wrong, I think the EU help for Greece is a good thing, but also let's not kid ourselves - the country borrowed a lot of money and spent most of it very ineffectively. >"Greece is a sovereign state and should just have the choice not to repay it's debts." And it does. What it does not have is the choice to stay within the Eurozone and not repay its debts - such is the thing with international bodies, they have rules and you must adhere to them to stay in the club. >"And frankly, the EU knows perfectly well what it's doing to these people" Thing is, the peripheral countries were given a _lot_ of money during the last 30-40 years in cohesive funding etc; the wages and living standards climbed accordingly; people got used to it. Then the financial crisis came and coutries which invested wisely were able to withstand it, others less so. Without the EU, the Greeks would be poor (look at the Bulgarian or Macedonian GDP per capita); the EU gave them a chance to change that; it does not seem they used it well. > "Any system in which a majority of the population does not have the option to block laws is not a democracy." Never heard such a definition. Anyway you are saying that a majority of EU population does not have the option to block laws? I don't think that's true. >"Start reading there, read at least the next 2 pages, then continue here" Or maybe you could tell me what your point is. >"The council stop is a joke" No it's not, the Council is in fact the most powerful body of the EU, and decisions there are taken by heads of the countries. I don't like that, but it's the current state of affairs. >"the legislative power is 100% in the hands of the EU commission" Which, again, consists of people nominated by the member countries. >claiming that this huge mass of people experiences this "era" as the "most prosperous ever" Good thing then I don't claim that. ('most', as I said) >"It is neither the fault of these states" Oh but it absolutely is. Companies don't employ new (young) people, because it's way too expensive to do that if the national legislation makes it so. On the other hand, there is record low unemployment in some countries (at least czech republic, slovakia, possibly poland, and I think also Germany, possibly others). So evidently some countries are doing something good. See also my point about some countries not investing effectively.

by tpm 10y ago

candiodari 10y ago

> Southern Europe was given enough rope to hang itself and it did, but again this all were decisions of (corrupt and irresponsible) national governments, not of the EU. I'm guessing you're reading the German or Dutch press ? I can only say, branch out a bit. A real analysis of what happened to Greece will yield that, when push comes to shove, it was in the same situation as 10 other EU countries, and the timing of a rate increase meant that Greece got into trouble, after which interventions happened to prevent the other countries from getting into trouble. Of the government support "given to Greece" between 80% and 90% ended up propping of foreign banks. The EU literally never deposited into an account controlled by the Greek state ... that's how bad it is. Just that fact by itself makes your calling this a decision by the Greek national government a gross misrepresentation. Is this all Greece's fault ? Yes, viewing Greece in isolation you could reasonably arrive at that conclusion, but Greece was in the same spot as others ... why didn't it cascade ? But Greece took the same actions as other EU countries until what is effectively a coincidence got them into trouble, which lead to a massive rise in interest rates, which sent them into a spiral from which they couldn't (and can't) escape. But they don't deserve their fate, their 25%+ unemployment, and their crippling bank limitations any more than Belgium, Ireland, Spain or Italy. And it's not like the debt difference with Germany was huge before this happened. Fact of the matter is that in 2012, Greece's finances were better than those of the US. So let's be clear : about 50% of the EU is in an unacceptable financial situation. Greece was picked out of the pack by random chance (effectively by the exact timing on bonds) and bludgeoned into submission, to serve as an example, a way to scare the rest into more and more concessions. Were these actions against Greece justified ? No they weren't. Greece is a sovereign state and should just have the choice not to repay it's debts. What happened to Greece can happen, in a matter of weeks, to half the EU countries and to the EU as a whole. All it takes is a stalemate at the ECB. Needless to say, depending on the newspaper/news organisation they either focus on public sector excesses in Greece, such as the early retirement age in some cases (ignoring, of course, how much of their pension they since lost). Either that or they focus on the social misery. A real analysis, from a financial perspective, of what happened can only really be found in economic papers and talks. Sucks. Holding Greece as a whole responsible for these events is ridiculous. Holding the Greek youth responsible for it, which is what's happening in practice, is outright evil. And frankly, the EU knows perfectly well what it's doing to these people and it deserves to die for what it's doing (it hasn't even stopped). Why didn't the same happen to 9 other countries ? If you're an EU citizen you have been paying an extra tax of about 120 euros per month, which has been given to banks, if they promise not to get more governments into trouble. That's why nobody but Greece got into trouble. The ECB (ie. the EU comission's finance minister) has promised, on your behalf, to keep paying this until at least December 2017, and has promised to these banks receiving the money that they stand ready with more if their profits are threatened ... (originally it was until March 2017, but -completely coincidentally I'm sure- right after the Deutsche bank profit figures were announced -and denounced- it was extended. They had the temerity to say it's now less. But paying 100 euros/month for 12 months instead of 120 euros/month for 4 months is ... well ... is how my bank would put it) > "The EC has the power to unilaterally impose laws on the member countries" It does not. Any system in which a majority of the population does not have the option to block laws is not a democracy. In the EU, that is the case, and that's why neither the EU, nor any of the member countries is a democracy. I will go into detail about what power the parliament doesn't have, but you obviously believe it does in a paragraph or two. But first, reality check : ask the Greeks whether or not democratic decisions work in the EU ... obviously the EC has the power to override measures voted in by the parliament of a "weaker" member nation which have been confirmed by referendum. But even in theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission#Powers_and_functions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission#Powers_and... Start reading there, read at least the next 2 pages, then continue here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_legislative_procedure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_legislative_pro... And read it in it's entirety. Note that the EU parliament DOES NOT HAVE THE OPTION NOT TO PASS LEGISLATION (!). The council stop is a joke, as the council is the "employer" of the commission, and really the same organisation. But you might say, the parliament can play games with amending proposals, thereby making legislation impossible to pass. That's nice, but what happens then ? Well, the commission has the option of calling for an "emergency break" procedure, after which the council can just pass the proposed not-amended proposal of the commission. Ergo, the legislative power is 100% in the hands of the EU commission ("and" the EU council). > "The EU has been an unmitigated disaster for normal people in the EU." Most of which currently live in the most prosperous era ever. This is the worst statistic, I get it, it is an extreme example, however ... claiming that this huge mass of people experiences this "era" as the "most prosperous ever" is not just disingenuous, but borders on malevolent: https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemploymen... And please don't say "it's their own fault". It is not. It is neither the fault of these states, nor is it the fault of the victims of the EU.

tpm 10y ago
> "Greece ... was in the same situation as 10 other EU countries" not really - Greece is especially troublesome, because it was not able to collect enough taxes from its own citizens and businesses, and also there was huge corruption. > "Of the government support "given to Greece" between 80% and 90% ended up propping of foreign banks." Yes - the alternative was to cut Greece out of the loop and only save the banks. Also, you have to consider the public sentiment of helping countries: in a lot of them, people made (and sometimes still make) much less money than the average Greek. So why should we send them money, people ask? Now don't get me wrong, I think the EU help for Greece is a good thing, but also let's not kid ourselves - the country borrowed a lot of money and spent most of it very ineffectively. >"Greece is a sovereign state and should just have the choice not to repay it's debts." And it does. What it does not have is the choice to stay within the Eurozone and not repay its debts - such is the thing with international bodies, they have rules and you must adhere to them to stay in the club. >"And frankly, the EU knows perfectly well what it's doing to these people" Thing is, the peripheral countries were given a _lot_ of money during the last 30-40 years in cohesive funding etc; the wages and living standards climbed accordingly; people got used to it. Then the financial crisis came and coutries which invested wisely were able to withstand it, others less so. Without the EU, the Greeks would be poor (look at the Bulgarian or Macedonian GDP per capita); the EU gave them a chance to change that; it does not seem they used it well. > "Any system in which a majority of the population does not have the option to block laws is not a democracy." Never heard such a definition. Anyway you are saying that a majority of EU population does not have the option to block laws? I don't think that's true. >"Start reading there, read at least the next 2 pages, then continue here" Or maybe you could tell me what your point is. >"The council stop is a joke" No it's not, the Council is in fact the most powerful body of the EU, and decisions there are taken by heads of the countries. I don't like that, but it's the current state of affairs. >"the legislative power is 100% in the hands of the EU commission" Which, again, consists of people nominated by the member countries. >claiming that this huge mass of people experiences this "era" as the "most prosperous ever" Good thing then I don't claim that. ('most', as I said) >"It is neither the fault of these states" Oh but it absolutely is. Companies don't employ new (young) people, because it's way too expensive to do that if the national legislation makes it so. On the other hand, there is record low unemployment in some countries (at least czech republic, slovakia, possibly poland, and I think also Germany, possibly others). So evidently some countries are doing something good. See also my point about some countries not investing effectively.