11 ms·

I don't agree with the downvotes you are receiving, you make some good overall points (but also some bad ones). Nothing is dead until it is entirely dead, and

by orf 10y ago

I don't agree with the downvotes you are receiving, you make some good overall points (but also some bad ones). Nothing is dead until it is entirely dead, and the EU idea still runs strong in people. Things need to change, as Brexit and the recent problems faced by the union have shown. Now it's down to the time to reform. I don't think Macron is choosing the status quo though, hes as much as a political outsider as Trump and I hope he will make some progress in achieving reforms.

Boothroid 10y ago
A former Rothschild banker - surely part of the establishment, but perhaps a different part
- cm2187 10y ago
  It's funny that he has this image of being a banker. This guy did all of his career at the ministry of finance or in a minister's staff, then went to monetize his address book for two years in a bank before coming back to politics. I don't really see him as a banker. I see him as a civil servant and a networking artist.
  - Boothroid 10y ago
    I am now better informed. Thank you.
mtgx 10y ago
What exactly "needs to change"? When I see people complain about the EU it's usually about "the EU taking their sovereignty and imposing stuff on them". So if "things are going to change" that means the EU would have to become less like the U.S. (a federal entity), and more like an aggregate of wildly different cultures and regulations (so more like the pre-EU Europe). Is that really a good thing? And do things "need to change" that way? Or is more education necessary about why the EU needs to become more homogeneous and less heterogeneous? I can say one thing - if EU states remain wildly different from each other in culture, language, and regulations, the EU will continue to remain a much less appealing market than the US. And it's not so much that the laws are "stricter" (like say the privacy ones), as it is about the laws being different in each country, and making it hard for a company to be compliant with all of them. And I think that means fewer options and fewer quality products for Europeans in the end (you'll be stuck with your locally-made products).
- RobertoG 10y ago
  Of course, you can find all kind of opinions, but it seems to me, that the EU (more specifically the Euroarea) could be just a loose commercial and travel area without a common currency or a real federation with economics stabilizer between regions and a real democratic mandate. What it can't be is something in the middle, like it's now.
- sparkling 10y ago
  What the EU is trying to do has been done in the past and it has failed. The EU as it is right now is becoming the next Sovient Union. A undemocratic, centralised, bureaucratic superstate that strips the people from their sovereignty, independence, cultural and ethnic traditions. Further, you seem to assume that without the EU, trade between countries would somehow radically decrease, i don't see that happening. The European Economic Area (EEA) and the Schengen treaty exist independently from the EU. Norway and Switzerland are not members of the EU, yet they trade perfectly fine with others. The EU is not necessary for free trade. PS: Feel free to downvote, but at least make an argument.
  - d215 10y ago
    > What the EU is trying to do has been done in the past and it has failed. First, If we would never try what in the past has failed then we would be really in a very stagnant state. Second, the EU has not failed, the EU is still the main reason for the prosperity most of its members have gained and still continue to gain after WWII. That it has had some backlashes recently does not mean at all that it has failed. > The EU is not necessary for free trade. It is not. It is however necessary for a internal economic market that guarantees the free flow of capital and labor, which is much wider/different in scope than free trade. Free trade can be arranged with a few trade treaties in neo liberal style.
    - sparkling 10y ago
      > It is however necessary for a internal economic market that guarantees the free flow of capital and labor That is, by definition, the purpose of the European Economic Area. Not the EU.
RobertoG 10y ago
"I don't think Macron is choosing the status quo though, hes as much as a political outsider as Trump and I hope he will make some progress in achieving reforms." Macron was and investment banker and a Minister of Economy. I suppose our definitions of outsider are really different.
dirtyaura 10y ago
I don't think Macron is a political outsider. He is from elite schools, served as a finance minister before. What he (and powers that backed him) realized is that political landscapes are changing everywhere and there was an opportunity to run without support of traditional parties. The major political axis is now national/conservative vs global/liberal, instead of traditional economic left vs right.
- petre 10y ago
  Don't fool yourself, it's still left/right and will get even more radicalized as the economic climate worsens and we face disruption (terrorism, migration).
  - dirtyaura 10y ago
    Don't fool yourself: terrorism by a few religious loonies as a problem has been and will be a drop in the ocean. The real issues are: how we organize work and social security in the global knowledge economy? How we deal with the climate change? How we deal with info ops, which is already much more destabilizing problem for western democracies than terrorism. You are right that migration is tough challenge, how we will handle increasing migration?
    - ameen 10y ago
      Unfortunate that posting factual thoughts about terrorism are downvoted. The "threat of terrorism" is how the right wants to organize the west.
      - user5994461 10y ago
        Terrorism is nothing. People are much more worried about healthcare, jobs and pensions. If you are French, all 3 are mostly nationalized.
mnm1 10y ago
Trump a political outsider. Lol. What a lie and many of the unthinking masses actually believed it. They probably still do. As if billionaires and politicians don't run in the exact same circles. As if it wasn't made crystal clear after the inauguration. Politics and business leadership in the U.S. are the same thing. There's no way in hell anyone's going to make billions without being a political insider.
pottersbasilisk 10y ago
Political outsider doesnt mean anti-establishment. Trump is clearly anti-establishment. Macron was pro-eu.
- tradersam 10y ago
  I think it has been proven Trump isn't actually anti-establishment, that was just a lie he used during the campaign.
  - sangnoir 10y ago
    Has it been proven? One of his advisers is on the record stating that the cabinet was chosen to "deconstruct the administrative state"[1], and Trump proceeded to appoint individuals (at least 2 by my reckoning) with beliefs contrary to the missions of the agencies they lead. 1. http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bannon-trump-cabinet-cpac/ http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bannon-trump-cabinet-cpac/
    - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
      I guess it depends on whether you think the EPA, and public schooling, have traditionally helped or hindered the "establishment". If you think wars for oil in the mid-east etc. are what the establishment wants, then the scientists at the EPA are a threat to that. If you think the establishment are Al Gore and his fellow communist hoaxers, then wrecking the EPA is an anti-elitists move.
    - tradersam 10y ago
      True, he appointed terrible people to the head of some important organizations. Dismantling them could be labeled "anti-establishment" but if they were a net win for humanity and kill/downsizing is a net win for business, that is clearly the establishment trope of pandering to big business.
  - BatFastard 10y ago
    Trump seems to be Pro-Trump, anything else is just convenience or political favor.

by orf 10y ago

Boothroid 10y ago

A former Rothschild banker - surely part of the establishment, but perhaps a different part

cm2187 10y ago
It's funny that he has this image of being a banker. This guy did all of his career at the ministry of finance or in a minister's staff, then went to monetize his address book for two years in a bank before coming back to politics. I don't really see him as a banker. I see him as a civil servant and a networking artist.
- Boothroid 10y ago
  I am now better informed. Thank you.

mtgx 10y ago

What exactly "needs to change"? When I see people complain about the EU it's usually about "the EU taking their sovereignty and imposing stuff on them". So if "things are going to change" that means the EU would have to become less like the U.S. (a federal entity), and more like an aggregate of wildly different cultures and regulations (so more like the pre-EU Europe). Is that really a good thing? And do things "need to change" that way? Or is more education necessary about why the EU needs to become more homogeneous and less heterogeneous? I can say one thing - if EU states remain wildly different from each other in culture, language, and regulations, the EU will continue to remain a much less appealing market than the US. And it's not so much that the laws are "stricter" (like say the privacy ones), as it is about the laws being different in each country, and making it hard for a company to be compliant with all of them. And I think that means fewer options and fewer quality products for Europeans in the end (you'll be stuck with your locally-made products).

RobertoG 10y ago
Of course, you can find all kind of opinions, but it seems to me, that the EU (more specifically the Euroarea) could be just a loose commercial and travel area without a common currency or a real federation with economics stabilizer between regions and a real democratic mandate. What it can't be is something in the middle, like it's now.
sparkling 10y ago
What the EU is trying to do has been done in the past and it has failed. The EU as it is right now is becoming the next Sovient Union. A undemocratic, centralised, bureaucratic superstate that strips the people from their sovereignty, independence, cultural and ethnic traditions. Further, you seem to assume that without the EU, trade between countries would somehow radically decrease, i don't see that happening. The European Economic Area (EEA) and the Schengen treaty exist independently from the EU. Norway and Switzerland are not members of the EU, yet they trade perfectly fine with others. The EU is not necessary for free trade. PS: Feel free to downvote, but at least make an argument.
- d215 10y ago
  > What the EU is trying to do has been done in the past and it has failed. First, If we would never try what in the past has failed then we would be really in a very stagnant state. Second, the EU has not failed, the EU is still the main reason for the prosperity most of its members have gained and still continue to gain after WWII. That it has had some backlashes recently does not mean at all that it has failed. > The EU is not necessary for free trade. It is not. It is however necessary for a internal economic market that guarantees the free flow of capital and labor, which is much wider/different in scope than free trade. Free trade can be arranged with a few trade treaties in neo liberal style.
  - sparkling 10y ago
    > It is however necessary for a internal economic market that guarantees the free flow of capital and labor That is, by definition, the purpose of the European Economic Area. Not the EU.

RobertoG 10y ago

"I don't think Macron is choosing the status quo though, hes as much as a political outsider as Trump and I hope he will make some progress in achieving reforms." Macron was and investment banker and a Minister of Economy. I suppose our definitions of outsider are really different.

dirtyaura 10y ago

I don't think Macron is a political outsider. He is from elite schools, served as a finance minister before. What he (and powers that backed him) realized is that political landscapes are changing everywhere and there was an opportunity to run without support of traditional parties. The major political axis is now national/conservative vs global/liberal, instead of traditional economic left vs right.

petre 10y ago
Don't fool yourself, it's still left/right and will get even more radicalized as the economic climate worsens and we face disruption (terrorism, migration).
- dirtyaura 10y ago
  Don't fool yourself: terrorism by a few religious loonies as a problem has been and will be a drop in the ocean. The real issues are: how we organize work and social security in the global knowledge economy? How we deal with the climate change? How we deal with info ops, which is already much more destabilizing problem for western democracies than terrorism. You are right that migration is tough challenge, how we will handle increasing migration?
  - ameen 10y ago
    Unfortunate that posting factual thoughts about terrorism are downvoted. The "threat of terrorism" is how the right wants to organize the west.
    - user5994461 10y ago
      Terrorism is nothing. People are much more worried about healthcare, jobs and pensions. If you are French, all 3 are mostly nationalized.

mnm1 10y ago

Trump a political outsider. Lol. What a lie and many of the unthinking masses actually believed it. They probably still do. As if billionaires and politicians don't run in the exact same circles. As if it wasn't made crystal clear after the inauguration. Politics and business leadership in the U.S. are the same thing. There's no way in hell anyone's going to make billions without being a political insider.

pottersbasilisk 10y ago

Political outsider doesnt mean anti-establishment. Trump is clearly anti-establishment. Macron was pro-eu.

tradersam 10y ago
I think it has been proven Trump isn't actually anti-establishment, that was just a lie he used during the campaign.
- sangnoir 10y ago
  Has it been proven? One of his advisers is on the record stating that the cabinet was chosen to "deconstruct the administrative state"[1], and Trump proceeded to appoint individuals (at least 2 by my reckoning) with beliefs contrary to the missions of the agencies they lead. 1. http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bannon-trump-cabinet-cpac/ http://fortune.com/2017/02/25/bannon-trump-cabinet-cpac/
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    I guess it depends on whether you think the EPA, and public schooling, have traditionally helped or hindered the "establishment". If you think wars for oil in the mid-east etc. are what the establishment wants, then the scientists at the EPA are a threat to that. If you think the establishment are Al Gore and his fellow communist hoaxers, then wrecking the EPA is an anti-elitists move.
  - tradersam 10y ago
    True, he appointed terrible people to the head of some important organizations. Dismantling them could be labeled "anti-establishment" but if they were a net win for humanity and kill/downsizing is a net win for business, that is clearly the establishment trope of pandering to big business.
- BatFastard 10y ago
  Trump seems to be Pro-Trump, anything else is just convenience or political favor.