5 ms·

Who is "we", in these sentences? It sounds like you mean the EU. The EU has a massive public relations budget. Most estimates place it at over half a billion e

Who is "we", in these sentences? It sounds like you mean the EU. The EU has a massive public relations budget. Most estimates place it at over half a billion euros per year just on self-promotion, although the true figure can be much larger if you consider the money "donated" by member states for subsidies and projects, that are then rebranded as EU funding: https://fullfact.org/europe/how-much-does-eu-spend-promoting-itself/ https://fullfact.org/europe/how-much-does-eu-spend-promoting... The EU spends significant time and effort on combating false information. The problem is that most of the information it tries to combat isn't actually false, so it ends up backfiring. For example, this "myth busting" page: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/what/myth-busting/ https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/what/myth-bus... The response to the so-called myth, "useless projects are funded with EU money" is some bland corporate-speak that says nothing: "National and regional authorities in the EU countries select projects which they think meet their needs best in line with the strategies and priorities agreed with the Commission" It's a response to stories like this one: https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/how_european_union_aid_is_squandered_on_wasteful_projects https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/how_european_union_aid_is_... which revealed the EU spent money on: • Weekly free trapeze lessons for people in Tanzania (nb: not in the EU) • Courses on how to make art from plastic bags in Dar Es Salaam (also not in the EU) • Nearly 200k EUR on EU self-promotion in Jamaica • Half a million EUR to a Zimbabwean "culture fund" whose CEO was a staunch defender of Mugabe etc. So the reason euroscepticism is on the rise isn't due to lack of money spent on propaganda, far from it. It's on the rise because the EU is extremely corrupt and its own attempts to defend itself are useless.

pjc50 6y ago
Where's the corresponding one mocking UK public and foreign policy spending? The "tax payers alliance" is one, murkily-funded, extremely partisan guy.
- beerandt 6y ago
  I think the more relevant point is not that political propaganda/ pork spending is automatically and inherently wasteful, but that the political value thereof is highly subjective and varies greatly based on locale. The US career politicians have arrived at a basic understanding, where loads of widely distributed pork spending is the acceptable cost of doing politics their way. The EU is not quite to the point where naming every local post office and govt building requires (supra-)national political capital and cooperation to accomplish.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Please try to avoid attacking the messengers instead of debating the message. It's that kind of behaviour that led to Remain losing the referendum. Where's the corresponding one mocking UK public and foreign policy spending On the same website! The TPA exists to mock wasteful government spending and inefficiency regulation in the UK, that's its entire purpose. On their website right now there are only UK specific campaigns, like one to abolish the license fee, or this one on wasteful local government spending: https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/city_hall_rich_list_2020 https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/city_hall_rich_list_2020 The "tax payers alliance" is one, murkily-funded, extremely partisan guy. The TPA lists 21 people on its team page, it's not one guy. At any rate, you didn't respond to the substance of my post. The EU wastes a lot of money on projects that don't help the people who pay for them. Its attempted defences of this practice are very weak. This sort of thing combined with shoot-the-messenger responses like yours create euroskepticism. That's the key point.

pjc50 6y ago

Where's the corresponding one mocking UK public and foreign policy spending? The "tax payers alliance" is one, murkily-funded, extremely partisan guy.

beerandt 6y ago
I think the more relevant point is not that political propaganda/ pork spending is automatically and inherently wasteful, but that the political value thereof is highly subjective and varies greatly based on locale. The US career politicians have arrived at a basic understanding, where loads of widely distributed pork spending is the acceptable cost of doing politics their way. The EU is not quite to the point where naming every local post office and govt building requires (supra-)national political capital and cooperation to accomplish.
thu2111 6y ago
Please try to avoid attacking the messengers instead of debating the message. It's that kind of behaviour that led to Remain losing the referendum. Where's the corresponding one mocking UK public and foreign policy spending On the same website! The TPA exists to mock wasteful government spending and inefficiency regulation in the UK, that's its entire purpose. On their website right now there are only UK specific campaigns, like one to abolish the license fee, or this one on wasteful local government spending: https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/city_hall_rich_list_2020 https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/city_hall_rich_list_2020 The "tax payers alliance" is one, murkily-funded, extremely partisan guy. The TPA lists 21 people on its team page, it's not one guy. At any rate, you didn't respond to the substance of my post. The EU wastes a lot of money on projects that don't help the people who pay for them. Its attempted defences of this practice are very weak. This sort of thing combined with shoot-the-messenger responses like yours create euroskepticism. That's the key point.