3 ms·

First Google result: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/the-european-union/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/the-european-u... >The peo

by chki 6y ago

First Google result: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/the-european-union/ https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/the-european-u... >The people pushing for more integration are politicians and bureaucrats, not normal people. That's simply not true. There are multiple civil society organizations pushing for a closer union. People are voting for parties that are explicitly pro-European.

mehrdadn 6y ago
I don't know who's right but France has some 65M people whereas e.g. Lithuania has 3M people. And France provides 15% of the EU budget whereas (say) Lithuania provides 0.3%. I'm not sure listing all countries on a bar chart as if their opinions have equal impact on the fate of the EU is an accurate way to illustrate the situation? Would the EU do just fine after losing the UK and a country like France? Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Maybe you could argue it would, but I guess it seems far from obvious to me.
- bkor 6y ago
  > Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Germans took up way more monetary responsibility during Corona. E.g. they took various patients from Netherlands and paid for the care themself. Same with the financial crisis that was a result of Corona, Germany was happy to help out other countries. Now if you look at what Netherlands gains out of the EU (so what the EU is worth to NL) it is about 7 to 8 times the net payment. Limiting the net amount paid is good, but the focus on net payment without looking at what you get is quite short sighted. See e.g. UK where just paying the custom agents will cost an equivalent as the EU payments.
- imtringued 6y ago
  >Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Maybe you could argue it would, but I guess it seems far from obvious to me. It would be shameful if we didn't, because helping poorer countries grow is the entire point of these transfer payments. The bigger issue is that there is lots of abuse and it doesn't actually improve the grand picture. Money is nice but only if it's used responsibly. If there was a way to reduce corruption in Eastern European countries they would grow on their own without any transfer payments. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective), that's outside the scope of the EU. It's the age old "give a man a fish vs teach a man to fish".
m12k 6y ago
Not one of the linked questions from that survey measured whether the respondents wanted more integration between EU countries, only how favorably they viewed the EU. So just to be clear: Those two things are very different. There's a world of difference between wanting more international cooperation (or actually, just liking the current amount of international cooperation) and wanting to give up more sovereignty. I'm not arguing against the EU being viewed favorably by the citizens of the EU - that is indeed generally the case. Case in point, I myself view the EU favorably, yet I'm also very concerned that about the push toward making it more of a supra-national organization (above its member states legally, who have given it sovereignty, and are forced into new deals, even ones its citizens disagree fiercely with) and less of an international organization (a forum for discussion and facilitator of agreements between its member states, who maintain their sovereignty, and are able to opt out of deals they don't want to be in). The people driving this push are indeed politicians and bureaucrats, not the general electorate. And why wouldn't it be - if you asked a normal person on the street "would you prefer that the laws governing your country are made by the politicians in your parliament that you know the names of, and have a say in electing, or primarily by hundreds of politicians from other countries, that might have a completetely different culture than you, and that you have no say in electing?" what do you think the response would be?

by chki 6y ago

mehrdadn 6y ago

I don't know who's right but France has some 65M people whereas e.g. Lithuania has 3M people. And France provides 15% of the EU budget whereas (say) Lithuania provides 0.3%. I'm not sure listing all countries on a bar chart as if their opinions have equal impact on the fate of the EU is an accurate way to illustrate the situation? Would the EU do just fine after losing the UK and a country like France? Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Maybe you could argue it would, but I guess it seems far from obvious to me.

bkor 6y ago
> Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Germans took up way more monetary responsibility during Corona. E.g. they took various patients from Netherlands and paid for the care themself. Same with the financial crisis that was a result of Corona, Germany was happy to help out other countries. Now if you look at what Netherlands gains out of the EU (so what the EU is worth to NL) it is about 7 to 8 times the net payment. Limiting the net amount paid is good, but the focus on net payment without looking at what you get is quite short sighted. See e.g. UK where just paying the custom agents will cost an equivalent as the EU payments.
imtringued 6y ago
>Would Germans still love the EU so much after they realize they're paying twice as much into the EU as the next country? Maybe you could argue it would, but I guess it seems far from obvious to me. It would be shameful if we didn't, because helping poorer countries grow is the entire point of these transfer payments. The bigger issue is that there is lots of abuse and it doesn't actually improve the grand picture. Money is nice but only if it's used responsibly. If there was a way to reduce corruption in Eastern European countries they would grow on their own without any transfer payments. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective), that's outside the scope of the EU. It's the age old "give a man a fish vs teach a man to fish".

m12k 6y ago

Not one of the linked questions from that survey measured whether the respondents wanted more integration between EU countries, only how favorably they viewed the EU. So just to be clear: Those two things are very different. There's a world of difference between wanting more international cooperation (or actually, just liking the current amount of international cooperation) and wanting to give up more sovereignty. I'm not arguing against the EU being viewed favorably by the citizens of the EU - that is indeed generally the case. Case in point, I myself view the EU favorably, yet I'm also very concerned that about the push toward making it more of a supra-national organization (above its member states legally, who have given it sovereignty, and are forced into new deals, even ones its citizens disagree fiercely with) and less of an international organization (a forum for discussion and facilitator of agreements between its member states, who maintain their sovereignty, and are able to opt out of deals they don't want to be in). The people driving this push are indeed politicians and bureaucrats, not the general electorate. And why wouldn't it be - if you asked a normal person on the street "would you prefer that the laws governing your country are made by the politicians in your parliament that you know the names of, and have a say in electing, or primarily by hundreds of politicians from other countries, that might have a completetely different culture than you, and that you have no say in electing?" what do you think the response would be?