4 ms·

This is boilerplate conspiratorial nonsense. West European countries would benefit far more from East European countries being free from the economic drag impos

This is boilerplate conspiratorial nonsense. West European countries would benefit far more from East European countries being free from the economic drag imposed by endemic corruption. The EU internal market overall would be much richer and stronger, and those banks and corporations would have a better quality consumer and labor base. Banks and corporations can make plenty of money in high-trust societies just as in low-trust ones, and they get more regulatory certainty as well.

JetSpiegel 4y ago
Most corruption cases benefit the German companies, so no, they would not benefit more, otherwise they would just lobby their local governments for fiscal transfer to the poorer countries. The opposite happens, the German constitutional court can veto foreign budgets if they don't pay the Danegeld (i.e. not wasting all european funds buying goods and services from Germany). The litmus test is this: can a EU country use european funds to create a new carmaker to compete with central european carmakers? Hell no. But you can spend all european funds buying cars from Germany, that's never wasteful. The EU has no policy to enrich the entire union, only the central countries. The EU funds are basically a workaround for direct transfers of money from the German government to German companies, via foreign countries. I'm not from a Eastern European country, but I do live in a poor Eastern European economy, it's the same dynamic.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>This is boilerplate conspiratorial nonsense It's not though. EU wide corruption scandals prove this. Western EU companies routinely pay bribes to dump plastics and toxic waste in Romanian landfills under the disguise of "recyclable material". This way those private companies save a few bucks to stay competitive, and their countries keep getting to call themselves "green" by exporting their environmental damage across the border. IKEA, plus Austrian and German wood companies routinely paid bribes in the Romanian timber industry to be able to perform mass deforestation. Austrian companies, like STR*BAG, paid bribes to Romanian politicians to get preferential juicy building contracts, sometimes using EU funds, for highways that never get completed due to various technicalities that got intentionally omitted from the contract so that the building company can just bail out from the deal without having built anything while getting paid in full. Basically, the EU taxpayer is paying for a western EU company to make bank in the east, all through EU funds funneled trough Romania, to build roads that never get built. All this high level corruption benefits major western EU companies, and corrupt eastern EU politicians a lot. Western EU politicians also benefit from this as the major companies in their countries lobby for them to keep this corrupt system going so they can keep making bank. The EU is a great thing, but it's also ripe with corruption that's costing the taxpayers tens of billions.

JetSpiegel 4y ago

Most corruption cases benefit the German companies, so no, they would not benefit more, otherwise they would just lobby their local governments for fiscal transfer to the poorer countries. The opposite happens, the German constitutional court can veto foreign budgets if they don't pay the Danegeld (i.e. not wasting all european funds buying goods and services from Germany). The litmus test is this: can a EU country use european funds to create a new carmaker to compete with central european carmakers? Hell no. But you can spend all european funds buying cars from Germany, that's never wasteful. The EU has no policy to enrich the entire union, only the central countries. The EU funds are basically a workaround for direct transfers of money from the German government to German companies, via foreign countries. I'm not from a Eastern European country, but I do live in a poor Eastern European economy, it's the same dynamic.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>This is boilerplate conspiratorial nonsense It's not though. EU wide corruption scandals prove this. Western EU companies routinely pay bribes to dump plastics and toxic waste in Romanian landfills under the disguise of "recyclable material". This way those private companies save a few bucks to stay competitive, and their countries keep getting to call themselves "green" by exporting their environmental damage across the border. IKEA, plus Austrian and German wood companies routinely paid bribes in the Romanian timber industry to be able to perform mass deforestation. Austrian companies, like STR*BAG, paid bribes to Romanian politicians to get preferential juicy building contracts, sometimes using EU funds, for highways that never get completed due to various technicalities that got intentionally omitted from the contract so that the building company can just bail out from the deal without having built anything while getting paid in full. Basically, the EU taxpayer is paying for a western EU company to make bank in the east, all through EU funds funneled trough Romania, to build roads that never get built. All this high level corruption benefits major western EU companies, and corrupt eastern EU politicians a lot. Western EU politicians also benefit from this as the major companies in their countries lobby for them to keep this corrupt system going so they can keep making bank. The EU is a great thing, but it's also ripe with corruption that's costing the taxpayers tens of billions.