4 ms·

Wacky idea. The EU is an awful lot of legislation to sign up to, not the most popular it's even been either. If it's just about trading space and resources for

Wacky idea. The EU is an awful lot of legislation to sign up to, not the most popular it's even been either. If it's just about trading space and resources for people I'd imagine a more bespoke arrangement would be preferable for both sides.

iknowstuff 2y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_single_market https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_single_market The four freedoms of the single market you get in return are incredible.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  Only the free movement of labor is really unusual. As in ... really, really, really unusual. Lots of trade deals include variations of the first 3 ... free movement of labor is basically unheard of between nation states as part of trade deals.
  - skissane 2y ago
    Australia and New Zealand have both free trade and free movement of people between them. They aren't formally linked – free trade is a treaty, free movement of people is just an "arrangement" (not a legally binding agreement under international law, rather a political agreement implemented in each country's immigration law) – but it is all part of the overall multifaceted bilateral relationship.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      Well, that gets the heart of what's do revolutionary about the EU's basic premises. "You want to move capital and profits and materials without limit? Sure, no problem, but only if labor has the same freedom."
      - skissane 2y ago
        I think a big difference is that Australia and New Zealand are only two countries, so there has never been felt to be a need to establish many joint institutions. Issues can generally be worked through by one-on-one negotiation. Rather than some single overarching body to manage everything, there are lots of individual agreements and arrangements on separate issues. There are some joint institutions – for example, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), which is in charge of food regulation for both countries – but rather than an international bureaucracy, it is an Australian government agency. Even its Wellington office, all the employees are technically Australian public servants, even though they are mostly New Zealanders. New Zealand pays the Australian government part of FSANZ's budget; FSANZ issues new food regulations under Australian law and then the New Zealand government copies/pastes them into New Zealand law too: with rare exceptions, they are allowed to refuse to adopt a change if they disagree with it–Kava is a recent example, Australia has been cracking down on Kava due to concerns about the health risk, and using both controlled substances and food standards regulation to do so; New Zealand has been unwilling to go along due to its cultural importance to New Zealand's Pasifika (Pacific Islander) minority. The issue is that the neighbouring countries are generally a lot poorer, and many of them are small island states, often with a shaky track record on democracy, so it just isn't politically and economically feasible to integrate them into the same economic relations as Australia and New Zealand have. There has been some talk of turning the Pacific Islands Forum, the regional international organisation, into a "Pacific Union", by expanding Australia/New Zealand's de facto economic union to the whole bloc. But realistically I think that's decades away, if it ever happens. And unless and until that happens, there is no real need to put the Australia/New Zealand economic union on a more formal footing.
      - ncruces 2y ago
        Not just that, it gives rise to the concept of EU citizenship, which covers more than just freedom of movement.
  - bluepizza 2y ago
    Mercosur, Australia-New Zealand, and the Gulf Cooperation Council all have a similar agreement on movement of labour. It is not particularly rare.
make3 2y ago
This is never passing. Trump-inspired conservatives are on their ways to be guaranteed majority at the next federal elections.
- joshl32532 2y ago
  The conservatives were leading the polls wayyy before Trump even winning the GOP primaries. Canadians are just tired of Justin Trudeau after almost 10 years. Which happens to even the best of leaders, and JT is far from it.
mmooss 2y ago
Despite the critics, many countries have signed up and would like to, and only one has left. Why is EU membership so much in demand?
- ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
  Weak countries need the protection of Germany and France
  - thenaturalist 2y ago
    Germany has no domestic military power to speak of, military is comically underfunded. No nuclear deterrence. Not sure what kind of protection you're thinking of. We can send beer to your enemy in hopes they opt for boozing rather than shooting.
    - ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
      They need the economies of Germany and France.
      - mmooss 2y ago
        And the international political and economic influence. Really of the whole EU - those countries together, including their currency, have global weight. Together, they are on the scale of the US and China. Also, they would like to sell things to and buy things from Germany and France, and the rest of the EU. Economics determines military power. If Germany wants to build a military, they can and now they are, to a significant extent.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mike_hearn 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - 2y ago
xoxosc 2y ago
Not to mention the bureaucrats at Brussels are not elected!
- preisschild 2y ago
  Wrong The EU parliament is elected and the EU council is indirectly elected.
- Aloisius 2y ago
  ? Bureaucrats aren't elected by definition. A bureaucracy is a body of non-elected government officials (aka bureaucrats).

iknowstuff 2y ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_single_market https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_single_market The four freedoms of the single market you get in return are incredible.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
Only the free movement of labor is really unusual. As in ... really, really, really unusual. Lots of trade deals include variations of the first 3 ... free movement of labor is basically unheard of between nation states as part of trade deals.
- skissane 2y ago
  Australia and New Zealand have both free trade and free movement of people between them. They aren't formally linked – free trade is a treaty, free movement of people is just an "arrangement" (not a legally binding agreement under international law, rather a political agreement implemented in each country's immigration law) – but it is all part of the overall multifaceted bilateral relationship.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    Well, that gets the heart of what's do revolutionary about the EU's basic premises. "You want to move capital and profits and materials without limit? Sure, no problem, but only if labor has the same freedom."
    - skissane 2y ago
      I think a big difference is that Australia and New Zealand are only two countries, so there has never been felt to be a need to establish many joint institutions. Issues can generally be worked through by one-on-one negotiation. Rather than some single overarching body to manage everything, there are lots of individual agreements and arrangements on separate issues. There are some joint institutions – for example, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), which is in charge of food regulation for both countries – but rather than an international bureaucracy, it is an Australian government agency. Even its Wellington office, all the employees are technically Australian public servants, even though they are mostly New Zealanders. New Zealand pays the Australian government part of FSANZ's budget; FSANZ issues new food regulations under Australian law and then the New Zealand government copies/pastes them into New Zealand law too: with rare exceptions, they are allowed to refuse to adopt a change if they disagree with it–Kava is a recent example, Australia has been cracking down on Kava due to concerns about the health risk, and using both controlled substances and food standards regulation to do so; New Zealand has been unwilling to go along due to its cultural importance to New Zealand's Pasifika (Pacific Islander) minority. The issue is that the neighbouring countries are generally a lot poorer, and many of them are small island states, often with a shaky track record on democracy, so it just isn't politically and economically feasible to integrate them into the same economic relations as Australia and New Zealand have. There has been some talk of turning the Pacific Islands Forum, the regional international organisation, into a "Pacific Union", by expanding Australia/New Zealand's de facto economic union to the whole bloc. But realistically I think that's decades away, if it ever happens. And unless and until that happens, there is no real need to put the Australia/New Zealand economic union on a more formal footing.
    - ncruces 2y ago
      Not just that, it gives rise to the concept of EU citizenship, which covers more than just freedom of movement.
- bluepizza 2y ago
  Mercosur, Australia-New Zealand, and the Gulf Cooperation Council all have a similar agreement on movement of labour. It is not particularly rare.

make3 2y ago

This is never passing. Trump-inspired conservatives are on their ways to be guaranteed majority at the next federal elections.

joshl32532 2y ago
The conservatives were leading the polls wayyy before Trump even winning the GOP primaries. Canadians are just tired of Justin Trudeau after almost 10 years. Which happens to even the best of leaders, and JT is far from it.

mmooss 2y ago

Despite the critics, many countries have signed up and would like to, and only one has left. Why is EU membership so much in demand?

ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
Weak countries need the protection of Germany and France
- thenaturalist 2y ago
  Germany has no domestic military power to speak of, military is comically underfunded. No nuclear deterrence. Not sure what kind of protection you're thinking of. We can send beer to your enemy in hopes they opt for boozing rather than shooting.
  - ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
    They need the economies of Germany and France.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      And the international political and economic influence. Really of the whole EU - those countries together, including their currency, have global weight. Together, they are on the scale of the US and China. Also, they would like to sell things to and buy things from Germany and France, and the rest of the EU. Economics determines military power. If Germany wants to build a military, they can and now they are, to a significant extent.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mike_hearn 2y ago
[flagged]
- 2y ago

xoxosc 2y ago

Not to mention the bureaucrats at Brussels are not elected!

preisschild 2y ago
Wrong The EU parliament is elected and the EU council is indirectly elected.
Aloisius 2y ago
? Bureaucrats aren't elected by definition. A bureaucracy is a body of non-elected government officials (aka bureaucrats).