5 ms·

> The EU has benefits obviously but it's been failing Europe in critical ways for about 20 yeas now I like those benefits: The shared currency, easy travel, th

by ngruhn 1mo ago

> The EU has benefits obviously but it's been failing Europe in critical ways for about 20 yeas now I like those benefits: The shared currency, easy travel, they killed roaming fees! Also they're the only ones seriously taking on big tech. They made Apple ditch their dumb ass lightning cable.

andrepd 1mo ago
[flagged]
runarberg 1mo ago
[flagged]
- GlacierFox 1mo ago
  "Another problem is border fascism. Europe has open borders internally, but very closed borders externally. The external borders are being militarized and increasingly hostile towards immigrants and asylum seekers. European politicians are showing increasingly fascistic behavior towards the borders. It is bad, and inhumane, and it is braking Europe apart." What planet are you living on? Border fascism? What? 70,000 'migrants' crossed into Cueta a short while back and the place is in turmoil now. "European politicians are showing increasingly fascistic behavior towards the borders" Where do people like you come from? I'm always interested in this utterly surreal take on enforcing the border of your own country, like that's now fascist. What's going on here? There's not many positions that leave me utterly perplexed. I'm sincerely asking, how you hold your position on this? What have you experienced in life to end up with these opinions? What benefit is flooding Europe with literally anyone from all the backward cultured shit holes from around the world?
  - runarberg 1mo ago
    What I have experienced is being in an international relationship and having to have to go through the (legal) immigration process twice. First by my married spouse immigrating to Iceland, and then again by me, and Icelandic citizen moving to the USA. What I have heard are people being deported from Europe, immigrants unable to move to the place they want to seek better life, asylum seekers sent back to the dangerous situations they were fleeing, or worse to third countries they have no relations with, exile being used as punishment against some criminals based on their country of origin, etc. etc. Europe is increasingly becoming a surveillance hellhole, personal rights are being stripped away, privacy is being abolished under the guise of “protecting our borders”. This is border fascism, and Europe is better off without it. Immigrants, no matter how many millions, can never cause the same harm to a fellow working European as a politician who stripes away your human rights.
    - GlacierFox 1mo ago
      "Immigrants, no matter how many millions, can never cause the same harm to a fellow working European as a politician who stripes away your human rights." See this is the point where you're so out of touch with reality it's truely perplexing. Both things are horrifically damaging to a country and it's residents. Thanks for outlining the things you've 'heard'. I see my country tearing itself apart at the seams and there's people like you say there with a shrug of the shoulders telling us we're all fascists.
      - runarberg 1mo ago
        Immigrants are not bad for your country, and claiming they are is racist. If your country is bad it is because of the people in charge (i.e. the rich and the powerful; i.e. politicians and billionaires). If your job sucks, you blame your boss, not your most recent hires. And if you don‘t get paid enough, you blame your shareholders, not your customers.
- inglor_cz 1mo ago
  I find it really amusing just how different our perspectives on the EU are. You accuse the EU of being neo-liberal, I accuse it of being a micromanaging bureaucratic behemoth heaping endless new regulations on everything including wrapping paper (this is our current outrage of the day), endlessly distrustful towards people who what just to take care of themselves and be left alone. It is hard to believe that we are both describing the same entity. Reminds me of the fable of an elephant and three blind men. Also, when it comes to borders, you probably know that if they were guarded as much as the European population wants, the situation would have been a lot stricter than it is. The EU is more left-wing in this regard than the median European voter.
  - runarberg 1mo ago
    I think this speaks volumes about how far right the Overton window has shifted in Europe, if my run-of-the-mill leftist critique of the EU sounds so novel. I actually blame Brexit for this. Before Brexit being anti-EU for anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist reason was kind of a litmus test for a left wing political candidate. Note this is also true of Iceland. The debate was mostly about nationalism and economy, and the left wing case against the EU was hardly ever mentioned. I also think asking your average European voter is bad faith (and is done by the media all the time). When asked about specific policies, the answers skew left. But when asked about ideology the answers will skew right. And the European media (including national broadcasters) totally abuse this, asking (or rather hiring private polling firms to ask) ”do you like capitalism?“ where the answer will probably be “yes” instead of “Do you want workers or shareholder to have more share of the wealth?”
    - inglor_cz 1mo ago
      I'd say that your critique of the EU would have been quite run-of-the-mill in the early 2000s, but nowadays, this corner of the left has mostly shrunk away and became somewhat marginal. As for the voters and their questioning: yeah, people will give inconsistent answers quite often, especially when you pry into the details. But the majority sentiment has been against more immigration for some time now, and that majority tends to become a supermajority when immigration specifically from the Islamic world and Subsaharan Africa is discussed. I don't think there is any way back from that, not in our lifetimes.
bluegatty 1mo ago
'roaming fees' :) That's my point: that's the most marginal thing imaginable, it's borderline tabloid populism - even though yes, admittedly over a lot of issues, it' beneficial obviously. The 'common market' is pretty valuable and it's what the focus should be. Literally nobody is against that - it's what everyone agrees on. As far as travel and roaming fees - you don't need a centralized government for any of that. This is the 'political project' substituting for what you think are benefits of what is mostly shared regulations. But the 'currency' thing is the most misleading. Your ability to 'not change currency while on holiday' does not come for free! It comes with a massive cost, and that is nation states cannot control their own monetary policy. What 'feels like' some kind of obvious amazing benefit, is possibly the most ugly structural think holding all of Europe back. The theory is - you cannot have shared currency unless there is absolute political and economic integration. The 'Euro' can only work if basically you have 'Europe Federal Superstate' - one country. When it was introduced, the population would 'not yet' accept federal political integration, and it was assumed that the inevitable 'Euro' crisis would be just cause for deeper political integration. The 'Euro crisis' arrived in early 2010's (it was inevitable) and Europe did not go to 'full federal state' (thankfully), but - it's never recovered from that mess. When periphery countries joined the Euro, it was kind of assumed that risk would be shared. Nations were given lending rates far below what was appropriate. That massive building in Spain in the 2000's was caused by Euro integration - was 'low rate' euphoria - money washing over the country. But it was not sustainable, crashed, and left many countries in a horrible state. No 'bailouts' from German taxpayers, and no 'Eurobonds' or shared risk - and worse - no ability to devalue the currency to spur economic activity. Unless there are transfers of wealth or other mechanisms (North Europe will never accept) then ... Mediterranean Europe is stuck in an economic prison due to 'half complete' currency project. The evidence on the other side is strong: places Sweden and Denmark - that at least maintained their own currencies - are in much better position. Literally those that avoided the Euro are arguably better off. It's a complicated subject obviously - but my overall point is, the 'psychology of the Euro' aka 'no exchange on holiday' and the sense of unity around common currency etc. can be very misleading. The Euro could very well be one of Europe's worst problems - again - even if it has benefits as well. 'The Euro' might be the best symbol of all over what is 'perceived' to be good for Europe, but what is actually bad. And 'the answer' is probably not a pendulum of 'more or less integration' - but actually less integration in some areas, more integration in others.
trentearl 1mo ago
Isn't easy travel already covered with their Schengen membership?
ExoticPearTree 1mo ago
They did not really ditched the roaming fees. You get some free roaming with any plan, and if you go over it, you get charged. Yes, it is nice for a day or two in another EU country, but pretty much that’s it.
- senko 1mo ago
  That's incorrect. There are no roaming fees. Instead, some telecoms give you a generous number of "credits" for calls, transfer, etc, and sometimes try to limit these to your own country. Then you have to pay overage fees (the same in your home country or elsewhere within EU). The legality (or ToS language around this) is dubious, but the fact that telecoms try to skirt around the rules doesn't mean they don't work - switch to a better provider. I just spent a week in another EU country and didn't think for a second about data usage, calls, fees, etc. Combined with not having to do fx or even carry a passport (national ID is enough), minimal queues at the airport and zero customs annoyance, travelling across continent was as much hassle going to the next town (modulo actual travel time). (Not to mention the actual benefits of membership, in this case, EU institutions slowly but surely cleaning up house).
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    They're required to grant roaming credits proportional to your monthly payment, but those are usually lower than you get in your own country for the same monthly payment. But they're also usually enough, and free to you. Which is much better than the previous status quo.
raffael_de 1mo ago
those are just conveniences relevant to relatively wealthy citizens. i regularly travel to places outside of EU and none of these missing "benefits" have ever posed more than minor challenges.

by ngruhn 1mo ago

andrepd 1mo ago

[flagged]

runarberg 1mo ago

[flagged]

GlacierFox 1mo ago
"Another problem is border fascism. Europe has open borders internally, but very closed borders externally. The external borders are being militarized and increasingly hostile towards immigrants and asylum seekers. European politicians are showing increasingly fascistic behavior towards the borders. It is bad, and inhumane, and it is braking Europe apart." What planet are you living on? Border fascism? What? 70,000 'migrants' crossed into Cueta a short while back and the place is in turmoil now. "European politicians are showing increasingly fascistic behavior towards the borders" Where do people like you come from? I'm always interested in this utterly surreal take on enforcing the border of your own country, like that's now fascist. What's going on here? There's not many positions that leave me utterly perplexed. I'm sincerely asking, how you hold your position on this? What have you experienced in life to end up with these opinions? What benefit is flooding Europe with literally anyone from all the backward cultured shit holes from around the world?
- runarberg 1mo ago
  What I have experienced is being in an international relationship and having to have to go through the (legal) immigration process twice. First by my married spouse immigrating to Iceland, and then again by me, and Icelandic citizen moving to the USA. What I have heard are people being deported from Europe, immigrants unable to move to the place they want to seek better life, asylum seekers sent back to the dangerous situations they were fleeing, or worse to third countries they have no relations with, exile being used as punishment against some criminals based on their country of origin, etc. etc. Europe is increasingly becoming a surveillance hellhole, personal rights are being stripped away, privacy is being abolished under the guise of “protecting our borders”. This is border fascism, and Europe is better off without it. Immigrants, no matter how many millions, can never cause the same harm to a fellow working European as a politician who stripes away your human rights.
  - GlacierFox 1mo ago
    "Immigrants, no matter how many millions, can never cause the same harm to a fellow working European as a politician who stripes away your human rights." See this is the point where you're so out of touch with reality it's truely perplexing. Both things are horrifically damaging to a country and it's residents. Thanks for outlining the things you've 'heard'. I see my country tearing itself apart at the seams and there's people like you say there with a shrug of the shoulders telling us we're all fascists.
    - runarberg 1mo ago
      Immigrants are not bad for your country, and claiming they are is racist. If your country is bad it is because of the people in charge (i.e. the rich and the powerful; i.e. politicians and billionaires). If your job sucks, you blame your boss, not your most recent hires. And if you don‘t get paid enough, you blame your shareholders, not your customers.
inglor_cz 1mo ago
I find it really amusing just how different our perspectives on the EU are. You accuse the EU of being neo-liberal, I accuse it of being a micromanaging bureaucratic behemoth heaping endless new regulations on everything including wrapping paper (this is our current outrage of the day), endlessly distrustful towards people who what just to take care of themselves and be left alone. It is hard to believe that we are both describing the same entity. Reminds me of the fable of an elephant and three blind men. Also, when it comes to borders, you probably know that if they were guarded as much as the European population wants, the situation would have been a lot stricter than it is. The EU is more left-wing in this regard than the median European voter.
- runarberg 1mo ago
  I think this speaks volumes about how far right the Overton window has shifted in Europe, if my run-of-the-mill leftist critique of the EU sounds so novel. I actually blame Brexit for this. Before Brexit being anti-EU for anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist reason was kind of a litmus test for a left wing political candidate. Note this is also true of Iceland. The debate was mostly about nationalism and economy, and the left wing case against the EU was hardly ever mentioned. I also think asking your average European voter is bad faith (and is done by the media all the time). When asked about specific policies, the answers skew left. But when asked about ideology the answers will skew right. And the European media (including national broadcasters) totally abuse this, asking (or rather hiring private polling firms to ask) ”do you like capitalism?“ where the answer will probably be “yes” instead of “Do you want workers or shareholder to have more share of the wealth?”
  - inglor_cz 1mo ago
    I'd say that your critique of the EU would have been quite run-of-the-mill in the early 2000s, but nowadays, this corner of the left has mostly shrunk away and became somewhat marginal. As for the voters and their questioning: yeah, people will give inconsistent answers quite often, especially when you pry into the details. But the majority sentiment has been against more immigration for some time now, and that majority tends to become a supermajority when immigration specifically from the Islamic world and Subsaharan Africa is discussed. I don't think there is any way back from that, not in our lifetimes.

bluegatty 1mo ago

'roaming fees' :) That's my point: that's the most marginal thing imaginable, it's borderline tabloid populism - even though yes, admittedly over a lot of issues, it' beneficial obviously. The 'common market' is pretty valuable and it's what the focus should be. Literally nobody is against that - it's what everyone agrees on. As far as travel and roaming fees - you don't need a centralized government for any of that. This is the 'political project' substituting for what you think are benefits of what is mostly shared regulations. But the 'currency' thing is the most misleading. Your ability to 'not change currency while on holiday' does not come for free! It comes with a massive cost, and that is nation states cannot control their own monetary policy. What 'feels like' some kind of obvious amazing benefit, is possibly the most ugly structural think holding all of Europe back. The theory is - you cannot have shared currency unless there is absolute political and economic integration. The 'Euro' can only work if basically you have 'Europe Federal Superstate' - one country. When it was introduced, the population would 'not yet' accept federal political integration, and it was assumed that the inevitable 'Euro' crisis would be just cause for deeper political integration. The 'Euro crisis' arrived in early 2010's (it was inevitable) and Europe did not go to 'full federal state' (thankfully), but - it's never recovered from that mess. When periphery countries joined the Euro, it was kind of assumed that risk would be shared. Nations were given lending rates far below what was appropriate. That massive building in Spain in the 2000's was caused by Euro integration - was 'low rate' euphoria - money washing over the country. But it was not sustainable, crashed, and left many countries in a horrible state. No 'bailouts' from German taxpayers, and no 'Eurobonds' or shared risk - and worse - no ability to devalue the currency to spur economic activity. Unless there are transfers of wealth or other mechanisms (North Europe will never accept) then ... Mediterranean Europe is stuck in an economic prison due to 'half complete' currency project. The evidence on the other side is strong: places Sweden and Denmark - that at least maintained their own currencies - are in much better position. Literally those that avoided the Euro are arguably better off. It's a complicated subject obviously - but my overall point is, the 'psychology of the Euro' aka 'no exchange on holiday' and the sense of unity around common currency etc. can be very misleading. The Euro could very well be one of Europe's worst problems - again - even if it has benefits as well. 'The Euro' might be the best symbol of all over what is 'perceived' to be good for Europe, but what is actually bad. And 'the answer' is probably not a pendulum of 'more or less integration' - but actually less integration in some areas, more integration in others.

trentearl 1mo ago

Isn't easy travel already covered with their Schengen membership?

ExoticPearTree 1mo ago

They did not really ditched the roaming fees. You get some free roaming with any plan, and if you go over it, you get charged. Yes, it is nice for a day or two in another EU country, but pretty much that’s it.

senko 1mo ago
That's incorrect. There are no roaming fees. Instead, some telecoms give you a generous number of "credits" for calls, transfer, etc, and sometimes try to limit these to your own country. Then you have to pay overage fees (the same in your home country or elsewhere within EU). The legality (or ToS language around this) is dubious, but the fact that telecoms try to skirt around the rules doesn't mean they don't work - switch to a better provider. I just spent a week in another EU country and didn't think for a second about data usage, calls, fees, etc. Combined with not having to do fx or even carry a passport (national ID is enough), minimal queues at the airport and zero customs annoyance, travelling across continent was as much hassle going to the next town (modulo actual travel time). (Not to mention the actual benefits of membership, in this case, EU institutions slowly but surely cleaning up house).
- inigyou 1mo ago
  They're required to grant roaming credits proportional to your monthly payment, but those are usually lower than you get in your own country for the same monthly payment. But they're also usually enough, and free to you. Which is much better than the previous status quo.

raffael_de 1mo ago

those are just conveniences relevant to relatively wealthy citizens. i regularly travel to places outside of EU and none of these missing "benefits" have ever posed more than minor challenges.