The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.
eu in trouble?
35 replies
coyboyusa said on June 3, 2005 12:40:
so both france and the dutch are going to say no to the eu constitution and supposedly other countrys will, is the eu in jeapordy?
tevensso (moderator) said on June 3, 2005 13:26:
Europe’s politicans aren’t on the same page as the people. Ah, they’re not even in the same book...
harriej said on June 3, 2005 14:12:
As long as the politicians can not clearly explain to me, what big advantage there is for me to vote for this, I will say NO (and that is what I did last wednesday).
shine said on June 3, 2005 15:38:
Germany said yes to it, The Bundestag has decided that they say yes to it.
I absolutly don´t know what the eu constitution is about.
ally77 said on June 3, 2005 16:46:
Gotta admit, it has seriously got me thinking, I ain’t a clue what it is all about.... I have read so much in the paper on it in the past 2 weeks or so but it still does not make sense...
Jud (moderator) said on June 3, 2005 17:15:
all countries without referendum will pass it, the ones with referendum will pass it in the case the country gets more money IN than gives OUT ;)
Santi said on June 3, 2005 17:22:
StillFar said on June 3, 2005 17:50:
If I have my facts straight (didn’t study geography at university) the constitution would give the European parliament more power to decide over all kinds of federal issues. Considering that there are countries like France, which are pretty strong on social issues, of course they would give up more than some other countries in the union and in the end; giving someone else the power to decide over their social system will result in impoverishment since it’s impossible to raise all other countries to their level...I might be wrong though :S
Breathe8 said on June 3, 2005 18:38:
I was surprising France said No. Perhaps statesmen will solve. I hope. Today I watched news on TV and they said Italy wanted to cancel Euros.
StillFar said on June 7, 2005 20:00:
Didn’t Blair push the idea of referendums? Now he canceled his own. I guess too much Texas sun isn’t good for you after all.
per_mson said on June 8, 2005 10:28:
@Santi: I think you have to explain to me how a country can get richer by having a higher output of money to the EU than input?! I just don’t get that equation I’m afraid and I studied math at the university. ;) And if it now have nothing to do with money as it sounds like on you... what exactly has gotten better?!
At least I hope that this will lead to the end of EU, cause those years Sweden have been a member we have gotten nothing but more problems. We don’t care if a banana has to have a certain bend to be called a banana and so on. Why pay people 8000 Euros a month for coming up with such?! I can’t really give one example of something that has gotten better since we joined to be honest....
But at least we didn’t have to have the Euro (or Teuro as the German speaking countries like to call it).
Santi said on June 8, 2005 17:49:
StillFar said on June 8, 2005 18:03:
Basically, what you’re saying is that corporations in richer countries gain most from the EU. It’s not the country itself, neither the citizens (since the corporation is not required to produce in its country of origin anymore).
I think it’s wrong to talk down on people who disagree with the EU. Every globalization project has a downside. For you the positive side of the development might be more important, which is alright. However, there are people who have different values and see the other side of that development (which exists without a doubt) and I don’t all those people just get their information from the yellow press :S
Santi said on June 8, 2005 18:14:
StillFar said on June 8, 2005 19:07:
Did you know that companies in Germany can now hire labor from Poland (for example) and pay them based on their wages? Now tell me how in any possible way that is some positive development for the citizens. Shoe manufacturer, textile and ceramic producers…I do believe you will have a hard time looking for them around Valencia in the future. The way the EU is changing and permitting its countries to become capitalist powers I would not be surprised if all of those companies will manufacture in China or some other cheap labor markets.
The history of Europe might have been dominated by wars, but I think it’s extremely naïve to believe that the union will automatically put a stop to that, considering that many country have an unemployment rate at a high similar to the one before world war II and many people blame this amount of unemployment on the EU.
Jud (moderator) said on June 8, 2005 20:01:
As StillFar comments, there’s no need to talk down on (“You don’t know what you are talking about”) others who have different opinion and points of views. Per-Axel is a clever informed person and free to have his own opinions. I doubt he ever thought EU is charity, it is obvious and surely clear to all of us that EU is all about business and getting more money, at any cost. We are not that stupid...
This said, I think you are only supporting the fact that richer get richer while poorer get poorer. Globalisation.
In richer countries unemployment rates are getting higher and higher (either because companies move to eastern countries or because - as in the case of Germany or Austria - they employ eastern citizens that live close to the border and pay them half of or at least lower salaries of what a local would get), while prices of even basic products are getting higher, while salaries get stuck, don’t raise the same % as the prices, etc.
While all these poorer countries are having some benefit out of this nightmare, the richer are getting poorer, they have to spend more money for unemployment, these unemployed also go to doctors (paid by the state), more people apply for subventions and different forms of family-help from state... there will come a time when this won’t be bearable and it will crash, somewhen. Raising taxes on salaries and other stuff will be a solution for a while and to a certain extent.
Sure the state also gets cash in from the taxes on these big companies benefits, but I strongly doubt this will cover the higher expenses they have to face due to unemployment. Note that companies also get many deductions, subventions, less benefit because they present consolidated statements, therefore benefits are lower due to the investments in other countries”.. I work in a big corporation and I think I can have quite an overview of how it works, and what I can see is only the top of the iceberg.
What benefit will it be for Germany, for example, when all car manufacturers open plants in these new-comer countries? They only need to set up a new company there, make it have no benefit during the first 5 years due to expenses/investment, which means the consolidated statements will have less benefits >> less taxes to be paid. Now it’s the big companies moving there, wait until smaller will also see a benefit with this.
You know what actually already happens in Austria (and I guess Germany) with Spanish products? You know where most products come from, more and more? Turkey, already now. Wait until Turkey gets in the EU. And take into account Spain won’t get a cent in the shape of subventions from the EU by that time. You tell me what will happen with all those farmers.
Those are only some examples, I guess in Germany/ Austria the consequences can be “felt” faster because we are neighbours with the new-comers. It will reach the others, soon.
When I imagine the future, I see a couple of people powerful as hell, ruling everything under them, and each of us (or our children or grandchildren) fighting to survive, at any cost. In my imagination the world wars will be a joke compared to that.
animalkingdom said on June 8, 2005 20:22:
In my opinion, people generally who voted/are going to vote against the constitution haven’t got a clue what the thing is about. They’re only voting against the whole of EU because they’ve begun to have second thoughts about the entire union.
per_mson said on June 8, 2005 23:08:
@Santi: Thanks for your way of seeing things! :) I must say that all your opinions sounds like they’ve been copied from some kind of leaflet that glorifies EU. THAT good nothing can be.. not even if you are super optimistic to it all. ;)
But I must also ask you a question: Have you ever been out in the “real world” seeing how EU works in practise?! I agree with the thought of EU being a economic strong base where the countries within EU are building a long lasting economic ground where trade and people are free to be exchanged over the borders is a nice thought. The only big problem is that this doesn’t work in practise.
I base this statement on what Sweden (since I’m from there I have to use that as a reference) has gone through since we became members in 1994. We have seen a lot of cut downs in our wellfare. The school system, care and other important parts of our society have never been in a worse state (in modern history) than it is now. I do of course not blame all this on EU since our politicians are pretty good at wasting money on useless things as well, but EU is certainly partly to be blamed. We (as well as many other western EU countries) are experiencing a rapid growth of people getting unemployed due to the fact that cheaper newcomer countries (mostly in eastern Europe) are taking over. As a real example I can give you truck based transport companies, which have almost dissapeared in Sweden. Sure, they are still called the same and you still see loads of trucks, but if you check them closer you see that the companies have moved their business to eastern Europe using low paid drivers from there. Very smart if you see it from the companies point of view. And I bet that the (in this case) Baltic states also love this development, but I don’t see how loosing all those jobs in Sweden can be an investment?!
I think of course it is a great chance for the people in the former east, but I still fear the development since it directly influences my own county in a negative way.
I also would like to comment that you think I don’t know a s**t since I think that EU should dissapear. Just to remind you I can tell you that Sweden haven’t had a war since 1809, but that’s another story.... And yes, I would prefer to have the Sweden we had from 1950-1994 (44 years and no war). We were maybe not the richest country with the best social systems in the end, but we definetly didn’t improve during the passed 11 years as members.
Furthermore I don’t see EU as something that is preventing a war. Rather the other way round if too many countries that are just too different get too involved. I have nothing against differences, but I still find it really hard to believe how such a union should work in the end. The world have seen too many unions already that never worked and I think EU will be one of them in the long run... unfortunately in many ways...
LittleSpooky said on June 8, 2005 23:59:
Sounds like we have polar opposite opinions on the EU.
And it sounds like that there’s a lot of “outsourcing” happening as well because labour’s cheaper elsewhere. The same is happening in the US:
Car makers, electronics, and so on are being moved to other countries because the corporation wants to make more money but can’t if they have to pay the employees a “reasonable” amount.
Where an American worker would make $15 / hour, sending the whole company to Mexico, where the workers there would make $7.50 doing the same job. Or better yet, sending it over seas where they’d be paid $3.75.
I hate to say it: But welcome to the fine world of business folks. You just got screwed. And I’m sorry to hear it.
Oldag75 said on June 9, 2005 12:50:
A provision of the proposed constitution states, “Everyone has the right to life.” Yeah, sure, on a continent where Donald Rumsfeld gets more respect than an unwanted fetus.
And another: “The use of property may be regulated by law insofar as is necessary for the general interest.” Comrade Lenin could not have said it better.
And folks are puzzled the voters were actually smart enough to reject this claptrap?
Santi said on June 10, 2005 00:58:
I apologize and I’ve edited my posts in consequence.
I wish no longer to take part in this discussion.
I only ask you to please edit any comments on my person or my words, thanks.
LittleSpooky said on June 10, 2005 05:25:
Santi: I don’t get it. I understand your point of view, but I also see it from “the common man’s” point of view. It’s almost a copy of Communist Russia. If and or when I can find the discussion I had with my step-father on that, I’ll send it to you.
Everything looks good on paper... but put it into practice and Humanity screws it up!
per_mson said on June 10, 2005 16:43:
Well said LittleSpooky!! :-))
I don’t want to be mean, but I don’t see a point editing my answers. I stand for what I think. So hopefully no hard feelings Santi!!
ncurran said on June 11, 2005 11:17:
Just looking at it from a different angle slightly. A lot of you are suggesting that the poor man ends up a lot worse off. However, it is the poor areas that the EU tends to invest in. And i dont just mean poor countries, but poor or underdeveloped areas in rich countries that are neglected by their own government. Travel around some of the remote parts of Scotland, which tend to be neglected by central govt because of their lack of political influence, and you will find many local projects that are funded by the EU. This has to be a good thing, as i doubt that money would ever have been invested by the UK govt itself
per_mson said on June 11, 2005 14:32:
@ncurran: Yes, sure, you really have a point there! When I was on holiday on Ireland I realized that most of the newer roads were partly finaced by EU. This is of course a positive thing!
But the problem I see is that so many so called “poor” countries just joined EU and I don’t see where all those money should come from that are needed to help them. Compared to Scotland I think for instance Czech Republic is poorer... at least if you look at the country side. So if they should get enough money to be able to build up that to the same standars as the “rich” parts of EU I see only two developments... 1. Take more money from the “rich”. 2. Don’t give the “medium poor” any more money, cause there simply isn’t enough. And with “medium rich” I’m thinking of places like Scotland (as you mentioned) and Ireland. Just what I think... :)
ncurran said on June 12, 2005 18:55:
Yeah, well to be honest i can see the argument from both sides, and i’m not really sure where i would like the EU to go. I still want to be a member of the EU, but I’m not decided whether there should be further integration or whether the powers of the EU should be scaled back a bit. I do think that overall the advantages outweigh the disadvantages though.
per_mson said on June 13, 2005 13:22:
@ncurran: I agree with you. It is not easy to know what should be done and how it should be done. But as you might have noticed I think that there’s a bit more disadvantages than advantages the way EU is run now. But I think it is nice to hear different opinions. :-)
pwbbounce (moderator) said on June 13, 2005 14:19:
I also agree with ncurran. Can’t really have much to say about it though as Guernsey isn’t part of EU. I think it’s good, but only if it doesn’t make the rich richer and the poor poorer. We are having this sort of trouble at the moment in Guernsey, where they want to increase Income Tax, which would effect the poorer people more than the rich. Crazy Idea!!! Not sure if it’s going to go ahead though.
See, nothing at all to do with the EU!!
ncurran said on June 19, 2005 08:28:
Well for once i actually agree with what Tony Blair is doing. I cant stand the man, but he is right to fight for the British rebate to stay. It is easy for Chirac to preach to us that it is unfair and that the EU cant afford it with the new eastern block members to support, but Blair is right to hold onto it until France gives up some of the £7 billion subsidies French farmers get under the CAP. The rebate was put there for a reason, because agriculture is such a small part of our economy that Britain would lose out under the CAP which is such a large proportion of EU expenditure. If Britain is expected to give up some of its money for the new members, France should be willing to do the same
Jud (moderator) said on June 19, 2005 10:55:
I think many countries wish they could just quit the EU again, at least many citizens do so,.. so if you are still on time, fight for that!
PS: I wonder if Sweden will get the Euro in the end??
Jud (moderator) said on June 3, 2005 12:44:
the EU is a joke, now we start to see the consequences, and what’s to come. All huge countries in the world have also huge problems.. why should we walk the same direction?