CIA predicts collapse of EU

[Jon Miller]

I didn't say funny

I said funner

which I don't tihnk is a word

aslo, I don't think Tizzyt reads here

JM

[notyoueither]

Are you arguing with the referee?

[Sandman]

As a result of the increased immigration needed, the report predicts that Europefs Muslim population is set to increase from around 13% today to between 22% and 37% of the population by 2025, potentially triggering tensions.

The Muslim population of the EU is 4% today, not 13%.

It's obvious that this report is simply an idiotic peice of propaganda, not a serious piece of research.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I also seem to recall a crisis in Sweden sometime around ten years ago. Seems it was like a flu was going around at the time. Even the yen was affected.

The interest that banks payed to the national bank was 500 % during a few weeks.

But we landed on our feet.

I pay 3.5 % on my house loan.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Errmmm, who seriously argues that having to pay for a defence that is never used is more costly than having whole cities and provinces, or the entire country, obliterated by the machines of modern warfare, on top of paying to actually fight a war, and not just sitting in barracks waiting for one? Please point them out, I need a good laugh.

We stayed out of WW2 because we didn't want to ally with Hitler or Stalin. Those were the options, and both would mean suicide. That was debated to boredom in the other thread.

What war did the others pay to fight in the 50's and 60's, while we were freeriding their defense budget, sitting in our barracks? We had a 700 000 man army (if mobilised) and one of the 5 largest air forces in the world at that time.

[Case]

Originally posted by el freako
3. The EU starts from a much better fiscal position.
After Bush's tax-cuts and spending splurge the US's structural budget deficit (i.e. that which would happen if the US economy was performing at 'trend') is around 4% of GDP whereas the EU's is around 1%. This means that the EU has more option to increase borrowing to fund pensions than the US does.

It's important to note that the issues caused by the aging population is a transitory problem and will only last for 10-20 years. As such, it's perfectly feasible and responsible for governments to borrow their way though the period (within reason of course - taxes will need to be increased a little).

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie


We stayed out of WW2 because we didn't want to ally with Hitler or Stalin. Those were the options, and both would mean suicide. That was debated to boredom in the other thread.

What war did the others pay to fight in the 50's and 60's, while we were freeriding their defense budget, sitting in our barracks? We had a 700 000 man army (if mobilised) and one of the 5 largest air forces in the world at that time.

I am not questioning why you stayed out. I am agreeing with the article in the OP of Aggy's thread. Sweden benefited from staying out when the rebuilding came and they were in an ideal situation to supply needs. It isn't a judgement, it is an observation.

That was barely scratched on in that thread. Despite Berz trying to return to it repeatedly nobody seemed to want to talk about it. Instead there were debates about the RN vs the Luftwaffe, Finns vs Russians and the impossible position that placed Sweden in, and a thousand other agendas being addressed.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by notyoueither


I am not questioning why you stayed out. I am agreeing with the article in the OP of Aggy's thread. Sweden benefited from staying out when the rebuilding came and they were in an ideal situation to supply needs. It isn't a judgement, it is an observation.

In the other thread, we concluded that the other Scandinavian countries introduced welfare systems despite being in the war. While staying out of the war was beneficial, it wasn't essential for the welfare state.

That was barely scratched on in that thread. Despite Berz trying to return to it repeatedly nobody seemed to want to talk about it. Instead there were debates about the RN vs the Luftwaffe, Finns vs Russians and the impossible position that placed Sweden in, and a thousand other agendas being addressed.

Berz was an ass, accusing us for freeriding on USA and using **** insults. That's the reason he was flamed back and not taken seriously.

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The conservative cry: throw the elderly to the wolves!

This is BS.

Well maybe not too far from the truth as the old continue to live longer and longer?

Sadly the very core problem of the EU, its lack of real foresight has meant that this option will not be available if its needed.
The 'Norway to kill 25% of wolf population' being the appropriate story.

[BeBMan]

I just woke up today and thought "I wonder if the EU still exists"

[child of Thor]

well there is that.

It could just be black-ops, i have a feeling the reports about spies in Iran could be the same kinda thing. Sometimes just a rumour can provide enough pressure to get the required result

[alva]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


No, I think it's more wishful thinking. The CIA isn't merely an analytical agency. It also produces ideology, and in this case, this report is likely more for internal U.S. consumption than to develop actual policy around a predicted EU collapse. There is a growing movement in the U.S. to build a more European modeled economy, and this is a salvo in the war by conservtivies to head this off.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner...

[Colon™]

Look, we have a claim here, namely that the strains on the welfare state due to ageing (A) leads to the collapse of the EU (B). Before anyone starts arguing about the validity of A, could the person in question PLEASE first show the precise element(s) that connect A to B, instead of considering that as a given? (and something vague as economic weakness won't do)

[Q Classic]

The thing is, the CIA issues many reports. It's very likely there's another report in the CIA saying that the EU is going to kick our economic asses. I doubt this is actually what the CIA, as a whole, is saying will happen.

like that future watch 2020 or whatever it's called...

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Look, we have a claim here, namely that the strains on the welfare state due to ageing (A) leads to the collapse of the EU (B). Before anyone starts arguing about the validity of A, could the person in question PLEASE first show the precise element(s) that connect A to B, instead of considering that as a given? (and something vague as economic weakness won't do)

i agree totally - the EU is a political and economic union. certain states can fail within due to welfare or whatever, but that doesnt mean the EU as a whole will fail. i hope the CIA isnt serious about this because if they are, they should prolly fire everyone.