Anglo Saxons poised to despoil France

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Yes, in and of itself floating the currency won't balance things but it will let currencies fluctuate with real economic demand and it will end the very real economically distorting effects China's artificially low currency has created.

The problem with this theory is that it does not work convincingly.

The $, the Euro and the Yen are floating. The $ has had its value reduced by one third during the last three years WITHOUT causing any reduction in the trade imbalance which on the contrary has continued its rise. That is for the floating.

Regarding China, the US import trade with China represents only 20% of the imbalance.

The terrible thing with the current US problems is that they cannot have the solutions paid by the rest of the world, and that the solutions paid by the US consumers and/or taxpayers, are likely to cause a recession.

[Bosh]

The real problem with the Constitution is that is write so many policy measures (for example, having universal health care, various trade policies etc. etc.) into the Constitution and then makes it very hard to ammend the constitution. This would make for political stagnation. A constitution should be a structure for decision-making, not a list of enshrined unchanging policies.

They need to go back to the drawing board...

[Dracon II]

Originally posted by Boshko
The real problem with the Constitution is that is write so many policy measures (for example, having universal health care, various trade policies etc. etc.) into the Constitution and then makes it very hard to ammend the constitution. This would make for political stagnation. A constitution should be a structure for decision-making, not a list of enshrined unchanging policies.

They need to go back to the drawing board...

You're right... a constitution should be the battleground, not the battle... if it is too policy specific and inflexible at the same time its a recipe for fragmentation.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

thats the american version of the constitution. other countries constitutions are not a framework, they are a lot more specific.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Did you know? These three words are used "as is" in France, and have no French equivalent outside of Québec.

Yes, I did- it was my jolie jape, which I bought at le supermarche.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Dry

Ther's quite a reason: Edgar A. Poe work was translated by a guy called Charles Beaudelaire.
Some claim the french text is even superior to the original. Unique case in translation history.

Yes, 'twas another petite jape of mine.

I had thought my Anglo-Saxon irony and sarcasm would translate Gallicly- I must rethink my tactics.

I was thinking of an article which I read many years ago on what aspects of one country's or civilization's culture can be adopted or used by another, and how it is transmuted in the borrowing- like tea, the European craze for chinoiserie, Japanese prints, the French love of Jerry Lewis and Alfred Hitchcock, how Texas and Carmel and Skunk Anansie could be bigger in France than in Great Britain or Australia, German adulation of that ghastly wooden actor (& worse singer) Hassellhoff, et cetera.

I remember the article referred to this strange phenomenon called 'Edgarpo' which had come into being thanks to the translation of his works into French by Baudelaire- and how these translations were that rara avis, a translation which could be deemed by some as good, if not better, than the original.

Some critics of literature in English think that Poe is overheated, and not disciplined, for instance.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DAVOUT

The $, the Euro and the Yen are floating. The $ has had its value reduced by one third during the last three years WITHOUT causing any reduction in the trade imbalance which on the contrary has continued its rise. That is for the floating.

That's because most of our trade imbalance comes from two places. 1) Oil imports which we're going to keep buying no matter the cost. 2) Asian imports.

The Asians (especially the Chinese) either officialy peg their currency to a fraction of the dollars value (making their currency artificially low) or they go the Japanese route of talking their currency down and using their central bank to try and keep the dollar high. If China stopped cheating with its intentionally devalued currency then two things would happen.

1) Manufacturers from outside China would find it easier to compete against artificially low priced Chinese made goods. 2) Foreign made goods would be more competitive in Chinese markets.

Right now the Chinese are behaving like unfair trading partners by intentionally devaluing their currency and distorting international trade. This effectively shifts Chinese unemployment problem to other countries by goosing Chinese exports, however, it is time China's trading partners demand they stop cheating and play fair.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Boshko
The real problem with the Constitution is that is write so many policy measures (for example, having universal health care, various trade policies etc. etc.) into the Constitution and then makes it very hard to ammend the constitution. This would make for political stagnation. A constitution should be a structure for decision-making, not a list of enshrined unchanging policies.

They need to go back to the drawing board...

They will. This thing won't even pass in France much less the half dozen other countries, like the UK, which give the people a vote on this treaty. It really is a treaty and not a constitution.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
thats the american version of the constitution. other countries constitutions are not a framework, they are a lot more specific.

More specific, yes. That specific, no (at least not that I can think of). The Brits have no Constitution outside of tradition. The French have a constitution which is an outline of how the government works, and what principles the country should strive for. AFAIK, it's also the case in Germany.

The reason why this constitution is so atrociously bloated is bacause it's a treaty between countries. In Europe, most of the decision making is made diplomatically instead of politically, and as such, many decisions take the form of treaties instead of laws. Since the main ambition of this constitution is to unite the past treaties in one same piece (how ambitious ), most of these very precise decisions are in, despite the fact they have nothing to do in a constitution, even according to our political cultures.

Most of the useless crap can be found in the title III of the constitution. If the writers of the constitution hadn't ambitioned to unite all the previous texts (thus making all previous treaties null and void, as explicited in the Con), maybe the whole title III would have been out of the picture.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Dracon II
and in 1066 they made certain that a large slice of "anglo-saxon" culture would forever be French....

The Norman aristocracy and much of there military class were recently descended for Viking conquerors/overlords. 'Norman' means northman and 'Normandy" means: Land where the vikings kicked our worthless frog butts and set up a duchy.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
They will. This thing won't even pass in France much less the half dozen other countries, like the UK, which give the people a vote on this treaty. It really is a treaty and not a constitution.

I wish. But the game isn't played yet. The French may end up voting as requested. And even the Brits might. The yes side has many resources at hand (the fact that it represents both establishment parties helps hugely), and they'll use them as they'll get more desperate. I know that, for the first time in my life, I'll be seriously wary when overseeing the voting booth, for instance.

Besides, even if the thing doesn't pass, our political elites won't necessarily go back to the drawing board. A tactics often used by the EU politicians is to harass the uncooperative rabble until they accept what's obviously good for them. And such a strategy will be the most likely, should only one country vote no. The more countries that vote no (especially for different reasons), the more our elites will be forced to drop the complacency, and the more they'll have to ask the real questions.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
The Norman aristocracy and much of there military class were recently descended for Viking conquerors/overlords. 'Norman' means northman and 'Normandy" means: Land where the vikings kicked our worthless frog butts and set up a duchy.

We eventually won thanks to our superior culture. Barbarians may kick our butt during one invasion, but we then sap them for the rest of eternity

Clearly, we are superior

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Spiffor

We eventually won thanks to our superior culture.

Clearly, we are superior

Like China with nomads. The Vikings came, saw, conquered, and were undone by Camembert, flan breton and Bordeaux.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Spiffor

We eventually won thanks to our superior culture. Barbarians may kick our butt during one invasion, but we then sap them for the rest of eternity

Clearly, we are superior

Was this the gameplan in 1940?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Dauphin
Was this the gameplan in 1940?

Well, we did it with Germanic barbarians before (the Franks), and I don't see why it wouldn't have worked again!