Third time lucky, for Germany?

[Traianvs]

this is so much hot air. i mean, who are these 'anti-integrationists' at the european political level? there is a very cosy consensus about the EU and its direction between the european political class. note the surprise in the media when a 'euro-skeptic' party, like true finns, does well on the continent.

of course there are those who are not happy with the direction that the EU is taking. namely, the people of europe. however, their views don't matter to the political class, as evidenced by the whole european constitution/lisbon treaty episode. european political leaders tried to sell the new, more integrated europe to their people, they failed in several countries and had to force the irish into a ridiculous, undemocratic farce to get the final document through. so now they have a new strategy. instead of seeking the consent of the people they are supposed to represent, they simultaneously play down the importance of the EU to the common man, while centralising power in brussels without any democratic mandate or control.

Yep. We can leech some structural funds for a year or two and what then?

How do you even get out of EU? Not really possible.

Pot, black, kettle.

The 'Constitution' (which was not a consitution really) and the Lisbon Treaty are not the same document. Secondly, the changes in that constitution as well as the Lisbon Treaty were meant (in part) to democratize the EU more. Keeping the status-quo (= a no vote) would mean a less democratic EU (in terms of power division, voting conditions etc) than its current situation

The point I'm trying to get across is that those Nigel Farage kind of skeptics don't want any power relegated to the EU - at all. They handily disguise their argument stating it is undemocratic. So what happens is that their behaviour strengthens or favours the intergovernmental approach, i.e. the Council (because they defend the interest of their own country at EU level, which is supposedly more democratic then ). That Council by the way, that gave its unanimate vote to the Herman Van Rompuy, the guy Farage is fulminating at in the video. So he is criticizing someone that was voted with pretty much his favourite institution.

What he should promote is more power to parliament. Skeptics always go on at lengths about the EU's undemocratic character, but all it boils down to is they don't want a stronger parliament, because that would mean their 'national powerbrokering' would become weaker. It would make Europe as an institution more democratic however.

[KrazyHorse]

Exactly. **** nationalism.

I don't know why you support a stronger EU, but most of the people I've seen express their reasoning are blatant EU nationalists.

[VetLegion]

What he should promote is more power to parliament. Skeptics always go on at lengths about the EU's undemocratic character, but all it boils down to is they don't want a stronger parliament, because that would mean their 'national powerbrokering' would become weaker. It would make Europe as an institution more democratic however.

Nonsense. Giving more power to the EU parliament is not the way to reform the
EU to make it more responsive to the wishes of her people. In my country (pop 4,5 million)
one member of Sabor (our parliament) is chosen by 25.000 people (depending on turnout,
it can be as few as 12.000). These guys aren't as manageable as I would wish, but it can
be done.

The EU parliament has an unwieldy 700+ members (and growing), each chosen by approximately
500,000 people. And it's a five year term compared to four years here.

Now, let's say a policy is discussed that would damage my small country. Let's say that
a lot of employment here is provided by incandescent light bulb factories and the parliament
is voting to outlaw them in favour of "energy saving" contraptions.

What can our 10 representatives do in the 700+ member parliament? Nothing. They're
irrelevant. If even 10% of the MPs want to voice an opinion about something, and each
takes 3 minutes, we have almost 4 hours of consecutive speaking. There can be little
meaningful debate in the EU parliament, let alone effective yet fair decision making.

So the proper way to democratize the EU is to return power to national parliaments, not
strengthen the EU parliament versus the Commission or the Council. All of those institutions,
including the Parliament, have a common interest in their fat paychecks and comfortable
lifestyle and are neither capable nor willing to truly represent the people of the union.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Federal Europe is not a good thing, and will not work either... the question is on how can the monetary union work without it though... I reckon there is a fine line somewhere which if divided correctly could work, but the chance that the politicians can/will find it is very close to 0.

I guess in a generation or two, of some half-baked system which currently exist, it would go down a lot easier... but the hard questions are being asked right now due to the economic situation, and it remains to be seen how it will be answered.

[KrazyHorse]

Why do you want a monetary union? I'm not even sure the US should be in a monetary union, and labour market mobility is much higher in the US than in Europe.

[BlackCat]

us never ran any jap camps (other than after the war to dismantle them and help the occupants), and hitler was inspired by not only the english´s boer cc but also the turkish´ armenian genocide.

Edit: click the smiley.

[Az]

The monetary union owns. I can't stand exchanging money all the time.

[Cort Haus]

So the proper way to democratize the EU is to return power to national parliaments, not
strengthen the EU parliament versus the Commission or the Council. All of those institutions,
including the Parliament, have a common interest in their fat paychecks and comfortable
lifestyle and are neither capable nor willing to truly represent the people of the union.

QFT.

And I bet their comfortable lifestyle doesn't include living in basement flats with hardly any natural light where the stupid low-photon migraine-inducing tree-hugging lightbulbs they are forcing on us are hardly sufficient to live by.

The bastards are even banning 60w incandescent bulbs now.

[KrazyHorse]

Az

Why would you change cash? Use an ATM or a credit card when you get there.

The downside to a monetary union is the lack of flexibility when macroeconomic conditions are different in one place than the other. This is most likely to happen when factors of production are less mobile. Labor is one of the least mobile factors of production, and the largest component of production, therefore optimal currency unions are generally viewed as being limited by the extent of labor force integration between various regions. When there are 15 different (?) languages spoken in a currency union, it is most likely too large to be optimal.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

Edit: click the smiley.

Oh, those. I was referring to the concentration camps that the Japanese were running to get rid of the Europeans, in Asia.

[C0ckney]

I'm pretty sure they had a referendum on leaving once, and they voted to stay by a pretty solid majority. But that was a while ago.

we had a vote in 1975 on the common market (as it then was), and about 2/3 voted in favour. we were promised a vote on the european constituation, but that was never delivered, mostly because the government thought, rightly, that they would lose.

[C0ckney]

The 'Constitution' (which was not a consitution really) and the Lisbon Treaty are not the same document.

even its own authors admitted it was the same in substance. you can find many quotes from them and other european politicians about the documents being 90% or 95% the same. they changed the name and did a little window dressing.

Secondly, the changes in that constitution as well as the Lisbon Treaty were meant (in part) to democratize the EU more. Keeping the status-quo (= a no vote) would mean a less democratic EU (in terms of power division, voting conditions etc) than its current situation.

ah so it was supposed to enhance democracy but couldn't be brought into force with the consent of the people... the pro-treaty side couldn't win the argument through democratic means, so they simply dispensed with them. it's just doubletalk.

The point I'm trying to get across is that those Nigel Farage kind of skeptics don't want any power relegated to the EU - at all. They handily disguise their argument stating it is undemocratic. So what happens is that their behaviour strengthens or favours the intergovernmental approach, i.e. the Council (because they defend the interest of their own country at EU level, which is supposedly more democratic then ). That Council by the way, that gave its unanimate vote to the Herman Van Rompuy, the guy Farage is fulminating at in the video. So he is criticizing someone that was voted with pretty much his favourite institution.
:

more hot air. i care not for what nigel farage says. the EU is undemocratic. that's the whole point. vet made a very good point about how unsuitable the parliament is to be a real democratic voice for the people of europe.

[Heraclitus]

Word

Well of course you'd say that living in a fake country and all

[Hauldren Collider]

Why do you want a monetary union? I'm not even sure the US should be in a monetary union, and labour market mobility is much higher in the US than in Europe.

Wait, do you think states should have independent currencies? That is generally considered one of the greatest weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation.

[Barnabas]

In the USA there is no problem with a single currency, you all speak the same language, and Americans are probably the nation which feels most comfortable with moving 1500 kilometers to another state for a job.
Obviously, moving to Germany for a Spaniard is a much more difficult event than moving from Maryland to California for an American.


For the EURO to make sense, europeans should all speak the same language, and national identities should be destroyed and merged into a new bigger european identity.