The European Parliamentary Elections and the EU in general

[AdamAK]

Which alternative would you propose as the EU center?

Somewhere that isn't a complete toilet would be a good start!

A vote would solve it. Although democracy in Europe is dead!

Please do elaborate. Which major city is not a toilet to some extent? And why is democracy dead?

You should also realise that trade rules are being broken all the time, not just in the EU. Just look up how often the US acted in violation of the rules of the WTO. The EU is young, and it's the first union of its kind. It's nowhere near perfect, but it is no surprise that it takes a long time to get everything right. Simply bashing the entire thing, regardless of the benefits, over 57 Billion is silly.

 

[AdamAK]

And yes, I'd rather have my country sort out it's NHS rather than Lativa get new roads, as I choose to live in the UK, not Latvia or Romania, so why should I pay for a country which I am not living in? Imagine if we suddenly had to pay US taxes, just because.

Go die in a fire. Now.
You're the definition of selfishness. You should also realise that improving the situation in other countries will lead to benefits for ALL countries, including your beloved UK, as a result of increased trade.

*Facepalm*
Doesn't work like that. The amount of money the UK is pumping into the EU, it will never get back as we will always be ahead of those countries & economically dominant. Not to mention. what the hell would Latvia and the old block countries be trading with us to make it worthwhile??
But I wouldn't expect someone with your mature attitude to understand something like economics.

Don't be so ignorant and arrogant. Look up the Ricardian model and see what I mean. YOU are the one lacking knowledge in economics.

 

[Doug]

Which alternative would you propose as the EU center?

Somewhere that isn't a complete toilet would be a good start!

A vote would solve it. Although democracy in Europe is dead!

Please do elaborate. Which major city is not a toilet to some extent? And why is democracy dead?

You should also realise that trade rules are being broken all the time, not just in the EU. Just look up how often the US acted in violation of the rules of the WTO. The EU is young, and it's the first union of its kind. It's nowhere near perfect, but it is no surprise that it takes a long time to get everything right. Simply bashing the entire thing, regardless of the benefits, over 57 Billion is silly.

Democracy in Europe is dead because the EU politicans have decided that we have to follow whatever rules or treaties they decide are right without a vote by the people they are meant to represent. Ireland had a vote that recieved a strong 'No' to the treaty of Lisbon, and the EU politicans response was 'tough shit, you're accepting it whether you like it or not'.

And I'm fairly sure the US doesn't pay 5.7 billion to be a member of the WTO ...(?)

 

[AdamAK]

Democracy in Europe is dead because the EU politicans have decided that we have to follow whatever rules or treaties they decide are right without a vote by the people they are meant to represent. Ireland had a vote that recieved a strong 'No' to the treaty of Lisbon, and the EU politicans response was 'tough shit, you're accepting it whether you like it or not'.

And I'm fairly sure the US doesn't pay 5.7 billion to be a member of the WTO ...(?)

If democracy is dead, then why do we see this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_euro_referendum,_2000]

And no, the US doesn't pay money for being part of the WTO, but it loses some possibilities, such as protectionism, in exchange for trade benefits. Just as in the EU..

 

[AdamAK]

I don't have the data for the Production Possibility Frontier for Eastern Europe, so I can't tell you specifically which industry is worthwile. Reading about the Ricardian model is actually a damned good answer for your question. The only problem is that you don't know about it yet. Here's the link, if you're still too lazy too look it up. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardian_model] Not exactly the best explenation there is, but then again, I'm making dinner while discussing with you.

By your logic, trading with China is just plain stupid, because they use less advanced technology. Looking at the real world, I'd have to say you're quite wrong.

Using three question marks doesn't really do anything, by the way.

 

[Doug]

Democracy in Europe is dead because the EU politicans have decided that we have to follow whatever rules or treaties they decide are right without a vote by the people they are meant to represent. Ireland had a vote that recieved a strong 'No' to the treaty of Lisbon, and the EU politicans response was 'tough shit, you're accepting it whether you like it or not'.

And I'm fairly sure the US doesn't pay 5.7 billion to be a member of the WTO ...(?)

If democracy is dead, then why do we see this? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_euro_referendum,_2000]

And no, the US doesn't pay money for being part of the WTO, but it loses some possibilities, such as protectionism, in exchange for trade benefits. Just as in the EU..

That was 9 years ago, and even so, the Treaty of Lisbon, a European constitution (a more important matter than the Euro really) wasn't meant to allow for votes against or for countries to reject it. As happened, too many countries rejected the treaty and they had to change their tune in the end.

 

[AdamAK]

That was 9 years ago, and even so, the Treaty of Lisbon, a European constitution (a more important matter than the Euro really) wasn't meant to allow for votes against or for countries to reject it. As happened, too many countries rejected the treaty and they had to change their tune in the end.

I reply with a nifty quote from this website: [http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/take/index_en.htm]

This new treaty is the result of negotiations between EU member countries in an intergovernmental conference, in which the Commission and Parliament were also involved. The treaty will not apply until and unless it is ratified by each of the EU?s 27 members. It is up to each country to choose the procedure for ratification, in line with its own national constitution.

According to Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon, "this Treaty shall enter into force on 1 January 2009, provided that all the instruments of ratification have been deposited, or, failing that, on the first day of the month following the deposit of the instrument of ratification by the last signatory State to take this step. Currently, 26 Member States have already approved the Treaty and 23 have deposited their ratification instruments in Rome.

While this is, of course, not exactly an example of 'living democracy', it shows that a single country still has the ability to block something that the majority agrees upon. This is, actually, exactly what 'dead' democracy is.

Imagine an election where 5% of the population would vote for party A and 95% for party B. Would it be fair to let party A form a parlaiment, even though they didn't get the majority of votes? No? Then why is it fair on an international scale?

 

[Doug]

That was 9 years ago, and even so, the Treaty of Lisbon, a European constitution (a more important matter than the Euro really) wasn't meant to allow for votes against or for countries to reject it. As happened, too many countries rejected the treaty and they had to change their tune in the end.

I reply with a nifty quote from this website: [http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/take/index_en.htm]

This new treaty is the result of negotiations between EU member countries in an intergovernmental conference, in which the Commission and Parliament were also involved. The treaty will not apply until and unless it is ratified by each of the EU?s 27 members. It is up to each country to choose the procedure for ratification, in line with its own national constitution.

According to Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon, "this Treaty shall enter into force on 1 January 2009, provided that all the instruments of ratification have been deposited, or, failing that, on the first day of the month following the deposit of the instrument of ratification by the last signatory State to take this step. Currently, 26 Member States have already approved the Treaty and 23 have deposited their ratification instruments in Rome.

While this is, of course, not exactly an example of 'living democracy', it shows that a single country still has the ability to block something that the majority agrees upon. This is, actually, exactly what 'dead' democracy is.

Imagine an election where 5% of the population would vote for party A and 95% for party B. Would it be fair to let party A form a parlaiment, even though they didn't get the majority of votes? No? Then why is it fair on an international scale?

Have a lookie at this one... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6901353.stm

Approved by parliment: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK
Defeated by referendum: Irish Republic

Note, only 1 country put the treaty to the people. The people of the UK certainly wouldn't support it, but we don't get a choice. Imagine a system where the politicians get to set their own constitution without approval from the people they are meant to represent. Does that sound like a truly democratic system?

 

[AdamAK]

Note, only 1 country put the treaty to the people. The people of the UK certainly wouldn't support it, but we don't get a choice. Imagine a system where the politicians get to set their own constitution without approval from the people they are meant to represent. Does that sound like a truly democratic system?

But wouldn't it be pointless to propose a referendum to a skeptical and uninformed public? It's like taxes; nobody likes them and many people just love tax reductions, but they really are necessary. Is that 'truly democratic' as well?

People are thinking in terms of countries, and the goal of the EU is to make people feel 'European', rather than just a citizen of a single country. This involves large changes, that cannot occur instantly, but they have to start somewhere.

 

[Doug]

Note, only 1 country put the treaty to the people. The people of the UK certainly wouldn't support it, but we don't get a choice. Imagine a system where the politicians get to set their own constitution without approval from the people they are meant to represent. Does that sound like a truly democratic system?

But wouldn't it be pointless to propose a referendum to a skeptical and uninformed public? It's like taxes; nobody likes them and many people just love tax reductions, but they really are necessary. Is that 'truly democratic' as well?

People are thinking in terms of countries, and the goal of the EU is to make people feel 'European', rather than just a citizen of a single country. This involves large changes, that cannot occur instantly, but they have to start somewhere.

Given the sheer volume of tax the average Brit pays, and the sleath taxes on things like congestion charges and council rates, and given our politicians have been lining their own pockets with tax money, and wasting the rest, I'd say 'No'.

And tough shit if they have a hard sell, its a democracy, they can't just impose something, they have to convince the people its the best thing.

 

[AdamAK]

And tough shit if they have a hard sell, its a democracy, they can't just impose something, they have to convince the people its the best thing.

I guess that is where the problem lies. To be honest, I have hardly seen any promotion regarding the EU constitution/Lisbon Treaty. Hence, the public is uninformed.

Now I must sleep, for I have an exam tomorrow. Hopefully this topic will not die a quick death before I get back online...

 

[Doug]

And tough shit if they have a hard sell, its a democracy, they can't just impose something, they have to convince the people its the best thing.

I guess that is where the problem lies. To be honest, I have hardly seen any promotion regarding the EU constitution/Lisbon Treaty. Hence, the public is uninformed.

Now I must sleep, for I have an exam tomorrow. Hopefully this topic will not die a quick death before I get back online...

True... come to think of it, all I've heard is 'there is this treaty, parliment have accepted it'. Thats about it, really. In Ireland, they are getting more info now that they rejected it the first time.

Of course, the UK government may end up collapsing with the rate of shit that's hitting them, heh. Sadly, this may leave the door open to the BNP, but I'm hopeful that the UK public is smarter than that. Its not so much the EU persay that I dislike, its there approach to things and the way they let things slide in one place whilst coming down hard on others. Just doesn't seem fair. Ok, the world is like that sometimes, but if they really want people to get behind the EU, that path won't get them there.

 

[Agent Larkin]

It is great being Irish. We keep stopping the EU from evolving. Were like an everstone.

 

[Aardvark Soup]

And yes, I'd rather have my country sort out it's NHS rather than Lativa get new roads, as I choose to live in the UK, not Latvia or Romania, so why should I pay for a country which I am not living in? Imagine if we suddenly had to pay US taxes, just because.

Go die in a fire. Now.
You're the definition of selfishness. You should also realise that improving the situation in other countries will lead to benefits for ALL countries, including your beloved UK, as a result of increased trade.

I agree. Also you probably didn't choose to live in the UK, you were born there.

Anyway, I'm certainly going to vote. My party of choice will be the social-democratic 'PvdA' because I agree with them on almost all subjects and think they are realistic and don't just sprout popular and simplistic opinions.

So I should be paying for another countries infrastructure why? A country which will not ever be able to pay pack the money given to it due.
Again, I'm not living there, why should I pay their taxes?

Because you help those countries develop. Poland for instance has greatly benefitted from the economical EU support, which will result in a better quality of life for a lot of Polish people.

Come on, we West-Europeans live in one of the richest regions in the world. Why not share a little bit of our wealth with the people who need it? This may sound awfully preachy, but only this way we can create a better world.

 

[AdamAK]

If the EU has helped Poland so much, why are they flocking to work in the UK?
Not that it's bad, but so much for the help from the EU.

I hope you're joking. Do you honestly expect that an economy that has been ruined for decades due to communism and corruption is going to reach the same level as Western European countries after 5 years of financial support?