Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Vudak on April 09, 2006, 12:35:27 PM
-
I’ve been taking a class this semester on the European Union, and find is a fascinating concept.
I can definitely see the EU as emerging as the preeminent superpower and hurdling the US by leaps and bounds economically. It’s simply a matter of math. Using the appendix from T.R. Reid’s “United States of Europe” I’ve added together the total population. I’ve included Norway as it is probable that, once their oil runs low, they’ll join, but I’ve excluded Switzerland. The figure is 458,938,000. Compare that to a July, 2005 estimate posted on the CIA’s website for America: 295,734,124. You guys have a hell of a lot more taxpayers.
Politically speaking, this means that Brussels, like it or not, already calls the shots for many American economic enterprises (ever wonder why we sell 2 liter bottles of soda?) and also has vast political power. When it comes to an economic decision, you’re a supernation of 460 million. When it comes to votes on any world issue, you magically break up into 25 separate votes to America’s 1. I personally think this is BS (imagine what you’d think if our 50 states tried to do that), but if you can get away with it, more power to you.
When you take into thought the fact that kids in the EU are receiving schooling through the college level pretty much free of charge (at least by US standards), this is pretty impressive. Within a few decades you’re going to have a continent full of highly educated tax paying citizens. That should continue to contribute to your economy.
My studies have led me to the conclusion that it would be a very good thing for Washington to move towards a stronger tie with Brussels. We don’t see eye to eye on many things, but if we could compromise on the majority of the issues we could truly be an unstoppable economic alliance backed by the world’s premier military should peaceful means fall through.
I was wondering what our Euro members think of the whole deal? Does the EU work for you or are you against it and why?
-
I can definitely see the EU as emerging as the preeminent superpower
====
United States of Europe sure sounds better than American Union :aok
-
It's takes alot more than just weight of numbers. The EU is not a single entity in the country sense.
If it were just numbers how do you explain, Japan, or Taiwan, or even South Korea's economic stature.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
It's takes alot more than just weight of numbers. The EU is not a single entity in the country sense.
If it were just numbers how do you explain, Japan, or Taiwan, or even South Korea's economic stature.
True, not yet, however they've broken down the border taxes, etc. for EU members so far. Basically meaning you don't have to pay a tax to ship goods from Marseilles to NW Italy for example. America does have to pay those tolls to get their goods in.
Numbers certainly won't hurt though. I'm just saying that if this place does continue to become more unified, they're going to increasingly become an economic check or balance to America. They already are to a great extent. (Think Jack Welch).
-
One benefit the EU's corporations have is that they have an educated, CEO/executive population in the Western part, and a poorer subclass in the Eastern part they can exploit for cheap labor in the short run.
I think in the long run no country except maybe India or China will benefit from "globalisation", only the wealthiest people in Western countries will. India and China may buck the trend and nationalize all the factories that Western corporations build there for cheap labor.
The rest of the population (EU included) will slowly slide down the standard of living scale until we meet Africa coming up, then the entire world will be equally bad off (except for the top .01% or so).
-
Originally posted by Urchin
One benefit the EU's corporations have is that they have an educated, CEO/executive population in the Western part, and a poorer subclass in the Eastern part they can exploit for cheap labor in the short run.
I think in the long run no country except maybe India or China will benefit from "globalisation", only the wealthiest people in Western countries will. India and China may buck the trend and nationalize all the factories that Western corporations build there for cheap labor.
The rest of the population (EU included) will slowly slide down the standard of living scale until we meet Africa coming up, then the entire world will be equally bad off (except for the top .01% or so).
You ever check out that documentary "The Corporation"? It'd be right up your alley, but I have to warn ya, you just might shoot yourself afterward :p
-
Nah, never heard of it.
If it expouses the view that eventually one corporation will rule the world, I don't need to see it.
-
Jack Welch lost his bid to buy Honeywell because it was a personal fued between him and the Italian that was head of the EU's Security Exchange Commission. I was an employee of Honeywell at that time.
My company has a manufacturing plant in Belgium and an light assembly operation in the UK. We have offices in just about every EU country. I think I have a little real world experience to speak from here, and while agree that the EU has broken many barriers down amongst Europe's countries, including a common currency, it still has to struggle with it's output/labor efficiences and costs.
I remember being told in the early 80's that Germany was going to be the economic power house of the world, then in the mid-80's the Asian Tigers of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, would be the force that overtakes America as a economic super power.
I think globalization will draw all competing economies closer together in the race, no question.
-
Wow, EU sounds good. Now we can move the UN over to Brussels
and let the new superpower start running things.
-
Originally posted by Rino
Wow, EU sounds good. Now we can move the UN over to Brussels
and let the new superpower start running things.
Oh c'mon now that's not what I'm advocating :) I'm just saying if we would move a few pegs closer to the average Euro's way of thinking, and if they would move a few pegs closer to the avereage American's way of thinking, I'd say there's nothing out there that could stop us, economically or militarily.
-
there is no way the EU will ever even come close to matching us in power or prestige. they are far too factional and petty. it won't be long before we will be forced to cross the puddle again to smack one tard down because they couldn't play nice with their neighbors. it happens around twice per century and there is no reason to suspect the 21st century will be any different.
-
Vudak, I hate to say it buddy, but not only have you been brainwashed, but you are completely wrong.
Any power, either political or economical resides solely in the power of the military, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO USE IT.
Right now people believe the EU has power because of this. However, I see it as a too fractured union to ever have anypower. Just as the Confederate States of America failed (twice), so will the European Union when the time comes to bind together and act militarily.
The EU will have power til the very first incursion against them. Then they, and any power they are "Supposed" to have, will crumble like a cookie.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Vudak, I hate to say it buddy, but not only have you been brainwashed, but you are completely wrong.
Any power, either political or economical resides solely in the power of the military, AND THE WILLINGNESS TO USE IT.
Right now people believe the EU has power because of this. However, I see it as a too fractured union to ever have anypower. Just as the Confederate States of America failed (twice), so will the European Union when the time comes to bind together and act militarily.
The EU will have power til the very first incursion against them. Then they, and any power they are "Supposed" to have, will crumble like a cookie.
How am I brainwashed?
Completely wrong, perhaps, but brainwashed for reading a book?
Power is a loose term. You're right, when push comes to shove, power does rest solely on the military and the willingness to use it. But there are other types of power that at least can be exercised before the shoving starts.
A huge one is market power. And the EU is a bigger market then us, plain and simple. We can't ignore that fact - we can't just say "to hell with Europe" anymore - we need them to buy our products and they need us to buy their's. If we tick them off too much, they can make our lives difficult, at least economically and politically, as we can do the same to them. The question is, who would get more hurt? I'll leave that to debate.
My point is that if we cooperated, and could get past this whole "Americans are Fascists"/"Europeans are pansies" idealogy that's going on on both sides, we could really accomplish quite alot.
I think it is a big mistake to not work together.
Are they a fractured Union currently? Yep. Is there a possibility that this fracturing will continue? Of course. However, I think it would be foolish to automatically assume it will fall apart. I think it's equally foolish to just dismiss them as pretenders to the crown. They are an educated, numerous people with western views (slightly different then ours), I don't see how the argument could be made that they can't accomplish just about anything they decide to do, just like us.
Of course, you know, Rome wasn't built in a day :)
-
So explain to me how after so many years of the EU developed countrys (that have been around for hundreds of years longer than the US) still have unemployment rates as high as 25%?
The nanny rules of the EU will be it's downfall. Govt. social welfare and private corporate intrests just do not mix. They are like oil and water.
I will not tout my views from a vast educated standpoint as I've never been to europe and I'm only quoting what I've read.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
So explain to me how after so many years of the EU developed countrys (that have been around for hundreds of years longer than the US) still have unemployment rates as high as 25%?
The nanny rules of the EU will be it's downfall. Govt. social welfare and private corporate intrests just do not mix. They are like oil and water.
I'd almost agree with you on that one. Still, I wouldn't say it'll lead to the EU's downfall so much to complete ineffectiveness militarily. When you have taxes as high as 25% in some countries, you can support unemployment as high as 25%, but you sure as hell can't do that and support any decent army too.
So, if they ever get in military trouble, they're going to need our protection. I'm just saying that, should they stay together, we're going to need their market. Hence, we have to work together.
And I'm not trying to come off as some pompous "educated' salamander here and if I do, my apologies. I'm just saying I've taken one class and read one book and have found the topic to be pretty interesting/looking for all your views.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
So explain to me how after so many years of the EU developed countrys (that have been around for hundreds of years longer than the US) still have unemployment rates as high as 25%?
That ones easy... they don't. Spains is the highest, and it is under 20%.
Also... Europeans offer workers unemployment longer, so it isn't like it is a huge deal.
France, Germany, and the UK are all under 10%. Italy was ~12% in the graph I saw.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
That ones easy... they don't. Spains is the highest, and it is under 20%.
Also... Europeans offer workers unemployment longer, so it isn't like it is a huge deal.
France, Germany, and the UK are all under 10%. Italy was ~12% in the graph I saw.
Wow!
The government offers unemplyment benefits longer so somehow thsi maked criminally high unemplyment rates not a huge deal...
Urchin, plese buy a gun and shoot the proffesors who taught you economics. Please.
-
You claim to not be brainwashed, but are spouting off all the "pro's" of the EU after reading a single book? Don't let yourself be swayed so easily.
Power is a loose term. You're right, when push comes to shove, power does rest solely on the military and the willingness to use it. But there are other types of power that at least can be exercised before the shoving starts.
Entirely wrong. Power is not a loose term at all. All the other things that you consider as "Power" do not even hold a candle to military power or the things that can be done with it.
"Market Power", as you can see worldwide, is the strongest with those countries that have the strongest militaries. I'll let you decide whether or not this is a coincidence.
"Political Power" can only be used when the promise of military power is behind it. How can we tell the middle east what to do if there is no promise of extreme retribution upon failure? This is where the EU, the UN, and NATO fail.
Are they a fractured Union currently? Yep. Is there a possibility that this fracturing will continue? Of course. However, I think it would be foolish to automatically assume it will fall apart. I think it's equally foolish to just dismiss them as pretenders to the crown. They are an educated, numerous people with western views (slightly different then ours), I don't see how the argument could be made that they can't accomplish just about anything they decide to do, just like us.
Any country of decent size will fall apart without a decently strong central government.
If you want to really read some interesting history, read up on the Confederate States of America. This government has been in the US two times. And both times it failed for the same reasons. Without a strong central government binding everything together, the states will quarrel and fall apart.
Now, take a wild guess why I brought this up. Take a wild guess as to the structure of the European Union.
The European Union **WILL** fall apart unless some strong central government takes over. But then, this would not be a league of nations, but an entirely new nation onto itself.
Mark my word. The EU will fail in one of two ways. Over a span of about 6-7 years they will bicker with eachother so much that they will break the bonds that "Unite" them.
Or the EU will be challenged militarily. And because (as we have already covered) the EU has no military power, they will fall apart within days.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
You claim to not be brainwashed, but are spouting off all the "pro's" of the EU after reading a single book? Don't let yourself be swayed so easily.
Hey I could spout you off a few things that aren't so hot about the place either: lack of strong military, quagmire of language (english helps, but hey), a healthcare system which, though largely free, is not IMO up to snuff with America's (In Britain, for example, you can't just go to NHS and get a colonoscopy because the state deems it "not cost effective"), and, finally, Eurovision :D
So no, I wouldn't say I'm brainwashed, maybe just optimistic or felt like talking about the positives as I was sure many here would have plenty of negatives to add.
Entirely wrong. Power is not a loose term at all. All the other things that you consider as "Power" do not even hold a candle to military power or the things that can be done with it.
"Market Power", as you can see worldwide, is the strongest with those countries that have the strongest militaries. I'll let you decide whether or not this is a coincidence.
"Political Power" can only be used when the promise of military power is behind it. How can we tell the middle east what to do if there is no promise of extreme retribution upon failure? This is where the EU, the UN, and NATO fail.
If your definition of power is being able to beat someone up if they don't do what you say, you're quite right. As far as telling the middle east what to do, and actually having them listen, good luck, military or not.
Any country of decent size will fall apart without a decently strong central government.
Agreed. But give them some time. Our own government wasn't so decently strongly centralized at first, either. Yet it survived.
If you want to really read some interesting history, read up on the Confederate States of America. This government has been in the US two times. And both times it failed for the same reasons. Without a strong central government binding everything together, the states will quarrel and fall apart.
I will definately check that out. Any suggested texts?
Mark my word. The EU will fail in one of two ways. Over a span of about 6-7 years they will bicker with eachother so much that they will break the bonds that "Unite" them.
Or the EU will be challenged militarily. And because (as we have already covered) the EU has no military power, they will fall apart within days.
What makes you believe that the Europeans won't defend themselves? They defended themselves fairly well for a number of years in both world wars while we were still sticking our heads in the sand. They might not have a large army now, but I can't imagine they'd just roll over and die.
And who is going to attack them with the aim of occupation, anyway? Us?
-
This thread is a nice change of scenery. Americans arguing over European matters. :)
Being an European I really don’t see why the EU can’t be successful. The peoples of Europe are becoming more and more integrated, but the language barrier is perhaps the biggest hurtle we have yet to solve. I think that just the fact that I can drive from Greece to Finland without any visas or passport, and use the same money everywhere says a lot about how far the EU has come.
However it is not a federated state yet. No USE by far.
To those of you who mentioned the military power of the EU I feel it is necessary to clear up a few things. In total the 25 member states of the EU have a bigger army and air force than the USA. The USA has a significantly bigger navy though, and both the EU and USA are nuclear powers. However it must be said that the forces of the USA are far better integrated than those of the EU, but that will probably change in time. If the EU becomes a federated state like the USA
-
Originally posted by Schwein
To those of you who mentioned the military power of the EU I feel it is necessary to clear up a few things. In total the 25 member states of the EU have a bigger army and air force than the USA. The USA has a significantly bigger navy though, and both the EU and USA are nuclear powers. However it must be said that the forces of the USA are far better integrated than those of the EU, but that will probably change in time. If the EU becomes a federated state like the USA
Oh I'd agree that if you that was your aim, you could achieve it. The question is, is it worth giving up some social programs or at the least lessening their benefits to pay for it? We here spend an awful lot of money on our military and other things naturally suffer, but it's a matter of what our priorities are.
Edit - and when i'm talking about the European Army being small, I'm talking the multinational one - not the individual nations' (have no idea about those).
-
Agreed. But give them some time. Our own government wasn't so decently strongly centralized at first, either. Yet it survived.
Wrong. WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Our government failed when it WAS NOT A CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT. The reason it succeeded was because it adopted one.
I will definately check that out. Any suggested texts?
Any standard history book. And the quote, "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it."
What makes you believe that the Europeans won't defend themselves? They defended themselves fairly well for a number of years in both world wars while we were still sticking our heads in the sand. They might not have a large army now, but I can't imagine they'd just roll over and die.
And who is going to attack them with the aim of occupation, anyway? Us?
Who said anything about defense? I said challenge them militarily. Sometime soon, the EU will venture out with all of it's military and engage someone. That same day the entire world will realize the lack of power the EU has and all EU stocks will drop like a rock.
Oh I'd agree that if you that was your aim, you could achieve it. The question is, is it worth giving up some social programs or at the least lessening their benefits to pay for it? We here spend an awful lot of money on our military and other things naturally suffer, but it's a matter of what our priorities are.
Somehow, artists who aren't subsidized do not receive any sympathy from me. Some of the greatest artists ever were **** broke. However, these artists are getting paid and are producing pure crap. I say **** them, we should cut off all funding for them.
Socialistic programs do not garner any care from me.
-
Originally posted by Vudak
Oh I'd agree that if you that was your aim, you could achieve it. The question is, is it worth giving up some social programs or at the least lessening their benefits to pay for it? We here spend an awful lot of money on our military and other things naturally suffer, but it's a matter of what our priorities are.
Edit - and when i'm talking about the European Army being small, I'm talking the multinational one - not the individual nations' (have no idea about those).
That was my point, we don’t have to give up anything to match the US in troops, tanks and planes. We already pay for them although instead of having one big army we have 25 smaller ones (with all the problems that entails). I believe the US Navy is the biggest spender of the US defense budget, and the USA needs a navy.
The USA is literally on the other side of the planet from most hotspots and potential enemies. You need a powerful navy to defend yourself and to project military power. The EU otoh has borders in the Middle-East and North Africa. Any potential invader is much more likely to come by land than sea, and as for power projection; a handful of carriers with escorts and subs is all we need for the foreseeable future imho, and the EU already have that navy.
The bottom line is that the USA spends about twice as much money on its armed forces than the European states, and I would surmise that half of that goes to your superior navy in addition to a less cost efficient army and air force due to the geographical size of your nation and the many foreign deployments you have (plus you like to have the biggest and most expensive toys ;))
My conclusion is that given a situation dire enough Europe could easily match the land and air forces of the USA to defend itself. However, any European expeditionary force would be severely hampered by the defensive nature of European forces and European Law. No one should let Europe’s defensive posture fool them into thinking us toothless however. It would still take another superpower to stop a European expeditionary force.
So you see Europe has both a big military and social programs, but it is more due to differences in geography and military needs than any superior social structure or economy.
-
There are no differences in need for the military. It's the same worldwide.
Sic Vis Pacem, Parabellum.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
There are no differences in need for the military. It's the same worldwide.
Sic Vis Pacem, Parabellum.
Yes, the Swiss really needs a big navy. :lol
-
Beautiful fighter:
(http://www.defesanet.com.br/imagens/eurofighter.jpg)
-
See Rule #5
-
LOL.... amusing thread :D
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
LOL.... amusing thread :D
I agree. Like listening to a couple of 12 handicappers exchange golf tips. :lol
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
Beautiful fighter:
(http://www.defesanet.com.br/imagens/eurofighter.jpg)
Eurofighter Typhoon...
Hawker Typhoon...
(http://airwarrior.afkamm.co.uk/Aerodynamics/hawker2.jpg)
I think they chose a good name :)
-
lol Rolex :D
-
We'll see.
The question whether the EU transforms itself into one nation or not is not decided yet.
In the past ~50 years it has come a long way from warring nations to a union of countries which share a common currency and freedom of travel. Still, having no borders do not a nation make and the true hurdles are the differences in laws, languages and most importantly the notion of a 'national interest' by which every member state can block the entire union. And as long as the member state view their 'nation' as something different from the 'union' the integration will fail. However, it will not fail in the mentioned 6-7 years because thats too quick for 'Old Europe'.
Or the EU will be challenged militarily. And because (as we have already covered) the EU has no military power, they will fall apart within days.
This is the only scenario which, in fact will be a deciding factor in favour of a unified Europe. If there should emerge a threat which can only be contained by the combined contribution of every member state, this will be the day a nation is born.
-
While Europe would be able to be the first economical/social/culture power, it won't be. Inmigration will crush us in few years. A recent study showed some disturbing news. 80% of current inmigration taxes does not even get close to cover half of the cost of social services they got in Europe for all their lives. What we thought would be the "fix" for the eagerly european population is goint to become an economical poison without antidote in less than 20 years more.
-
The EU was founded in the ashes of WW2 with the aim of for all time preventing another conflict between France and Germany. It should stand as a tribute to the sacrifices of the allies, and to that end it is strange that certain neo-con poster-children who love to do it down do so by harping on the contibution of the US contingent in WW2. I'm sure your grandfathers would be proud. ;)
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I will not tout my views from a vast educated standpoint as I've never been to europe and I'm only quoting what I've read.
You've read being lots of editorials from the Weekly Standard and Worldnetdaily based on past form, correct? Your tacit admission that you know next to nothing about the subject in hand does not bode well for your subsequent posts. Why are you even post if you're so uninformed?
"Market Power", as you can see worldwide, is the strongest with those countries that have the strongest militaries. I'll let you decide whether or not this is a coincidence.
You're just making this stuff up as usual. Japan for example has the second biggest economy on the world and very little military power-projection capability.
"Political Power" can only be used when the promise of military power is behind it. How can we tell the middle east what to do if there is no promise of extreme retribution upon failure?
You're telling the middle east what to do? Since when? You can't control Iraq, Iran is thumbing its nose at you and colluding with Russia and China behind your back, and you're forced ignore the real sponsors of Islamic extremism in Saudi Arabia since they can close the oil spigot on you any time they want. Egypt does your bidding because you bribe them, not in reaction to any perceived "prestige".
Any country of decent size will fall apart without a decently strong central government.
The EU isn't a country, it's an economic union based on free-market principals. That it doesn't have any strong central authority is actually one of it's strengths, since it is then forced to make decisions based on unanimity and mutual benefit, and isn't easily hijacked by special interests like some other democracies we could name.
Mark my word. The EU will fail in one of two ways. Over a span of about 6-7 years they will bicker with eachother so much that they will break the bonds that "Unite" them.
That's interesting, because the founding treaty of the EU was promulgated in 1957, so it has lasted nearly 50 years already. 6-7 years? Engage brain before posting please.
Or the EU will be challenged militarily. And because (as we have already covered) the EU has no military power, they will fall apart within days
WhY would anyone agress against the EU? The US and Asia both need access to the combined markets there; both have massive investments there that would be risked. That said, some of the EU constituent states have more than enough nuclear capability to deter an attack by anyone, yourselves included. I think decades of bullying third world nations has made you over-confident.
Who said anything about defense? I said challenge them militarily. Sometime soon, the EU will venture out with all of it's military and engage someone. That same day the entire world will realize the lack of power the EU has and all EU stocks will drop like a rock.
You're just making this stuff up; it's great. EU stocks are underwritten by perception of potential military force? Brilliant!
-
Militarily the EU doesn't need hundreds of thousands of ground troops, we are not planning on invading anyone you see. However, Europe has enough weapons that not even the might of the largest or only superpower could invade Europe.
Factor in that the Euro will eventually be the currency that Oil is purchased with and you will see that the future is in fact quite rosy this side of the Atlantic.
wipass
-
Thread started out with civility, then it looks like some people had to come in and stomp on things. Saitaw, Nilsen and Rolex, why don't you contribute some informed intelligence on the thread instead of acting like the proud eurotards. You guys wonder why people on this board slam the euros?
-
Tell me, how many of you guys work 2 or 3 jobs?
-
Originally posted by Goth
Thread started out with civility, then it looks like some people had to come in and stomp on things. Saitaw, Nilsen and Rolex, why don't you contribute some informed intelligence on the thread instead of acting like the proud eurotards. You guys wonder why people on this board slam the euros?
lol.. cranky today?
-
Originally posted by Goth
Thread started out with civility, then it looks like some people had to come in and stomp on things. Saitaw, Nilsen and Rolex, why don't you contribute some informed intelligence on the thread
Rofl, I was thinking the same thing but it wasn't about those three by a long shot.
And Rolex, by "12 handicappers," do you mean golfers with a score handicap of 12, or simply a dozen retards? I'm trying to figure out which is funnier (and more applicable to this thread). :D
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
lol.. cranky today?
Yeah....sorry...hehe.
Finally got some food in my belly!
-
that usually helps
lack of sex and/or food does that to you
-
Originally posted by Urchin
That ones easy... they don't. Spains is the highest, and it is under 20%.
Also... Europeans offer workers unemployment longer, so it isn't like it is a huge deal.
France, Germany, and the UK are all under 10%. Italy was ~12% in the graph I saw.
The only problem with unemployment is. Thew longer its available. the longer people will delay getting a job and getting off unemployment.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
The only problem with unemployment is. Thew longer its available. the longer people will delay getting a job and getting off unemployment.
There will always be a few that abuse the system, but they are very few up here atleast.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
That ones easy... they don't. Spains is the highest, and it is under 20%.
:O
End of 2005 was 8.5% with a substained economic growth of 3.3%.
Stop scaring me :p
-
Guess my graph was a couple years out of date lol. It showed Spain at around 18%.
Glad to hear it isn't that bad.
-
Well, so far in this thread I've learned a few things I didn't know before, and that was pretty much the aim. I'll get back to your comments a little later Lasersailor (I think we owe the Euros a good thread where two guessing Americans go at it over their policies :D ) but have to run.
A quick question for the Euros:
How do you feel about Turkey? My professor is of the opinion that the biggest reason (perhaps sometimes unspoken) is the EUs immense agricultural subisidies (dont have exact figure but thinking 40%ish?) and the fact that places like France, with 15% of the pop. in agriculture wouldn't look so kindly on a few hundred million Turks in the business dividing the spoils of the subsidies.
Would you agree or would you have another major reason?
-
vudak... I think that your teacher would love for the eu to win out... I don't think it will happen tho. Just wishfull thinking by your socialist teacher. Tell em I said so..
lazs
-
Originally posted by MANDO
While Europe would be able to be the first economical/social/culture power, it won't be. Inmigration will crush us in few years. A recent study showed some disturbing news. 80% of current inmigration taxes does not even get close to cover half of the cost of social services they got in Europe for all their lives. What we thought would be the "fix" for the eagerly european population is goint to become an economical poison without antidote in less than 20 years more.
Welcome to America! :confused: :furious
-
The biggest problem of the EU is that the member nations have soooo different cultures and local problems.
In the USA all the states have a very similar culture and the difference between Idaho, California and Alabama is much much smaller then the difference between Sweden, UK and Greece.
Imho europe would have been much stronger if it would have consisted of the following unions that had a trade agreement.
Nordic Union (Sweden, Danemark, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Estonia)
Central European Union (Germany, Luxenburg, Austria, Poland, Czech Rep, Hungary, Lituania).
Mediteranian Union (Portugal, France, Spain, Italy, Greece)
Atlantic Union (UK, Ireland, Netherlands, Belgium)
These four unions are much closer in cultur and regional issues and would have much easier time working in the same direction.
Then a financial trade union between these four unions and thats it.
Tex
-
Originally posted by Goth
Thread started out with civility, then it looks like some people had to come in and stomp on things. Saitaw, Nilsen and Rolex, why don't you contribute some informed intelligence on the thread instead of acting like the proud eurotards. You guys wonder why people on this board slam the euros?
I'll return your question to storch, your local EU specialist... oh wait... your "All in one" specialist.
-
Originally posted by Vudak
A quick question for the Euros:
How do you feel about Turkey? My professor is of the opinion that the biggest reason (perhaps sometimes unspoken) is the EUs immense agricultural subisidies (dont have exact figure but thinking 40%ish?) and the fact that places like France, with 15% of the pop. in agriculture wouldn't look so kindly on a few hundred million Turks in the business dividing the spoils of the subsidies.
Turkey is a thorny question.
On the one hand, yes, you have France, whose inefficient farmers draw a large proportion of the budget from the Common Agricultural Policy and who wield a disproportionate amount of pwer under the Franch political system. France has so far escaped any major change to the CAP but it is the next likely target for reform as the EU looks to finance continued expansion. My belief is that France will eventually (with some whining) give up on the CAP for fear of being marginalised from the core of EU decision making.
On the other hand, some of the other nations object to Turkey as a prospective member out fear of what they percieve as the prospect of a flood of Turkish (i.e. non-white) immigrants; much of european society is very conservative despite the portrayal of europe in the right wing US press as being quite socialist. These fears are probably misplaced, as every expansion of the EU in recent memory has been accompanied by fears of such waves of immigration which have always failed to materialise. There is also the matter of human rights - which is supposed to be something Turkey is actively addressing.
Also, the objections of Greece will need to be overcome over the issue of Cyprus and the ongoing dispute with Turkey. Because each member state has a veto over expansion of the union, Turkey will need to expend considerable effort in winning Greece over. Since Turkey probably values EU membership more than it values a part of Cyprus, this might actually lead to a final resolution of this age-old problem.
Turkey can supply a young workforce to help with our demographic problems and as an EU member offers a strategic proximity to middle east oil supplies. IMO Turkish membership is just a matter of time.
-
Without reform of the Commission and the dismantling of the CAP, I will never support stronger links between the EU and UK.
To dismantle the CAP system, you will have to break down years of tradition within French agricultural circles, where farms are broken down into smaller farms and distributed among the surviving children on death of the parents. Consequently, inefficiency and reliance on subsidies increases.
Contrast with English tradition, whereby the eldest son inherits the whole farm, and where efficiencies and economies of scale can be exploited with new technology.
Having said that, my recent visits to the continent have opened my eyes. After visiting Berlin in particular, I felt like I could call myself a European.
The EU has great potential - but it is in its infancy. There is alot to change first, and it is best done slowly. Despite recent history, we have more in common than we think - I also think we have a duty to bring in Eastern Europe from the cold after (predominantly) America sold them out at the end of WWII.