|
|
|
On December 04 2013 11:25 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 09:32 3Form wrote:On December 04 2013 06:20 Sub40APM wrote:this poster also misses Communist era 'pride' instilled into Bulgarians so you have to take his views with a large grain of salt. Contrary to what you might believe, people from former bloc countries may have views that differ from each other and from your own. Things like these are never black and white and I have heard numerous people espouse the merits of how their countries used to be. Anecdotal I know. But even an elderly German gentleman saying how things were better in the DDR. Edit: TBH I think you misinterpreted him anyway. He means that during Communist times they were proud of their country. Now they have joined the EU and feel like they are treated like shit and lose their pride. I lived through Communists times to. No, we werent proud. We wanted food, we wanted electricity and hot water at a constant rate. The only people who were proud were the top guys who lived in a parallel universe from the rest of us and children. After the fall everyone felt like shit without any EU help, you went from being kind of poor to super poor. Blaming it on EU is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever read, on par with arguments that the CIA is building pro-western governments around great Russia.
I dont know where have you lived, but in Bulgaria during the communist regime for sure there was more than enough food and electricity. The problems with the electricity here occured when EU pushed our goverment to close several of the nuclear reactors we had...
In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
|
On December 04 2013 16:43 mdb wrote:
In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
Please explain what you mean with that in all details, I'm curious.
|
On December 04 2013 17:22 SilentchiLL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 16:43 mdb wrote:
In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
Please explain what you mean with that in all details, I'm curious.
Its hard for me to find the best words in english, but I`ll try. Both systems are trying to control the people, the communists did it by idealogical propaganda - russia (ussr at the time) was the only one who can save us and we had to be just like them and have the same moral values like them and the economic system was soviet oriented.
Now its the same but instead of USSR we have EU. Somehow we`ve lost our identity as a nation and we are always trying to be like someone else.
But I dont blame EU for this. We as a country are the only ones rensponsible for our faith and my belief is that we have to be totally independent from EU and Russia in order to progress. The fact is that although we may be more financially secure, the people here are very unhappy.
|
Both systems are trying to control the people, the communists did it by idealogical propaganda - russia (ussr at the time) was the only one who can save us and we had to be just like them and have the same moral values like them and the economic system was soviet oriented.
yes the EU has MAJOR flaws... but goddammit comparing it to the friggin USSR is beyond anyone with reason...
|
I`m not comparing EU to USSR, I`m comparing the influence of EU and USSR on a small country in eastern Europe.
|
On December 04 2013 19:26 mdb wrote:
I`m not comparing EU to USSR, I`m comparing the influence of EU and USSR on a small country in eastern Europe.
maybe you, as a country, should have thought about that before joining the EU in hopes of getting a nice junk of that western wealth...
How about asking texas if they like that the federal government has some influence over them... pretty much the same discussion.
|
On December 04 2013 17:41 mdb wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 17:22 SilentchiLL wrote:On December 04 2013 16:43 mdb wrote:
In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
Please explain what you mean with that in all details, I'm curious. Its hard for me to find the best words in english, but I`ll try. Both systems are trying to control the people, the communists did it by idealogical propaganda - russia (ussr at the time) was the only one who can save us and we had to be just like them and have the same moral values like them and the economic system was soviet oriented. Now its the same but instead of USSR we have EU. Somehow we`ve lost our identity as a nation and we are always trying to be like someone else. But I dont blame EU for this. We as a country are the only ones rensponsible for our faith and my belief is that we have to be totally independent from EU and Russia in order to progress. The fact is that although we may be more financially secure, the people here are very unhappy.
The EU can help Bulgaria, like it has many other nations that have joined, and experienced rapid development due to structural support. It is too soon to tell how much Bulgaria is able to make use of the EU though, the Euro crisis has not made things easier either.You can be part of the EU perfectly fine without losing any national identitiy at all.
I think Bulgaria's unhappiness has little to do with being part of the EU to be honest. I can understand that being part of the USSR can cause some sort of national trauma, but the organisations are not comparable. Say what you will about the EU being too wastefully bureaucratic, undemocratic and opague etc. (there are many valid criticisms) but the EU does not bully its member states, and does not blackmail nations into joining. I am not an expert on Bulgaria but I do know Bulgaria is plagued by widespread corruption and organised crime, which understandably causes despair. The EU can't immediately make those things better, but it won't make them worse.
|
On December 04 2013 20:10 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 17:41 mdb wrote:On December 04 2013 17:22 SilentchiLL wrote:On December 04 2013 16:43 mdb wrote:
In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
Please explain what you mean with that in all details, I'm curious. Its hard for me to find the best words in english, but I`ll try. Both systems are trying to control the people, the communists did it by idealogical propaganda - russia (ussr at the time) was the only one who can save us and we had to be just like them and have the same moral values like them and the economic system was soviet oriented. Now its the same but instead of USSR we have EU. Somehow we`ve lost our identity as a nation and we are always trying to be like someone else. But I dont blame EU for this. We as a country are the only ones rensponsible for our faith and my belief is that we have to be totally independent from EU and Russia in order to progress. The fact is that although we may be more financially secure, the people here are very unhappy. The EU can help Bulgaria, like it has many other nations that have joined, and experienced rapid development due to structural support. It is too soon to tell how much Bulgaria is able to make us of the EU though, the Euro crisis has not made things easier either.You can be part of the EU perfectly fine without losing any national identitiy at all. I think Bulgaria's unhappiness has little to do with being part of the EU to be honest. I can understand that being part of the USSR can cause some sort of national trauma, but the organisations are not comparable. Say what you will about the EU being too wastefully bureaucratic, undemocratic and opague etc. (there are many valid criticisms) but the EU does not bully its member states, and does not blackmail nations into joining. I am not an expert on Bulgaria but I do know Bulgaria is plagued by widespread corruption and organised crime, which understandably causes despair. The EU can't immediately make those things better, but it won't make them worse.
Yeah, I agree with everything. As I mentioned in my previous posts, we need to help ourselves first by standing against the corruption and mafia and only after that we may see the positives of joining the EU.
|
On December 04 2013 16:43 mdb wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 11:25 Sub40APM wrote:On December 04 2013 09:32 3Form wrote:On December 04 2013 06:20 Sub40APM wrote:this poster also misses Communist era 'pride' instilled into Bulgarians so you have to take his views with a large grain of salt. Contrary to what you might believe, people from former bloc countries may have views that differ from each other and from your own. Things like these are never black and white and I have heard numerous people espouse the merits of how their countries used to be. Anecdotal I know. But even an elderly German gentleman saying how things were better in the DDR. Edit: TBH I think you misinterpreted him anyway. He means that during Communist times they were proud of their country. Now they have joined the EU and feel like they are treated like shit and lose their pride. I lived through Communists times to. No, we werent proud. We wanted food, we wanted electricity and hot water at a constant rate. The only people who were proud were the top guys who lived in a parallel universe from the rest of us and children. After the fall everyone felt like shit without any EU help, you went from being kind of poor to super poor. Blaming it on EU is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever read, on par with arguments that the CIA is building pro-western governments around great Russia. I dont know where have you lived, but in Bulgaria during the communist regime for sure there was more than enough food and electricity. The problems with the electricity here occured when EU pushed our goverment to close several of the nuclear reactors we had... In no way I am defending the former communists, but the more time passes the more I realize that communism and EU are the both sides of one coin.
I know nothing about this, but the EU is not one to meddle in internal energy policy, because none of the countries who might want to meddle can agree at all. So if there is any truth at all to the EU pushing Bulgaria to shut down nuclear plants, it's probably more to do with a severe risk of a meltdown than any anti-nuclear policy.
In the latter case, having some electricity problems seems a lot better than having a couple of Chernobyls waiting to happen.
|
Ukraine's deputy prime minister says Ukraine will 'soon sign' free trade and association agreement with EU-@Reuters
|
On December 13 2013 03:42 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Ukraine's deputy prime minister says Ukraine will 'soon sign' free trade and association agreement with EU-@Reuters
Does that mean they will try to go a middle way now instead of deciding on one side or will the ukraine distance itself from russia now?
|
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language)
|
On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language)
So quote the relevant parts in french and give us a translation by yourself.
|
On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language)
I'd also like to hear his rationale from a recent perspective. People who've been pronouncing gloom and doom on the Euro come at it from all different ways, so I've no idea what his principal reason is.
One of the world’s leading economists will today admit he was wrong to back the creation of the euro – and call for it to be dismantled.
Sir Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2010, was once a passionate believer in the benefits of the single currency.
But in an extraordinary change of heart, today he will warn the euro is creating a ‘lost generation’ of unemployed youngsters and is ‘dividing Europe’.
The Cypriot-British economist will call for action to ‘restore the euro’s credibility in international markets’ and to ‘restore the trust that Europe’s nations once had in each other’.
But, in a lecture at the London School of Economics, where he teaches, he will add: ‘Regretfully, I do not see either materialising.’
His comments come days after Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, dismissed claims that the crisis in the eurozone is over.
That's one writeup from the daily mail. (Full article includes more recent statements from Lagarde)
|
On December 13 2013 05:34 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language) I'd also like to hear his rationale from a recent perspective. People who've been pronouncing gloom and doom on the Euro come at it from all different ways, so I've no idea what his principal reason is. Show nested quote +One of the world’s leading economists will today admit he was wrong to back the creation of the euro – and call for it to be dismantled.
Sir Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2010, was once a passionate believer in the benefits of the single currency.
But in an extraordinary change of heart, today he will warn the euro is creating a ‘lost generation’ of unemployed youngsters and is ‘dividing Europe’.
The Cypriot-British economist will call for action to ‘restore the euro’s credibility in international markets’ and to ‘restore the trust that Europe’s nations once had in each other’.
But, in a lecture at the London School of Economics, where he teaches, he will add: ‘Regretfully, I do not see either materialising.’
His comments come days after Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, dismissed claims that the crisis in the eurozone is over. That's one writeup from the daily mail. (Full article includes more recent statements from Lagarde)
Anybody with a little economic knowledge KNEW the euro would actually lead to the current situation if nothing was done to give a unified fiscal policy inside the EU. It has been proved since mundell and the theory of the optimum currency area in 1961 (yes the economic problem of a unified currency area in europe were already discussed more than 40 years before the euro)...
The only thing that lead some people in thinking that the euro was a good economic idea is the belief that the europe would actually move toward a federal union before the arrival of an exogene shock, but they obviously refused the see that staying as a clandestine passenger was too beneficial for some country.
|
On December 13 2013 06:15 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2013 05:34 Danglars wrote:On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language) I'd also like to hear his rationale from a recent perspective. People who've been pronouncing gloom and doom on the Euro come at it from all different ways, so I've no idea what his principal reason is. One of the world’s leading economists will today admit he was wrong to back the creation of the euro – and call for it to be dismantled.
Sir Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2010, was once a passionate believer in the benefits of the single currency.
But in an extraordinary change of heart, today he will warn the euro is creating a ‘lost generation’ of unemployed youngsters and is ‘dividing Europe’.
The Cypriot-British economist will call for action to ‘restore the euro’s credibility in international markets’ and to ‘restore the trust that Europe’s nations once had in each other’.
But, in a lecture at the London School of Economics, where he teaches, he will add: ‘Regretfully, I do not see either materialising.’
His comments come days after Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, dismissed claims that the crisis in the eurozone is over. That's one writeup from the daily mail. (Full article includes more recent statements from Lagarde) Anybody with a little economic knowledge KNEW the euro would actually lead to the current situation if nothing was done to give a unified fiscal policy inside the EU. It has been proved since mundell and the theory of the optimum currency area in 1961 (yes the economic problem of a unified currency area in europe were already discussed more than 40 years before the euro)... The only thing that lead some people in thinking that the euro was a good economic idea is the belief that the europe would actually move toward a federal union before the arrival of an exogene shock, but they obviously refused the see that staying as a clandestine passenger was too beneficial for some country.
EU did try to make what mostly was a true federation in 2005 but France and Holland turned it down way before the real skeptical countries got to vote no (and there was no doubt some countries would)..
Most of all it seems that implementation of the EURO was seen as politically plausible and that window of opportunity was closing... It was a long immplementation and it was opposed in several turns by some countries (not governments, mind you) with the arguments about the uneven market etc. Somehow the though of implementing the EURO so people could learn to love eachother and in that way force a federation through has been proposed. In reality both the EURO and the federation was a certainty for some parties. They wanted it so bad, but forgot to ask the people in their countries (The EURO was forced onto every country in the union except Denmark and UK, Sweden blew the rest of EU off and held a referendum even though they had promised to join. The result was a clear no.)...
|
On December 13 2013 06:36 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2013 06:15 WhiteDog wrote:On December 13 2013 05:34 Danglars wrote:On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language) I'd also like to hear his rationale from a recent perspective. People who've been pronouncing gloom and doom on the Euro come at it from all different ways, so I've no idea what his principal reason is. One of the world’s leading economists will today admit he was wrong to back the creation of the euro – and call for it to be dismantled.
Sir Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2010, was once a passionate believer in the benefits of the single currency.
But in an extraordinary change of heart, today he will warn the euro is creating a ‘lost generation’ of unemployed youngsters and is ‘dividing Europe’.
The Cypriot-British economist will call for action to ‘restore the euro’s credibility in international markets’ and to ‘restore the trust that Europe’s nations once had in each other’.
But, in a lecture at the London School of Economics, where he teaches, he will add: ‘Regretfully, I do not see either materialising.’
His comments come days after Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, dismissed claims that the crisis in the eurozone is over. That's one writeup from the daily mail. (Full article includes more recent statements from Lagarde) Anybody with a little economic knowledge KNEW the euro would actually lead to the current situation if nothing was done to give a unified fiscal policy inside the EU. It has been proved since mundell and the theory of the optimum currency area in 1961 (yes the economic problem of a unified currency area in europe were already discussed more than 40 years before the euro)... The only thing that lead some people in thinking that the euro was a good economic idea is the belief that the europe would actually move toward a federal union before the arrival of an exogene shock, but they obviously refused the see that staying as a clandestine passenger was too beneficial for some country. EU did try to make what mostly was a true federation in 2005 but France and Holland turned it down way before the real skeptical countries got to vote no (and there was no doubt some countries would).. Most of all it seems that implementation of the EURO was seen as politically plausible and that window of opportunity was closing... It was a long immplementation and it was opposed in several turns by some countries (not governments, mind you) with the arguments about the uneven market etc. Somehow the though of implementing the EURO so people could learn to love eachother and in that way force a federation through has been proposed. In reality both the EURO and the federation was a certainty for some parties. They wanted it so bad, but forgot to ask the people in their countries...
2005 and the Rome treaty was not about making a federation, it was about making a confederation (completly different for the matter at hand). It stays a political union amongst equal.
The problem has nothing to do with that, but with the inability to make fiscal transferts within the EU from rich countries to poor countries, or from countries in a good situation to countries in a difficult situation.
This was, at no point, discussed in the Rome treaty. Nobody argued that one state, above all countries, should be created and all. In fact it's quite the opposite because the treaty of Lisbon (in 2007) FORBID any "help" from one country to another.
|
On December 13 2013 06:48 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2013 06:36 radiatoren wrote:On December 13 2013 06:15 WhiteDog wrote:On December 13 2013 05:34 Danglars wrote:On December 13 2013 04:41 Saumure wrote:
To whoever told me the € shouldn't be abandoned, even Christopher Pissarides (nobel of economics in 2010) who always defended it said it should be. (can't quote since the article is not in English and I have not found it in that language) I'd also like to hear his rationale from a recent perspective. People who've been pronouncing gloom and doom on the Euro come at it from all different ways, so I've no idea what his principal reason is. One of the world’s leading economists will today admit he was wrong to back the creation of the euro – and call for it to be dismantled.
Sir Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2010, was once a passionate believer in the benefits of the single currency.
But in an extraordinary change of heart, today he will warn the euro is creating a ‘lost generation’ of unemployed youngsters and is ‘dividing Europe’.
The Cypriot-British economist will call for action to ‘restore the euro’s credibility in international markets’ and to ‘restore the trust that Europe’s nations once had in each other’.
But, in a lecture at the London School of Economics, where he teaches, he will add: ‘Regretfully, I do not see either materialising.’
His comments come days after Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, dismissed claims that the crisis in the eurozone is over. That's one writeup from the daily mail. (Full article includes more recent statements from Lagarde) Anybody with a little economic knowledge KNEW the euro would actually lead to the current situation if nothing was done to give a unified fiscal policy inside the EU. It has been proved since mundell and the theory of the optimum currency area in 1961 (yes the economic problem of a unified currency area in europe were already discussed more than 40 years before the euro)... The only thing that lead some people in thinking that the euro was a good economic idea is the belief that the europe would actually move toward a federal union before the arrival of an exogene shock, but they obviously refused the see that staying as a clandestine passenger was too beneficial for some country. EU did try to make what mostly was a true federation in 2005 but France and Holland turned it down way before the real skeptical countries got to vote no (and there was no doubt some countries would).. Most of all it seems that implementation of the EURO was seen as politically plausible and that window of opportunity was closing... It was a long immplementation and it was opposed in several turns by some countries (not governments, mind you) with the arguments about the uneven market etc. Somehow the though of implementing the EURO so people could learn to love eachother and in that way force a federation through has been proposed. In reality both the EURO and the federation was a certainty for some parties. They wanted it so bad, but forgot to ask the people in their countries... lol I don't think you understand what I meant. 2005 and the Rome treaty was not about making a federation, it was about making a confederation (completly different). It stays a political union. The problem has nothing to do with that, but with the inability to make fiscal transferts within the EU from rich countries to poor countries, or from countries in a good situation to countries in a difficult situation. This was, at no point, discussed in the Rome treaty. Nobody argued that one state, above all countries, should be created and all. In fact it's quite the opposite because the treaty of Lisbon (in 2007) FORBID any "help" from one country to another.
Treaty of Lisbon was a result of the Rome treaty going down. I dont think it explicitly forbids help from one country to another. Where does it say so? You could argue that some provisions make it difficult?
Confederation vs federation. Ok, I see the difference now. Then again, I would argue that a confederation wasn't the end-step for several parties.
|
For me the biggest reason for the failure of the euro is that lying and hiding nations did with there finances. There were rules to help keep the euro stable, 3% max budget debt ect, and they were ignored or lied about. That more then anything caused its failure.
Perhaps if countries actually tried to keep a healthy economy/budget instead of thinking the EU was promised land and they could fuck about this might have never happend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
