|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On October 26 2015 07:48 Cazimirbzh wrote:
I am bit more afraid about their relation with russia :S
It can't get much worse
|
|
|
On October 26 2015 06:57 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2015 06:04 Silvanel wrote:
So polish parlimentary elections are finished. Looks like PiS (the right wing guys that some call populists) will be able to govern unoposed. They have around ~51% of seats in lower house. I wonder how it will impact polish-german relations. More harsh language, thats all.
One can only hope that this gouvernment will collapse before they manage to fuck things up while trying to "fix Poland".
|
On October 26 2015 07:48 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@Nyxisto
Roots even go before nationalism aka French Revolution, Napoleon vs all European monarchies (slaughters a lot of people and after spreads weird ideas about equality=citizenship). Same apply for immigration, it goes back to colonization(vs english) cause borders are water. Immigration in Germany is relatively new, same for nationalism (Franco-Prussian War 1870)
The idea of assimilation came after this war like all others country, either your french/german or you out/dead^^. Today this process is not very effective as forcing people to be something they're not is not considered a good thing so it's harder to impose it.
@Silvanel
I am bit more afraid about their relation with russia :S
Assimilation is actually incredibly effective. The US does it in a soft way because of how people perceive its culture of individualism ("you can be anything you want to be as long as you're willing to work hard for it"), other countries enforce it upon outsiders by basically denying them rights if they do not conform. The absence of a generous social security system forces migrants who move to the US to integrate into the larger society to much larger degree than in Wester Europe.
The multiculturalism approach which Germany, France, Belgium, The Netherlands and others have taken have led to closed communities of migrants living next to (as in "not among") the indigenous population with very little integration to show, even after three generations and a fourth coming up. They are overrepresented in povery figures, unemployment figures and are disproportionately dependent on all sorts of benefits. Many of them identify more with the country their (grand) parents originated from than with the country they've been living in since they were born.
Of course, unlike Western European countries the US is a lot more selective in who gets to legally stay long-term in the country. People who migrate to Europe are often low-skilled workers, something Europe has absolutely no shortage of. On the contrary, skill misallocation is a huge problem on European labour markets.
Then there's also either overt or hidden discrimination towards migrants to take into account too.
|
@maartendq
You're mixing the words.
There is a very limited assimiliation process in the USA. It's multiculturalist society, americans are devided into ethnic groups, white, african/black american, latino, asian, etc.
France is the best counter example of europe as republicanism-Radicalism(i didnt find the correct term) doesnt give space to people with foreign origins.
Even if both have "failed" on a cultural level, it's interesting to see that actually interethnic marriage is higher in france compared to the USA.
If you look at the south of USA, the latino population booms and immigration is leading to a majority of spanish speakers compared to english speakers.
But at the complete opposite, the chinese dont even integrated populationn they replaced them (Hanization)
As the world is mixing, this issue tend to be more and related to with "racism", mainly because people know nothing about genetics but there a lot of approachs possible on this.
They are overrepresented in povery figures, unemployment figures This situation can be found around the world, minorities are always marginalized.
the US is a lot more selective in who gets to legally stay long-term As legally doesnt reflect reality, who cares ? Even jeb Bush agreed that 11 million people should be legally american, that's some quick selection^^
|
Actually with respect to "muslim" immigrants, you will find that USA tends to receive "muslims" which are more moderate and with tertiary education.
|
So now Austria is building a border fence, and with Poland possibly doing the same. Now what is Germany's plan?
|
Trying to push for a European solution until it works. We have 4000km of land borders, I don't think there is that much fence material in the country and I'm afraid that the refugees have already discovered ladder technology
|
On October 29 2015 10:25 Nyxisto wrote:
Trying to push for a European solution until it works. We have 4000km of land borders, I don't think there is that much fence material in the country and I'm afraid that the refugees have already discovered ladder technology
i think we are pretty good at walling in countries, especially our own.
|
The European Commission knew of “widespread concern” that car manufacturers were cheating in emissions tests as long as two years ago, according to a report.
In February 2013, the then European Union’s environmental commissioner, Janez Potocnik, wrote to Antonio Tajani, then industry commissioner, in February 2013, warning that several EU countries believed a “significant discrepancy” between emissions from cars in the real world and emissions during testing was the “primary reason” that air quality was not improving, The Financial Times reported.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-eu-officials-knew-of-widespread-concern-that-manufacturers-were-a6708656.html
European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.html
Who's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be.
|
On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be.
How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules.
|
On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules.
It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that european high officials knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. The fact that lobbying is so easy in europe is a scandal. The fact that regulation at the european level is almost always liberal and in favor of the powerful firms against things like health or working conditions is a disaster. You can cut it and argue that it is the government, the point is that the more the european commission is given power the more those kind of situations arose.
Don't tell me people like Juncker (who's economic strategy in luxemburg was based around sucking the fiscal basis of other european countries) would actually do what's necessary in europe if they had more power to impose their will on nations.
|
On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure.
How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards.
|
On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards.
It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented.
It's also the european institutions that permit some nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. There is no problem for the current europe to force spain, portugal and greece into austerity, but somehow we're unable to do anything when it's about the migrants and the environment because the europe can't impose anything on nations ?
It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better while countries changed tremendously under the influence of the european institutions.
|
On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better.
I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative.
|
On November 02 2015 00:30 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better. I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative.
That's some funny arguments you got there.
What you're telling me is that you don't want to argue with me on what I am talking about, but in fact prefer to quote only a part of my post - which was mainly about the fact the european institutions knew about the volkswagen scandal two years ago - and respond to it like it is the entirety of my post. May I add that the fact that national governments pushed for a rather gentle regulation can also be seen as a flaw of the europe... and thus still fit "my narrative". But don't let that trouble you.
Hum... don't respond to any of my post if the only thing you want to do is misrepresent my arguments and then jump ship as soon as I respond.
|
On November 02 2015 00:35 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:30 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better. I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative. That's some funny arguments you got there. What you're telling me is that you don't want to argue with me on what I am talking about, but in fact prefer to quote only a part of my post - which was mainly about the fact the european institutions knew about the volkswagen scandal two years ago - and respond to it like it is the entirety of my post. May I add that the fact that national governments pushed for a rather gentle regulation can also be seen as a flaw of the europe... and thus still fit "my narrative". Hum... don't respond to any of my post and misrepresent my arguments if you want to be taken seriously.
This discussion started with me responding to what you wrote in reference to the vote mentioned in the Financial Times article that you quoted. I responded specifically to that part of your post because using that vote to denounce the European Union is, as I've explained clearly, utterly ignorant. Again, I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU, I was addressing that specific example, which you completely mischaracterized. National governments pushed for the measure which was adopted, and they are to blame for it -- not EU institutions (the Commission was in favor of stricter rules). This specific case completely contradicts your narrative.
|
On November 02 2015 00:44 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 02 2015 00:30 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better. I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative. That's some funny arguments you got there. What you're telling me is that you don't want to argue with me on what I am talking about, but in fact prefer to quote only a part of my post - which was mainly about the fact the european institutions knew about the volkswagen scandal two years ago - and respond to it like it is the entirety of my post. May I add that the fact that national governments pushed for a rather gentle regulation can also be seen as a flaw of the europe... and thus still fit "my narrative". Hum... don't respond to any of my post and misrepresent my arguments if you want to be taken seriously. This specific case completely contradicts your narrative.
No it does not. And there's no discussion actually.
responded specifically to that part of your post because using that vote to denounce the European Union is, as I've explained clearly, utterly ignorant
So basically, your argument is that the fact that dominant national countries in europe can always push for their own interests against the interests of the majority is not a failure in itself for european institutions ? So my argument is "ignorant", and yours is stupid basically ?
|
On November 02 2015 00:46 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:44 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 02 2015 00:30 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:On October 31 2015 22:47 WhiteDog wrote:European countries have unexpectedly granted carmakers additional leeway to break EU rules on harmful emissions, confounding expectations that they would agree to a tight framework in the wake of the Volkswagen scandal.
In a vote in Brussels on Wednesday, the 28 member states watered down proposals for a new testing framework that would crack down on the techniques used by carmakers to doctor their emissions’ results in tests. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96092c6c-7d90-11e5-a1fe-567b37f80b64.htmlWho's surprised anymore ? The European Union is a complete failure whatever the subject may be. How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better. I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative. That's some funny arguments you got there. What you're telling me is that you don't want to argue with me on what I am talking about, but in fact prefer to quote only a part of my post - which was mainly about the fact the european institutions knew about the volkswagen scandal two years ago - and respond to it like it is the entirety of my post. May I add that the fact that national governments pushed for a rather gentle regulation can also be seen as a flaw of the europe... and thus still fit "my narrative". Hum... don't respond to any of my post and misrepresent my arguments if you want to be taken seriously. This specific case completely contradicts your narrative. No it does not. And there's no discussion actually.
Yes it does, because national governments are to blame and not EU institutions.
On November 02 2015 00:46 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +responded specifically to that part of your post because using that vote to denounce the European Union is, as I've explained clearly, utterly ignorant So basically, your argument - which is not ignorant but stupid - is that the fact that national countries can always push for their own interests is not a failure for the european institutions ?
Again, in this case, it is only a failure in the sense that the way to avoid that decision was to take that authority away from member states and give it to the Commission. It's the exact opposite of your argument that we would be better off without EU institutions.
|
On November 02 2015 00:51 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:46 WhiteDog wrote:On November 02 2015 00:44 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 02 2015 00:30 kwizach wrote:On November 02 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 23:54 kwizach wrote:On November 01 2015 23:52 WhiteDog wrote:On November 01 2015 22:43 kwizach wrote:How exactly is the European Union responsible when it's the national governments which lobbied and voted in favor of the measure, with only The Netherlands voting against it? The EU Commission favors stricter rules. It's always the same excuses over and over again : it's not the eu but the nations and blablabla, we need more eu blablabla. The fact that the european commission knew about the volkwagen scandal two years ago and still did nothing, even just for communication, is a failure. How is it an excuse with regards to the vote you brought up? Again, the national governments lobbied in favor of that measure. Not having the EU would have led to an even worse outcome. Your reasoning is completely backwards. It's an excuse because it's always given by people that are usually completly oblivious to the reality of europe as it is. It's not only countries, but the european institutions that give tons of power to lobbying : everybody knows it, it's well documented. It's also the european institutions that permit nations to impose their will on the rest of the countries. It's already been 30 years that some argue that the problem is not those institutions but the countries : fact is, parties have been completly unable to change those institutions for the better. I'm not interested in getting into a wider debate about the EU -- I am addressing the point you raised in your initial post, which was about a specific vote. The measure they voted in favor of was lobbied for by national governments, NOT the EU's Commission, which is in favor of stricter rules. Blaming the EU for that vote and arguing that we would have been better off in this case without the EU is utterly ignorant, considering the responsibility for that decision lies with the national governments and not the Commission. Had the decision been up to the Commission and not representatives from national governments, we would actually have tougher rules. If you want to rant about the EU, suit yourself, but don't be surprised when you get called out for misrepresenting cases to make them fit your narrative. That's some funny arguments you got there. What you're telling me is that you don't want to argue with me on what I am talking about, but in fact prefer to quote only a part of my post - which was mainly about the fact the european institutions knew about the volkswagen scandal two years ago - and respond to it like it is the entirety of my post. May I add that the fact that national governments pushed for a rather gentle regulation can also be seen as a flaw of the europe... and thus still fit "my narrative". Hum... don't respond to any of my post and misrepresent my arguments if you want to be taken seriously. This specific case completely contradicts your narrative. No it does not. And there's no discussion actually. Yes it does, because national governments are to blame and not EU institutions. Show nested quote +On November 02 2015 00:46 WhiteDog wrote:responded specifically to that part of your post because using that vote to denounce the European Union is, as I've explained clearly, utterly ignorant So basically, your argument - which is not ignorant but stupid - is that the fact that national countries can always push for their own interests is not a failure for the european institutions ? Again, in this case, it is only a failure in the sense that the way to avoid that decision was to take that authority away from member states and give it to the Commission. It's the exact opposite of your argument that we would be better off without EU institutions.
So it is only a failure in a specific sense : so it is still a failure. So my comment was not wrong...
And basically you argued against a comment I didn't make (that europe imposed on nations a gentle regulation on automobile against their will), thus misrepresenting my point, and then made it seem like i was contradicting myself.
Bravo.
it is only a failure in the sense that the way to avoid that decision was to take that authority away from member states and give it to the Commission
This is not a description of the failure (which is what you are supposed to contredict), but rather of your solution. To me this solution is stupid and ignorant (both at the same time !) for reasons I've exposed before, but I'm not willing to discuss with someone who paint other's argument with its own color to refute them easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
