|
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. |
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 05:46 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:29 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own. Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis. Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it. What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world? Why would a Greek default lead to a wider financial crisis? Nobody in the financial sector has exposure to Greece anymore and the bailout money not coming back isn't going to make any country go bankrupt. You're overestimating Trumps influence. He's massively disliked in Europe. I remember a poll in NL where 90% thought negatively of him.Trump being negative about the EU won't really matter at all. There's no real alternative for the US as an ally tbh (this goes both ways, the US has no real alternative to the EU). Economically though there are plenty of partners like China, India, other developed countries etc.
"Nobody in the financial sector" - going to have to ask for clarification. Greece owes people money, and that money not being repaid looks like something of a loss. And depending on how that's resolved, it could lead to further money troubles.
Trump being disliked, no shit. I can't recall "Europe" being fond of Republicans. But if the most important country to the "liberal order" that makes up part of the ideological basis for the EU is not really on board, then that severely undermines any ideological message of unity.
The US doesn't need the EU as a bloc - it can certainly pick and choose its favorites for an alliance. I can't agree that they have no other possible partners, considering that they are one other ocean away from plenty of potentially US-sympathetic nations. Economically, though, do you see a deepening of ties with China as the US pulls away being the arrangement that saves the EU?
|
On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:20 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:13 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:08 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place. Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that. I was asking you the following question: Is "Occupation" a loaded term, and hence, inapproriate? How about "puppies"? Opposition is largely dependent on how an EU army would be used in practice. Increased security by itself in the face of the threat of expanding militarist powers is sensible, and opposition can be overcome over time. Occupation as in, how would German troops being deployed in (insert country here) the way US NATO troops are, be interpreted? If you think there wouldn't be a substantial number of people who would say "this is precisely what we fought against, 70 years ago" then you would be far too optimistic. Does it accurately a hypothetical foreseeable situation? Why did you choose the highly negative connotation term occupation out of a selection of the also applicable terms "deployment" or "supporting local forces"? Is any military presence occupation by the virtue of people having differing opinions about it, or is it a legal term? Because any nation with any sense of national pride would see a German garrison in their homes as little more than an occupation. Yes, it is true that "nation with any sense of national pride" is a dying breed, but they still exist. And let's not pretend that an EU-centric military project wouldn't elevate Germany to the status of the strongest military force within the bloc. The U.K. and French militaries don't set such a high bar to overcome, and Germany would easily be able to take its place at the top there. It would start to look like something resembling an occupation to people who are not so inclined to want German garrisons. Which countries would see it that way? France and Britain would, almost certainly. The German puppy bloc, almost certainly not. Everyone else, I don't know. But I doubt it would look pretty.
Even if everyone in Europe would spend 2% of GDP as defense budget, there would never be a need for German troops to garrison France or England... So what are you talking about?
And Poland and the Baltics requested troops... There are joint forces with the Dutch, so troops are already stationed across borders (in both directions) there. Not sure Italy or Spain would need any assistance with their defense...
And if SE europe doesn't want German troops, I would highly doubt any would be sent there. After all it is not like Germany is pushing itself into the role, but everyone asks Germany to finally do more in the defense department.
So again: WHAT COUNTRY are you talking about?
You are spouting bullshit.
|
On January 17 2017 20:24 DickMcFanny wrote:
I just came back to Germany and it's quite remarkable how much the country has changed in just 18 months.
First off, there's police EVERYWHERE. That's so depressing. Up until recently, all you ever saw was the Ordnungsamt, now there's police at every corner.
For the first time I can recall, four Bundespolizisten came into the train today and wanted to see our IDs because a couple of Bahn staff were attacked and molested.
My friend, who volunteers for the THW in an emergency vehicle says they now had to hire a security company because they can't go into certain areas without protection. If they go into migrant territory to treat an emergency, the migrants attack them or try to steal equipment.
Even hospitals aren't safe anymore, Muslims frequently come in and attack doctors and nurses if they don't give preferential treatment to Muslim women. There's recently been a case in NRW where an emergency nurse (male) got beaten to a pulp because he removed a hijab to treat a woman... He was kneeling down, took her pulse and got kicked in the head. When he was on the ground, some more migrants kicked the shit out of him.
Not a day goes by without some violent crime making it into national news, 60% of people report feeling less safe in Germany, Antisemitism is on the rise again...
It all just feels like a giant net-loss to our society.
Muslisms are a problem and antisemitism is on the rise? Why?
|
On January 19 2017 05:55 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:46 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 05:29 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own. Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis. Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it. What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world? Why would a Greek default lead to a wider financial crisis? Nobody in the financial sector has exposure to Greece anymore and the bailout money not coming back isn't going to make any country go bankrupt. You're overestimating Trumps influence. He's massively disliked in Europe. I remember a poll in NL where 90% thought negatively of him.Trump being negative about the EU won't really matter at all. There's no real alternative for the US as an ally tbh (this goes both ways, the US has no real alternative to the EU). Economically though there are plenty of partners like China, India, other developed countries etc. "Nobody in the financial sector" - going to have to ask for clarification. Greece owes people money, and that money not being repaid looks like something of a loss. And depending on how that's resolved, it could lead to further money troubles. Trump being disliked, no shit. I can't recall "Europe" being fond of Republicans. But if the most important country to the "liberal order" that makes up part of the ideological basis for the EU is not really on board, then that severely undermines any ideological message of unity. The US doesn't need the EU as a bloc - it can certainly pick and choose its favorites for an alliance. I can't agree that they have no other possible partners, considering that they are one other ocean away from plenty of potentially US-sympathetic nations. Economically, though, do you see a deepening of ties with China as the US pulls away being the arrangement that saves the EU?
So your logic is:
- one major partner goes idiot mode for a couple of years (US)
- no other potential partners are on the horizon for various reasons (Russia, China)
-> conclusion: let's all split up and abandon the remaining big partners we have in central Europe
Yeah, this makes sense.
And with Trump doing his daily best that nobody takes him serious, and even those who may be tempted will have serious doubt if any of his shit stunts survives the next US president... He is certainly doing a good job to not cause pickoffs.
If anyone will pick off nations it will be Russia... At least they can be considered "reliable" in their own way.
|
I'm with Mahrgell here. Why would foreign (german) troops be stationed in random nations again?
The only countries asking for troops are Eastern European ones who are afraid of Russian aggression and any troops send there will happen with agreement from both sides.
Why exactly is Germany going to occupy random countries all of a sudden??
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 06:08 Gorsameth wrote:
Why exactly is Germany going to occupy random countries all of a sudden??
Say that Trump takes his "2 percent or we don't got your back" pledge seriously. Who is suddenly going to have a massively increased military role in Europe?
|
On January 19 2017 06:09 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:08 Gorsameth wrote:
Why exactly is Germany going to occupy random countries all of a sudden?? Say that Trump takes his "2 percent or we don't got your back" pledge seriously. Who is suddenly going to have a massively increased military role in Europe?
Yes yes we get this. The German army will grow. But I want to know why that would suddenly mean that 3000 German soldiers are camping in my backyard?
|
On January 19 2017 06:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:09 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:08 Gorsameth wrote:
Why exactly is Germany going to occupy random countries all of a sudden?? Say that Trump takes his "2 percent or we don't got your back" pledge seriously. Who is suddenly going to have a massively increased military role in Europe? Yes yes we get this. The German army will grow. But I want to know why that would suddenly mean that 3000 German soldiers are camping in my backyard?
Given that so far 5000 Dutch soldiers were integrated into the German forces and currently there are plans for an entire German-Dutch tank division with 20.000 soldiers... Depending on where your backyard is... :D
|
On January 19 2017 05:55 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:46 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 05:29 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own. Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis. Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it. What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world? Why would a Greek default lead to a wider financial crisis? Nobody in the financial sector has exposure to Greece anymore and the bailout money not coming back isn't going to make any country go bankrupt. You're overestimating Trumps influence. He's massively disliked in Europe. I remember a poll in NL where 90% thought negatively of him.Trump being negative about the EU won't really matter at all. There's no real alternative for the US as an ally tbh (this goes both ways, the US has no real alternative to the EU). Economically though there are plenty of partners like China, India, other developed countries etc. "Nobody in the financial sector" - going to have to ask for clarification. Greece owes people money, and that money not being repaid looks like something of a loss. And depending on how that's resolved, it could lead to further money troubles. Trump being disliked, no shit. I can't recall "Europe" being fond of Republicans. But if the most important country to the "liberal order" that makes up part of the ideological basis for the EU is not really on board, then that severely undermines any ideological message of unity. The US doesn't need the EU as a bloc - it can certainly pick and choose its favorites for an alliance. I can't agree that they have no other possible partners, considering that they are one other ocean away from plenty of potentially US-sympathetic nations. Economically, though, do you see a deepening of ties with China as the US pulls away being the arrangement that saves the EU?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33407742
As you can see most of the Greek debt is held by public institutions like the ESFS, IMF, ECB. The first Greek crisis was dangerous because multiple European banks were exposed to Greek debt. THat suddenly all souring can cause a financial crisis (I don't think it would've though). Now the exposure is quite small. While a default will still be pretty painful a financial crisis doesnt seem very likely. An actual haircut seems more likely than a default since if Greece does default a haircut will follow as well.
But don't you see that nobody gives a damn about what Trump thinks over here? Nobody is going to think worse of the EU because Trump doesn't like it. They'll either shrug or thinks he's an idiot.
None of those allies have the same history, cooperation, trust and size as the EU does. There are countries like Australia and New Zealand which are very close but don't have the size, not to mention that they're already allies. So no there's not really an equal partner as a substitution for the EU.
Economically deepening ties with China, which has an economy as big as the US, is definitely a worthy option (although I don't think anything can actually replace the US in this regard). Then there are also other developed nations like Australia and Japan. There are developing nations like Brazil, Mexico and Argentina etc. Especially on the economic front there are a lot of alternatives.
|
On January 19 2017 06:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:09 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:08 Gorsameth wrote:
Why exactly is Germany going to occupy random countries all of a sudden?? Say that Trump takes his "2 percent or we don't got your back" pledge seriously. Who is suddenly going to have a massively increased military role in Europe? Yes yes we get this. The German army will grow. But I want to know why that would suddenly mean that 3000 German soldiers are camping in my backyard?
Pssst, they already are. With Dutch permission of course. There are one or two joint bases.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 06:24 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:55 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:46 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 05:29 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own. Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis. Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it. What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world? Why would a Greek default lead to a wider financial crisis? Nobody in the financial sector has exposure to Greece anymore and the bailout money not coming back isn't going to make any country go bankrupt. You're overestimating Trumps influence. He's massively disliked in Europe. I remember a poll in NL where 90% thought negatively of him.Trump being negative about the EU won't really matter at all. There's no real alternative for the US as an ally tbh (this goes both ways, the US has no real alternative to the EU). Economically though there are plenty of partners like China, India, other developed countries etc. "Nobody in the financial sector" - going to have to ask for clarification. Greece owes people money, and that money not being repaid looks like something of a loss. And depending on how that's resolved, it could lead to further money troubles. Trump being disliked, no shit. I can't recall "Europe" being fond of Republicans. But if the most important country to the "liberal order" that makes up part of the ideological basis for the EU is not really on board, then that severely undermines any ideological message of unity. The US doesn't need the EU as a bloc - it can certainly pick and choose its favorites for an alliance. I can't agree that they have no other possible partners, considering that they are one other ocean away from plenty of potentially US-sympathetic nations. Economically, though, do you see a deepening of ties with China as the US pulls away being the arrangement that saves the EU? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33407742As you can see most of the Greek debt is held by public institutions like the ESFS, IMF, ECB. The first Greek crisis was dangerous because multiple European banks were exposed to Greek debt. THat suddenly all souring can cause a financial crisis (I don't think it would've though). Now the exposure is quite small. While a default will still be pretty painful a financial crisis doesnt seem very likely. An actual haircut seems more likely than a default since if Greece does default a haircut will follow as well. But don't you see that nobody gives a damn about what Trump thinks over here? Nobody is going to think worse of the EU because Trump doesn't like it. They'll either shrug or thinks he's an idiot. None of those allies have the same history, cooperation, trust and size as the EU does. There are countries like Australia and New Zealand which are very close but don't have the size, not to mention that they're already allies. So no there's not really an equal partner as a substitution for the EU. Economically deepening ties with China, which has an economy as big as the US, is definitely a worthy option (although I don't think anything can actually replace the US in this regard). Then there are also other developed nations like Australia and Japan. There are developing nations like Brazil, Mexico and Argentina etc. Especially on the economic front there are a lot of alternatives.
So the debt is basically passed around and someone else will pay the price.
Yes, it's clear that you don't think people will take Trump seriously and think he's a buffoon. But without the US backing the EU, what good is it? The US will pursue a policy that does not necessarily favor a bloc rather than separate nation-states.
Why does the US need to ally with the bloc rather than individual nations? Are they going to go to the back of the queue on the trade deals and alliances because the US wants to negotiate with blocs instead? No? Then the US doesn't necessarily need the EU to stay together to have alliances within it.
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0003.html
That's a lot of trade to replace. And a lot of trading infrastructure to replace too, if you want to go for China instead for that matter. But I hear China is having trouble selling enough cargo ships to keep their shipyards working, so maybe it will all work out after all.
|
What do you mean, "what good is the EU without the US backing it"? The EU doesn't exist because of or for the US. It exists because of internal European reasons. That the US (mostly) thinks it's a wonderful idea, because it is far easier to negotiate treaties with a single block rather than dozens of individual nations doesn't mean that the US not caring for it makes it futile. As long as the EU exists, the US will keep negotiating with the EU (and also with individual nations for things that are sorted out at national level).
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners?
A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 06:41 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners? A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective.
I think you know what I meant, and I saw no reason to comment further on it beyond your insistence on receiving an answer. If "the group of countries that are most inclined to form a bloc with Germany" would be a more flattering description, you can have it. In any case, I would indeed predict that such a bloc would form in the aftermath of a hypothetical EU collapse.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 19 2017 06:46 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:41 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners? A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective. I think you know what I meant, and I saw no reason to comment further on it beyond your insistence on receiving an answer. If "the group of countries that are most inclined to form a bloc with Germany" would be a more flattering description, you can have it. In any case, I would indeed predict that such a bloc would form in the aftermath of a hypothetical EU collapse.
In the aftermath of Trump's behaviour, "You know what I mean" should no longer fly as an excuse. Terrible people use that phrase to escape responsibility for their own carelessness. Words matter, it is not just more flattering, but also more accurate and appropriate.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 06:54 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:46 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:41 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners? A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective. I think you know what I meant, and I saw no reason to comment further on it beyond your insistence on receiving an answer. If "the group of countries that are most inclined to form a bloc with Germany" would be a more flattering description, you can have it. In any case, I would indeed predict that such a bloc would form in the aftermath of a hypothetical EU collapse. In the aftermath of Trump's behaviour, "You know what I mean" should no longer fly as an excuse. Terrible people use that phrase to escape responsibility for their own carelessness. Words matter, it is not just more flattering, but also more accurate and appropriate.
I must comment, though, that if a quip as minor as "puppy" is enough to be offensive, then I might suggest that you should grow a backbone rather than insist on being referred to with the "proper degree of respect." It reminds me of the concerns over "PC culture" or "Polish death camps" in its insistence on certain terminology.
But that's a discussion that would be more fruitful in the US thread than here, since the European position is more of a consensus than a discussion.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On January 19 2017 07:03 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 06:54 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 06:46 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:41 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners? A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective. I think you know what I meant, and I saw no reason to comment further on it beyond your insistence on receiving an answer. If "the group of countries that are most inclined to form a bloc with Germany" would be a more flattering description, you can have it. In any case, I would indeed predict that such a bloc would form in the aftermath of a hypothetical EU collapse. In the aftermath of Trump's behaviour, "You know what I mean" should no longer fly as an excuse. Terrible people use that phrase to escape responsibility for their own carelessness. Words matter, it is not just more flattering, but also more accurate and appropriate. I must comment, though, that if a quip as minor as "puppy" is enough to be offensive, then I might suggest that you should grow a backbone rather than insist on being referred to with the "proper degree of respect." It reminds me of the concerns over "PC culture" or "Polish death camps" in its insistence on certain terminology. But that's a discussion that would be more fruitful in the US thread than here, since the European position is more of a consensus than a discussion.
I hold political discussion to a higher standard. There's a reason these threads have a higher standard in discourse, and my disagreement is at least partly motivated by your own hypocrisy on the matter.
|
The EU works because one big puppy can stop another big puppy from dominating smaller puppies but everything should fall apart if there will be only one big puppy. A lot of smaller puppies like the German model but they're not going to join a mini-EU with just Germany (or just France) because it would be extremely risky. Regressing to the old system of bilateral agreements sounds more reasonable.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On January 19 2017 07:13 Sent. wrote:
The EU works because one big puppy can stop another big puppy from dominating smaller puppies but everything should fall apart if there will be only one big puppy. A lot of smaller puppies like the German model but they're not going to join a mini-EU with just Germany (or just France) because it would be extremely risky. Regressing to the old system of bilateral agreements sounds more reasonable.
Yes, but if said puppies are closest to the German dog ("big puppy") and the other dogs don't really want to play ball, are the puppies more likely to go at it alone or just warm up to their favorite dog, even though it might be dangerous because even their favorite dog can't be fully trusted.
Mind you, the presupposition for this entire hypothetical is that the EU falls apart - in which case you don't have multiple dogs that keep each other in check because they all went their own way.
On January 19 2017 07:11 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 07:03 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:54 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 06:46 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 06:41 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:47 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"? Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners? A neutral term would perfectly do. Your value judgement about these countries worth is unnecessary and provocative. Thank you for your response however, it helps put your inability to understand the viewpoint of these countries into perspective. I think you know what I meant, and I saw no reason to comment further on it beyond your insistence on receiving an answer. If "the group of countries that are most inclined to form a bloc with Germany" would be a more flattering description, you can have it. In any case, I would indeed predict that such a bloc would form in the aftermath of a hypothetical EU collapse. In the aftermath of Trump's behaviour, "You know what I mean" should no longer fly as an excuse. Terrible people use that phrase to escape responsibility for their own carelessness. Words matter, it is not just more flattering, but also more accurate and appropriate. I must comment, though, that if a quip as minor as "puppy" is enough to be offensive, then I might suggest that you should grow a backbone rather than insist on being referred to with the "proper degree of respect." It reminds me of the concerns over "PC culture" or "Polish death camps" in its insistence on certain terminology. But that's a discussion that would be more fruitful in the US thread than here, since the European position is more of a consensus than a discussion. I hold political discussion to a higher standard. There's a reason these threads have a higher standard in discourse, and my disagreement is at least partly motivated by your own hypocrisy on the matter.
If this were a televised debate or something that otherwise had more impact than an inconsequential forum discussion, then I would agree with you.
|
On January 19 2017 07:13 Sent. wrote:
The EU works because one big puppy can stop another big puppy from dominating smaller puppies but everything should fall apart if there will be only one big puppy. A lot of smaller puppies like the German model but they're not going to join a mini-EU with just Germany (or just France) because it would be extremely risky. Regressing to the old system of bilateral agreements sounds more reasonable.
I think the big political rift in Europe is between the Southern members and the rest. If France gets a Conservative government they're basically on German line, Benelux and Scandinavian countries I don't see the big difference either and most of Eastern Europe is even more fiscally hawkish than Germany and relies on France and Germany in foreign politics. I don't really see them going into some kind of non-alignment with Russia's renewed territorial ambitions. So I think even if the EU in its current form was to fall apart there'd be some sizeable group of countries left that basically only diverge on very small issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
