EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 678
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9097 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On February 24 2017 09:58 Sent. wrote: There is a middle ground between having an idealistic view of the 60s and wanting to transform the European nation states into whatever the authors of the Lisbon treaty had in mind. I agree that the real 60s were far from perfect but I don't see how it's relevant to my initial question. Just because I don't support strengthening the EU in it's current form doesn't mean I'm an AfD supporter. We need to "strengthen" the EU by strictly limiting what it can say about the domestic policies of countries, but presenting a unified European front towards outside entities such as Russia, America, Turkey, etc on certain issues. Beyond that, there needs to be some reform that increases the feeling of representation and actual responsiveness for citizens while at the same maintaining the distinct lack of influence from unwanted sources (see my quote). I'd say a delegative e-democracy is the only way forward for an entity as large as the European Union, but politicians are as of yet unwilling to support such a thing. It will come eventually, and I think it will be a revolution equal to that when women were allowed the vote in terms of changing policies and so forth over the long term. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
I also think that if the EU ops for a 'vertical' model with limited but deep integration, countries will have to give in on issues they know consider sovereign matters. In Germany this would most likely mean giving up austerity and fiscal policies, in Eastern Europe immigration and in Southern Europe overly strict labour regulation and administration. All very tough to pull off. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9234 Posts
You preach the downfall of the EU and your hopes for Le Pen every couple of pages RANDOMLY without any apparent intention of contributing. You're the political clickbait and I'd like you to tone it down a notch, if you were so kind. Though I must credit you for the comedic value of your posts, especially in the US politics thread. | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4514 Posts
On February 24 2017 08:45 LegalLord wrote: Those who don't have to live with the results of her domestic policy, whatever it may be. She would help end the EU which would certainly be a good thing, so she has my full support for that alone. Even if Le Pen wins, there is no chance of a Frexit referendum passing, I'm not sure what other steps she could take to "help end the EU" but I'm skeptical. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On February 24 2017 08:45 LegalLord wrote: Those who don't have to live with the results of her domestic policy, whatever it may be. She would help end the EU which would certainly be a good thing, so she has my full support for that alone. At this moment, I have a strong urge to start a "EU politics thread" thread in feedback with the sole intention of getting you banned, because this is nothing but trolling. Maybe "end of EU would be certainly good" is your actual opinion, then put forward some specific arguments (we all know that you are perfectly capable of doing that), so we can pick them apart one by one and show you how stupid this opinion is, but just dropping oneliners saying that is on the level of walking around and shitting randomly on the pavement. Or are you just mad that the EU thread actually usually has some discussion and want to drag it down to the US level? You used to be a pretty good poster, with well constructed ideas - and with an occasional obvious bait in good humour, and then you suddenly changed into this old grumpy hobo who just wants to piss over everything. You might wanna rethink this attitude. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On February 24 2017 17:17 Laurens wrote: Even if Le Pen wins, there is no chance of a Frexit referendum passing, I'm not sure what other steps she could take to "help end the EU" but I'm skeptical. Can she realize her plan to leave the Euro and bancrupt France without a referendum? | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4514 Posts
On February 24 2017 17:48 Big J wrote: Can she realize her plan to leave the Euro and bancrupt France without a referendum? That's what I'm not sure about. Can some French posters inform us about the power of the president in France? | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 24 2017 17:48 Big J wrote: Can she realize her plan to leave the Euro and bancrupt France without a referendum? Why would there be an automatic bankrupt? She said that she would hold a referendum (and resign if she lost it!). | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On February 24 2017 18:28 TheDwf wrote: Why would there be an automatic bankrupt? She said that she would hold a referendum (and resign if she lost it!). Because if she converts all debt to Francs as she says she will, France is immidiately unable to fullfill its financial obligations, as they are in Euro. That is what is called bancruptcy. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17834 Posts
On February 24 2017 14:00 a_flayer wrote: We need to "strengthen" the EU by strictly limiting what it can say about the domestic policies of countries, but presenting a unified European front towards outside entities such as Russia, America, Turkey, etc on certain issues. Beyond that, there needs to be some reform that increases the feeling of representation and actual responsiveness for citizens while at the same maintaining the distinct lack of influence from unwanted sources (see my quote). I'd say a delegative e-democracy is the only way forward for an entity as large as the European Union, but politicians are as of yet unwilling to support such a thing. It will come eventually, and I think it will be a revolution equal to that when women were allowed the vote in terms of changing policies and so forth over the long term. I can't believe I actually agree with a_flayer. Well said, sir! | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17834 Posts
On February 24 2017 14:36 Nyxisto wrote: Strengthening democracy on one side through measures such as e-democracy or the European parliament would I think without a doubt hurt the sovereignty of individual nation states and result in a horizontal and not vertical union, whereas a strong focus on a limited amount of issues is probably better handled by strengthening the commission. Wanting both seems contradictory because I've got no idea how to turn that into a political structure. I also think that if the EU ops for a 'vertical' model with limited but deep integration, countries will have to give in on issues they know consider sovereign matters. In Germany this would most likely mean giving up austerity and fiscal policies, in Eastern Europe immigration and in Southern Europe overly strict labour regulation and administration. All very tough to pull off. Absolutely, and all very necessary. You just pointed out the sore spots of the current Union. Joint monetary, but separate fiscal policy is stupid. Current open borders, but different immigration rules is retarded. And southern Europe has to drag their ass out of their Ponzi scheme socialism. There are very clear benefits to the EU, that even the most rabid Wilders or FN voter acknowledges. They just think those advantages are overshadowed by some specific issue... and an unrealistic dream that leaving Europe will solve that issue. Making the EU more transparent and further reaching on some specific issues (mostly fiscal and foreign policy related), while explicitly limiting their power in other respects seems like an excellent start. Not easy, but necessary. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 24 2017 18:36 Big J wrote: Because if she converts all debt to Francs as she says she will, France is immidiately unable to fullfill its financial obligations, as they are in Euro. That is what is called bancruptcy. Nope, those obligations would be relabelled in the new French currency (97% of the bond contracts obey to the French law, so debts would be paid in what the French state considers the legal tender). Plus the euro would disappear in the following weeks/months anyway if France left it, so the real problem would rather be to master the consequences of this upheaval. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6190 Posts
Moritz Kraemer, S&P’s head of sovereign ratings, said in a statement that this would be a default. “There is no ambiguity here . . . If an issuer does not adhere to the contractual obligations to its creditors, including payment in the currency stipulated, [we] would declare a default.” https://www.ft.com/content/06deaa20-eed8-11e6-930f-061b01e23655 More importantly investors will simply want a higher yield on the bonds if they get redenominated in Francs. The only reason to go back to Francs is to devalue it. So to compensate for that loss they'll ask a higher yield. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On February 24 2017 18:59 TheDwf wrote: Nope, those obligations would be relabelled in the new French currency (97% of the bond contracts obey to the French law, so debts would be paid in what the French state considers the legal tender). Plus the euro would disappear in the following weeks/months anyway if France left it, so the real problem would rather be to master the consequences of this upheaval. Hm, maybe I'm wrong here, but from what I've read up to 20% of the French debt cannot be relabelled due to international laws. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On February 24 2017 18:28 TheDwf wrote: Why would there be an automatic bankrupt? She said that she would hold a referendum (and resign if she lost it!). I have to admit I don't understand that whole "I'll resign if I lose the referendum" thing (Mélenchon said he would do the same last night). I mean come on, as a President you should be able to respect the fact that once you decide to directly ask the people what it wants, you do what the people wants. It's your job, and even your duty. Resigning in such a case is desertion and basically means that you don't have what it takes to be a President, only a small egocentric tyrant who needs to know people love him. (also, you're taking a huge and unnecessary risk, as Cameron showed) | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4514 Posts
"Vote for what I want or face political chaos in your country" Didn't seem to work for Cameron and Renzi though. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 24 2017 19:19 Big J wrote: Hm, maybe I'm wrong here, but from what I've read up to 20% of the French debt cannot be relabelled due to international laws. The first figure was 15% or something like that, but apparently it was recalculated afterwards. On February 24 2017 20:58 OtherWorld wrote: I have to admit I don't understand that whole "I'll resign if I lose the referendum" thing (Mélenchon said he would do the same last night). I mean come on, as a President you should be able to respect the fact that once you decide to directly ask the people what it wants, you do what the people wants. It's your job, and even your duty. Resigning in such a case is desertion and basically means that you don't have what it takes to be a President, only a small egocentric tyrant who needs to know people love him. (also, you're taking a huge and unnecessary risk, as Cameron showed) Quite on contrary, I think it does make sense. If you throw your whole political weight to campaign on Frexit (in Le Pen's case) and you get beaten, it makes sense to consider that your fundamental political line was refused and thus that you no longer have the necessary legitimacy to remain in power. It's a matter of commitment; if you clearly and strongly recommend an option then lose the referendum, you can consider that you lost your mandate, and thus that you have to let someone else take your place. In France it also echoes the gaullist/Vth Republic mythology and how De Gaulle resigned after losing his 1969 referendum. | ||
|
corumjhaelen
France6884 Posts
On February 24 2017 20:58 OtherWorld wrote: I have to admit I don't understand that whole "I'll resign if I lose the referendum" thing (Mélenchon said he would do the same last night). I mean come on, as a President you should be able to respect the fact that once you decide to directly ask the people what it wants, you do what the people wants. It's your job, and even your duty. Resigning in such a case is desertion and basically means that you don't have what it takes to be a President, only a small egocentric tyrant who needs to know people love him. (also, you're taking a huge and unnecessary risk, as Cameron showed) Agreed, de Gaulle, that crybaby :D | ||
|
pmh
1351 Posts
No international investor will lend france any money anymore,there are much more attractive countries and regions available. So france will have to go back to printing francs again. Leading to a permanent deflating franc, a huge loss in purchase power while getting closer and closer to the bottom in a desperate effort to become competitive again. Then once at the bottom new money will flow in again,but then we are 10 years plus and one huge depression further. But there are countries which will be off much worse then france,as france has a high degree of being potentially self sufficient. Its large agricultural sector will ironically be its savior. Ironically because it was often seen as a weakness with little opportunity for growth. Why would a frexit referendum not pass? I doubt there is a large majority in france for staying in the Eurozone even though they are probably a net receiver. | ||
| ||
