|
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 March 07 2017 12:13 Incognoto wrote:Fillon looks like he might bounce back though. This is typical left-wing magistrates who are corrupt, looking for dirt on a candidate they don't like. Anyone who thinks that Fillon is somehow worse than the shit-tards to the left or to the right of him are delusional. They're all corrupt shits but you may as well put one in power who will kick things into action. I don't know about Macro though, he might be legitimate as well, depends on what his policies are. I'm having a hard time following this debate. Lmao, what a shit-fest Le Pen's a pig but mélen-con is in a class of his own as well edit: "cette femme va parler comme un moulin pendant combien de temps" lol melechon you little piece of shit. i hate le pen myself but you don't attack her for being a woman lol
I really don't understand your opinion, Mélenchon compltely destroys this xenophobic would-be tyrant.
Furthermore the debate he had with kids recently graduated from éco was commendable in my opinion. Kids born with a golden spoon in their mouth who actually believe that 99% of the unemployed are unemployed out of choice/laziness- his policies might be too left leaning though. Hamon seems to be the only viable option.
|
EU leaders embrace multi-speed Europe amid tensions
France, Germany, Italy and Spain have backed the idea of a multi-speed EU, as the 28-nation bloc prepares to mark 60 years since its founding treaty.
"Unity does not mean uniformity," French President Francois Hollande said as he hosted the other leaders in the ornate Versailles Palace near Paris.
The EU Commission accepts that projects do not have to involve all EU members.
Brexit - a psychological and budgetary blow - now overshadows the anniversary, the BBC's Kevin Connolly reports.
EU leaders are focusing on a strategy of promising both deeper co-operation but also the possibility of different member states joining common projects at times that suit them, our correspondent says.
After Brexit what next?
In some respects the EU is already a multi-speed organisation. Not all members are in the Schengen border-free zone, and 19 of the 28 use the euro.
The UK, poised to trigger the withdrawal mechanism soon, already has many opt-outs from EU policies.
"Italy wants a more integrated EU, but one that can allow various levels of integration," Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni said.
EU summit talks in Brussels on Friday will focus on how the EU moves forward post-Brexit, amid tensions over integrating migrants, globalisation and how to revive ailing eurozone economies.
Merkel warning
Versailles was a symbolic place to hold such talks - the palace where peace in Europe was mapped out after World War One.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said "we need to have the courage for some countries to go ahead if not everyone wants to participate.
"A Europe of different speeds is necessary, otherwise we will probably get stuck. If Europe gets stuck and doesn't develop further, then this work of peace may run into danger faster than one might think," she said.
The 1957 Treaty of Rome established the goal of "ever closer union". And the 60th anniversary is an occasion to stress unity, amid widespread speculation that the EU could disintegrate.
Poland is among the newer EU member states which view multi-speed development with suspicion.
Since the end of communism they have been catching up economically. And as net recipients from the EU budget they fear being left behind by their stronger European partners.
|
So what are the reactions to the multi-speed Europe proposals in your countries? In Austria ÖVP and FPÖ, the right and far-right parties are, unsurprisingly, strongly against it as it seems. I haven't heard a reaction of the other parties.
|
Poland is and always was against it. Its even mentioned in article. Personally i think it might be good idea if implemneted correctly, which i doubt will happen.
|
It sounds reasonable (at least in the short term) but also bad for non-core EU members. If European integration was a school class it would be like splitting the students into groups according to their abilities. It's great for better students because they will be no longer slowed down by their less gifted peers but it's also terrible for worse students because they will never catch up with the advanced group.
Can't blame them for choosing that route (just like I can't blame the UK for Brexit) but I think it means that their "small union now" plan also means "big union never".
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I'm not exactly sure what the implications of this would be. Could anyone explain that to me?
|
On March 08 2017 01:28 Sent. wrote:
It sounds reasonable (at least in the short term) but also bad for non-core EU members. If European integration was a school class it would be like splitting the students into groups according to their abilities. It's great for better students because they will be no longer slowed down by their less gifted peers but it's also terrible for worse students because they will never catch up with the advanced group.
Can't blame them for choosing that route (just like I can't blame the UK for Brexit) but I think it means that their "small union now" plan also means "big union never".
To me that sounds like: "We believe further European integration is bad, so we won't take those steps. But since further European integration is going to be good, we don't want you to take further steps either."
Dunno, my country is probably not going to be in the core group either though if this happens. Maybe I should start doing some research into regions of Germany, which put the least amount of sauce onto their Schnitzel... 
On March 08 2017 01:36 LegalLord wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what the implications of this would be. Could anyone explain that to me?
I think noone knows yet. It's a bunch of conservatives and conservative social democrats who came up with the idea. It's supposed to be lackluster and without details.
My guess is that they want some institutional changes that allow for a more free decision making process with a core group that takes further integration steps first (my guess is that this would be Germany-France-Benelux-Italy-Spain) which others are free to join as well or join later on. Like military integration, more banking integration, greater fiscal integration, greater tax harmonization, greater integration of legal systems etc.
|
On March 08 2017 01:36 LegalLord wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what the implications of this would be. Could anyone explain that to me?
“Everything needs to change so everything can stay the same.” — Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, The Leopard
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 08 2017 01:51 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2017 01:36 LegalLord wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what the implications of this would be. Could anyone explain that to me? “Everything needs to change so everything can stay the same.” — Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, The Leopard
Ah, makes perfect sense to me. More or less what I got out of it then.
|
Multispeed could be terrible idea, because if it leads in poorer countries to the perception that the membership loses benefits, it may leed to more exits as the anti-EU moods are already strong. It seems rational, but the timing is not good.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Hollande the outgoing failure suggesting it, in the great and glorious palace of Versailles, does come with an unfortunate imagery to boot.
|
On March 08 2017 01:28 Sent. wrote:
It sounds reasonable (at least in the short term) but also bad for non-core EU members. If European integration was a school class it would be like splitting the students into groups according to their abilities. It's great for better students because they will be no longer slowed down by their less gifted peers but it's also terrible for worse students because they will never catch up with the advanced group.
Can't blame them for choosing that route (just like I can't blame the UK for Brexit) but I think it means that their "small union now" plan also means "big union never".
I don't think that's what is meant with it. I think it's something like: "we want to build a European army. Who's in? To participate, you need to spend 3% of your GDP on military, which will be under a European commander and no longer directly under national control"
Then each country decides whether they want in or not. If enough countries want in, then it goes ahead, and these countries integrate their military "at a faster speed" than other countries. However, this is pretty much how things work right now, so seems to be more messaging than anything else.
E: or yeah, what TheDwf said.
|
On March 07 2017 12:13 Incognoto wrote:Fillon looks like he might bounce back though. This is typical left-wing magistrates who are corrupt, looking for dirt on a candidate they don't like. Anyone who thinks that Fillon is somehow worse than the shit-tards to the left or to the right of him are delusional. They're all corrupt shits but you may as well put one in power who will kick things into action. I don't know about Macro though, he might be legitimate as well, depends on what his policies are. I'm having a hard time following this debate. Lmao, what a shit-fest Le Pen's a pig but mélen-con is in a class of his own as well edit: "cette femme va parler comme un moulin pendant combien de temps" lol melechon you little piece of shit. i hate le pen myself but you don't attack her for being a woman lol
Are you serious or is it sarcastic?
|
I didn't mean to say faster pace club is only for the rich old members. Austria, Sweden and Denmark will probably opt out of it while Slovenia and Estonia might want to join it .
|
On March 08 2017 02:37 Sent. wrote:
I didn't mean to say faster pace club is only for the rich old members. Austria, Sweden and Denmark will probably opt out of it while Slovenia and Estonia might want to join it .
Okay, but why is that bad? Why should Austria, Sweden and Denmark join in future projects of closer cooperation that they don't want to be a part of?
Taking a step back on forcing EU integration is something the population of almost all European countries have been clamoring for for a while. And this multiple speeds thing is a good tool for doing it. A tool that has been there since the very beginning of the EU, but one that is worth highlighting: nobody is forced to cooperate on anything that the national government hasn't already ok'd.
|
On March 08 2017 02:37 Sent. wrote:
I didn't mean to say faster pace club is only for the rich old members. Austria, Sweden and Denmark will probably opt out of it while Slovenia and Estonia might want to join it .
If a joint military is created soon and Russian aggression keeps being at the current level Sweden would likely not join. If Russia ramps things up then Sweden might be positive to joining. We have had a slow positive trend towards a NATO membership but doubt anybody seriously entertains joining that while Trump is president, so might instead pivot towards an EU military.
Other questions regarding environment or equality Sweden would likely be pushing and join into deals. Economy would likely be a skipped area as well since the Euro considerations aren't matching in all cases. Mostly we would join in on things unless we had a big reason to skip, currently it is that way (though people complain about housing rules being the same in southern Spain as in Sweden).
|
it could really well positive to have a single predominant core within the EU, since it's quite clear that right now nothing is working as intended
could end like an other forced "join us or leave us"
|
Maybe the situation is different in other countries, but in Czech, the marketing of the multispeed concept is bad and already being abused by populists as "they're gonna leave us out from the good stuff", so if it is supposed to ease the minds of anti-integrationists, it's kinda failing. Honestly, a really big issue of EU is inefficient marketing as most people make their opinions on it based on random trivia and outrught false facts.
|
On March 08 2017 03:21 opisska wrote:
Maybe the situation is different in other countries, but in Czech, the marketing of the multispeed concept is bad and already being abused by populists as "they're gonna leave us out from the good stuff", so if it is supposed to ease the minds of anti-integrationists, it's kinda failing. Honestly, a really big issue of EU is inefficient marketing as most people make their opinions on it based on random trivia and outrught false facts.
It really wouldn't hurt if the European Union was more democratic. To function properly it would require a huge transfer of sovereignty and a functional federal government. That's possible and is the way forward. The actual system is really not working very well.
|
On March 08 2017 03:47 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2017 03:21 opisska wrote:
Maybe the situation is different in other countries, but in Czech, the marketing of the multispeed concept is bad and already being abused by populists as "they're gonna leave us out from the good stuff", so if it is supposed to ease the minds of anti-integrationists, it's kinda failing. Honestly, a really big issue of EU is inefficient marketing as most people make their opinions on it based on random trivia and outrught false facts. It really wouldn't hurt if the European Union was more democratic. To function properly it would require a huge transfer of sovereignty and a functional federal government. That's possible and is the way forward. The actual system is really not working very well.
Yeah, but here's the rub: the majority does not want it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
