|
On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically.
Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week
But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future.
|
On April 14 2013 23:24 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically. Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future.
I just cannot agree to the institutional framework, I see it as somehow post-democratic with big bussiness lobyists having too much of a say.
Prime example is always the EU commission. They have basically the whole guideline competence (like the german chancellor) and combine executive and legislative powers (that itself is quite problematic). In Germany the chancellor gets factually voted by the people (parties name their candidate around a year before the election and then the people can vote the parties, parties vote the chancellor). The EU commission gets appointed by national chancellors/prime ministers/presidents whatever they call themselves.
Does any citizen in any EU country know which commissioner their respective government will appoint next? No, the whole process is intransparent and kept secret. For the position with the most power within the EU institutional framework, this is simply outrageous and I refuse to support such a framework. In the national governments/frameworks these appointment elections systems are reserved for politicians with only or mainly representative tasks (german president for example).
Using such an election system for the most powerful position within the EU is eroding democratic rules and the chance of the people to vote for the people who shall represent them in the political sphere (that's one of the reasons for the term post-democracy). There are many others I could point out but that leads to far, you could name the relative unimportance of the eu parliament in comparison to national parliaments, the erosion of the subsidarity principle and a myriad of other things.
As already said I will never support such a system. That is basically why Schäuble is saying no banking union under the current framework.. He knows that new treaties won't be achieved in the next time and agreeing to a banking unions or further integration would be the safest way to not see an office for his party in the next 30 years.
|
On April 14 2013 23:42 AngryMag wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2013 23:24 govie wrote:On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically. Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future. I just cannot agree to the institutional framework, I see it as somehow post-democratic with big bussiness lobyists having too much of a say. Prime example is always the EU commission. They have basically the whole guideline competence (like the german chancellor) and combine executive and legislative powers (that itself is quite problematic). In Germany the chancellor gets factually voted by the people (parties name their candidate around a year before the election and then the people can vote the parties, parties vote the chancellor). The EU commission gets appointed by national chancellors/prime ministers/presidents whatever they call themselves. Does any citizen in any EU country know which commissioner their respective government will appoint next? No, the whole process is intransparent and kept secret. For the position with the most power within the EU institutional framework, this is simply outrageous and I refuse to support such a framework. In the national governments/frameworks these appointment elections systems are reserved for politicians with only or mainly representative tasks (german president for example). Using such an election system for the most powerful position within the EU is eroding democratic rules and the chance of the people to vote for the people who shall represent them in the political sphere (that's one of the reasons for the term post-democracy). There are many others I could point out but that leads to far, you could name the relative unimportance of the eu parliament in comparison to national parliaments, the erosion of the subsidarity principle and a myriad of other things. As already said I will never support such a system. That is basically why Schäuble is saying no banking union under the current framework.. He knows that new treaties won't be achieved in the next time and agreeing to a banking unions or further integration would be the safest way to not see an office for his party in the next 30 years.
There is an even bigger problem with the EU parliament: The elections are separate and therefore completely meaningless. In Denmark we can vote on a whopping 1.8 % of the members of the parliament and they all agree on more than 80 % of the biggest issues regarding EU... There is a slow increase in the relevance of the groups and therefore the relevance on who to vote for, but it is nowhere near the point where the danish politicians can influence much. When I vote for the parliament, I vote for danish representation in as many of the larger groups as possible, simply because no danish members in EPP is almost a surefire way of getting even more irrelevant than now. I actually would prefer a lower number of danish representatives, no elections, but a guarantee that we get a representative in all the major groups...
So when you complain about the commission and their corruption (Has been shown several times, so if it is corrupt is not even a question!), you forget about the lack of true democracy in the parliament too! I find it unfortunate that UK are on their way out of EU, since one of their MEPs had a good idea about how to improve the parliaments democracy and he has fought incessantly for it!
As for the council, it is the most democratic part of EU, but there are problems in that too. In the last french election, Merkel was completely clear about who she wanted elected and I am sure that is going to be the trend: Transnational parties with an EU-angle on every issue. It is unfortunate to see parliamentarians from Germany hating on the UK prime minister and it is unfortunately for Merkel to support a specific president in France since the nationally elected in France and UK are meant as internal affairs where their national interests are to be determined!
Btw. Calling the euro doomed if Merkel loses the election in Germany is far too early to say anything about. Furthermore I think there are several german problems that, we as foreigners, do not need to get involved in at an election... EU is becomming all-encompassing in far too many ways and the war between the commission and the parliament combined with the internal and extermal fights with the council is not conductive for improving democracy.
There needs to be severe reforms on all 3 of these main powers in EU and I am gettiong more and more convinced that nobody has the power and/or courage to change the foundations of these in fear of not getting elected again or simply getting shut down by other elected officials. The democratisation of EU feels like a dead horse and that worries me more than the economic crisis.
Edit: Understandeability
|
On April 14 2013 23:42 AngryMag wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2013 23:24 govie wrote:On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically. Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future. I just cannot agree to the institutional framework, I see it as somehow post-democratic with big bussiness lobyists having too much of a say. Prime example is always the EU commission. They have basically the whole guideline competence (like the german chancellor) and combine executive and legislative powers (that itself is quite problematic). In Germany the chancellor gets factually voted by the people (parties name their candidate around a year before the election and then the people can vote the parties, parties vote the chancellor). The EU commission gets appointed by national chancellors/prime ministers/presidents whatever they call themselves. Does any citizen in any EU country know which commissioner their respective government will appoint next? No, the whole process is intransparent and kept secret. For the position with the most power within the EU institutional framework, this is simply outrageous and I refuse to support such a framework. In the national governments/frameworks these appointment elections systems are reserved for politicians with only or mainly representative tasks (german president for example). Using such an election system for the most powerful position within the EU is eroding democratic rules and the chance of the people to vote for the people who shall represent them in the political sphere (that's one of the reasons for the term post-democracy). There are many others I could point out but that leads to far, you could name the relative unimportance of the eu parliament in comparison to national parliaments, the erosion of the subsidarity principle and a myriad of other things. As already said I will never support such a system. That is basically why Schäuble is saying no banking union under the current framework.. He knows that new treaties won't be achieved in the next time and agreeing to a banking unions or further integration would be the safest way to not see an office for his party in the next 30 years.
Its good to hear this coming from a German. My main problem with the European Union is also the lack of transparency and accountability, especially when it comes to what the ECB are doing. The Cyprus situation was the final nail in the coffin for me, watching all the bumbling morons run around contradicting each other when the reality was 'oh yeah so the Cypriot banks lent way too much to the Greek government so now we're taking your money.' Its worth noting that this is the exact case in Spain as well - all the major Spanish banks are holding huge amount of Spanish government paper, and their public pension system is 97% (yes, 97%!!) invested in government debt. Can't see how this will end well.
|
Germany is actually quite strong with its economy expanding rather than contracting for the most part.
I'm very worried about Spain, Italy, Portugal.
Here's an excellent article highlighting Cyprus' current situation and why they weren't able to prevent it:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/business/global/25iht-dixon25.html?_r=0
|
On April 17 2013 23:10 BritishPizza wrote:
Germany is actually quite strong with its economy expanding rather than contracting for the most part.
I'm very worried about Spain, Italy, Portugal.
Here's an excellent article highlighting Cyprus' current situation and why they weren't able to prevent it:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/business/global/25iht-dixon25.html?_r=0
An interesting article on Cyprus.
As for your worries, Portugal is in a bad state because of their shifting governments lack of economic responsibility. Financially they have already hit rock bottom and their bonds are labeled junk by credit companies. It is, however, seemingly under control at the moment even though they are in constitutional debacles, ECB is holding a hand under them as long as they stick to the plan they are on atm. Their prospect according to that plan is a decreasing debt from 2014, so at least the public debt and budget problems seem to be well under control.
Spain is far worse with a huge budget deficit, a banking crisis of huge dimensions, a very low debt diversification. a completely unsustainable unemployment and a continuing crash of their housing market. Their governmental debt situation is set to top in 2018 which is quite a long term and even worse their structural deficit is expected to be above 0.5 % untill between 2022 and 2027. Most of their economic numbers are almost as bad as Greece with exception of debt where Spain is doing far better (untill now...) and budget deficit where Spain is doing far worse!
Italy has a high debt, so it is primarily their refinancing that is in perril. Their budget has been somewhat under control under both Berlusconi and Monti where the deficit has been less than 5 % even when the crisis was at its worst. Unemployment is unalarming at up to 14 % for Sicily and islands where the crisis is worst. Sure Italy is in an acute recession today with 6 consecutive quartals of contraction and the unemployment is increasing, but it is still far from as serious as Greece and Spain. Italy needs to turn their budget deficits to budget surplusses to really get out of the crisis. It is still some way from happening, but it seems to be going in the right direction.
|
Euro area is doing comparatively worse in this recession than in the Great Depression. Keep up the austerity, guys!
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1PuVZ14.png)
I'm curious about something, though. Is 14% unemployment really "unalarming" to you guys? Are we searching for a threshold of pain where 20% of the population kills themselves, and THEN recovery can begin? At this point, every academic backing for austerity has been resoundingly refuted, every "quest for confidence" showing negative results, and yet your leaders soldier on sacrificing the public to some fairy that is promised by no one. So what amount of public suffering will you find "alarming"? How pale does the patient have to get before you stop sucking the "bad blood" out of them? It seems to me like you're more willing to kill them off and write it off as weakness.
|
On April 24 2013 10:20 aksfjh wrote:
Euro area is doing comparatively worse in this recession than in the Great Depression. Keep up the austerity, guys!
More spending, more debt, more Chinese importations seems very exciting !
|
On April 24 2013 10:20 aksfjh wrote:Euro area is doing comparatively worse in this recession than in the Great Depression. Keep up the austerity, guys! I'm curious about something, though. Is 14% unemployment really "unalarming" to you guys? Are we searching for a threshold of pain where 20% of the population kills themselves, and THEN recovery can begin? At this point, every academic backing for austerity has been resoundingly refuted, every "quest for confidence" showing negative results, and yet your leaders soldier on sacrificing the public to some fairy that is promised by no one. So what amount of public suffering will you find "alarming"? How pale does the patient have to get before you stop sucking the "bad blood" out of them? It seems to me like you're more willing to kill them off and write it off as weakness.
Problems are so complex. But if i only look at what we the people in the netherlands get influenced by, then its a vicious circle :
1. Governments influence in increasing housingprices, rent, energy, taxes and cost of living;
2. Need higher loans and salaries to pay the bills;
3. Turning point were labor is too expensive;
4. Decline in jobs as NL to expensive for labor, companies go abroad;
5. Government raises taxes again because they dont have enough money with less people working (typical that taxes are raised during crisis);
5. Decline in salaries till NL is more competative again;
6. We eventually will hit a certain point in time where NL is more interesting to manufacture or produce goods or services and eventually u end up in the upstream part of the cycle again.
This 7 year cycle has been there for decades (as in most western countries). The only difference is now that because of the eurocrisis, the decline of our national economy is harder to finance. There is less government money to help people temporarily, but also less money to try to positively stimulate the national markets like the housingmarket etcetc.
Ive seen a couple of these cycles but this time, but this time its harder to get into the upstream part. This because we are dependent on the rest of europe and cant simply change some regulations to pull ourselves out of the shitzone (must fit the EU regulations aswell). The crisis will be there for years to come. Certainly seeing slovenie, portugal, spain, italy and other countries are getting closer and closer to the dangerzone. This means more money will go from northern europe to southern europe. Which in turn will mean that there will be less money to try stimulating our national markets..
Yes, the shitzone.. ahh well..:I still believe a united states of europe could be beneficial for everyone. But i also believe that the cultural differences are bigger then the speed at which the EU is trying to force countries and there citizens into this new united country).... Ahh well
|
On April 24 2013 10:20 aksfjh wrote:Euro area is doing comparatively worse in this recession than in the Great Depression. Keep up the austerity, guys! I'm curious about something, though. Is 14% unemployment really "unalarming" to you guys? Are we searching for a threshold of pain where 20% of the population kills themselves, and THEN recovery can begin? At this point, every academic backing for austerity has been resoundingly refuted, every "quest for confidence" showing negative results, and yet your leaders soldier on sacrificing the public to some fairy that is promised by no one. So what amount of public suffering will you find "alarming"? How pale does the patient have to get before you stop sucking the "bad blood" out of them? It seems to me like you're more willing to kill them off and write it off as weakness.
'Working as intended'
|
If we measure the production in dollars (like the usa does) the picture would look alot better ^-^
Even in euros it is alot better then the crisis of the 30,s, specially if you add up the production over thoose 6 years.
|
So is there a line % that when crossed Europe throws up it's hands and gives up? What is Merkel's opinion of this?
MADRID, April 24 (Reuters) - More than six million Spaniards were out of work in the first quarter of this year, raising the jobless rate in the euro zone's fourth biggest economy to 27.2 percent, the highest since records began in the 1970s.
The huge sums poured into the global financial system by major central banks have eased bond market pressure on Spain, but the cuts Madrid has made in spending to regain investors' confidence have left it deep in recession.
Unemployment - 6.2 million in the first quarter - has been rising for seven quarters and the latest numbers will fuel a growing debate on whether to ease off on the budget austerity which has dominated Europe's response to the debt crisis.
"These figures are worse than expected and highlight the serious situation of the Spanish economy as well as the shocking decoupling between the real and the financial economy," strategist at Citi in Madrid Jose Luis Martinez said.
Source
|
On April 26 2013 02:06 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:So is there a line % that when crossed Europe throws up it's hands and gives up? What is Merkel's opinion of this? Show nested quote +MADRID, April 24 (Reuters) - More than six million Spaniards were out of work in the first quarter of this year, raising the jobless rate in the euro zone's fourth biggest economy to 27.2 percent, the highest since records began in the 1970s.
The huge sums poured into the global financial system by major central banks have eased bond market pressure on Spain, but the cuts Madrid has made in spending to regain investors' confidence have left it deep in recession.
Unemployment - 6.2 million in the first quarter - has been rising for seven quarters and the latest numbers will fuel a growing debate on whether to ease off on the budget austerity which has dominated Europe's response to the debt crisis.
"These figures are worse than expected and highlight the serious situation of the Spanish economy as well as the shocking decoupling between the real and the financial economy," strategist at Citi in Madrid Jose Luis Martinez said. Source
I don't think unemployment is the one deciding issue with Spain, they had similar (cca 25%) unemployment around 1995.
|
On April 15 2013 01:11 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2013 23:42 AngryMag wrote:On April 14 2013 23:24 govie wrote:On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically. Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future. I just cannot agree to the institutional framework, I see it as somehow post-democratic with big bussiness lobyists having too much of a say. Prime example is always the EU commission. They have basically the whole guideline competence (like the german chancellor) and combine executive and legislative powers (that itself is quite problematic). In Germany the chancellor gets factually voted by the people (parties name their candidate around a year before the election and then the people can vote the parties, parties vote the chancellor). The EU commission gets appointed by national chancellors/prime ministers/presidents whatever they call themselves. Does any citizen in any EU country know which commissioner their respective government will appoint next? No, the whole process is intransparent and kept secret. For the position with the most power within the EU institutional framework, this is simply outrageous and I refuse to support such a framework. In the national governments/frameworks these appointment elections systems are reserved for politicians with only or mainly representative tasks (german president for example). Using such an election system for the most powerful position within the EU is eroding democratic rules and the chance of the people to vote for the people who shall represent them in the political sphere (that's one of the reasons for the term post-democracy). There are many others I could point out but that leads to far, you could name the relative unimportance of the eu parliament in comparison to national parliaments, the erosion of the subsidarity principle and a myriad of other things. As already said I will never support such a system. That is basically why Schäuble is saying no banking union under the current framework.. He knows that new treaties won't be achieved in the next time and agreeing to a banking unions or further integration would be the safest way to not see an office for his party in the next 30 years. There is an even bigger problem with the EU parliament: The elections are separate and therefore completely meaningless. In Denmark we can vote on a whopping 1.8 % of the members of the parliament and they all agree on more than 80 % of the biggest issues regarding EU... There is a slow increase in the relevance of the groups and therefore the relevance on who to vote for, but it is nowhere near the point where the danish politicians can influence much. When I vote for the parliament, I vote for danish representation in as many of the larger groups as possible, simply because no danish members in EPP is almost a surefire way of getting even more irrelevant than now. I actually would prefer a lower number of danish representatives, no elections, but a guarantee that we get a representative in all the major groups... So when you complain about the commission and their corruption (Has been shown several times, so if it is corrupt is not even a question!), you forget about the lack of true democracy in the parliament too! I find it unfortunate that UK are on their way out of EU, since one of their MEPs had a good idea about how to improve the parliaments democracy and he has fought incessantly for it! As for the council, it is the most democratic part of EU, but there are problems in that too. In the last french election, Merkel was completely clear about who she wanted elected and I am sure that is going to be the trend: Transnational parties with an EU-angle on every issue. It is unfortunate to see parliamentarians from Germany hating on the UK prime minister and it is unfortunately for Merkel to support a specific president in France since the nationally elected in France and UK are meant as internal affairs where their national interests are to be determined! Btw. Calling the euro doomed if Merkel loses the election in Germany is far too early to say anything about. Furthermore I think there are several german problems that, we as foreigners, do not need to get involved in at an election... EU is becomming all-encompassing in far too many ways and the war between the commission and the parliament combined with the internal and extermal fights with the council is not conductive for improving democracy. There needs to be severe reforms on all 3 of these main powers in EU and I am gettiong more and more convinced that nobody has the power and/or courage to change the foundations of these in fear of not getting elected again or simply getting shut down by other elected officials. The democratisation of EU feels like a dead horse and that worries me more than the economic crisis. Edit: Understandeability
It is perfectly democratic that Danish representatives in parliament cannot influence much. Danish population is too small. I don't think lack of democracy is your issue
|
Spain is just highly cyclic due to the nature of their economy.
They mostly rely on tourism and housing sector (building houses for europeans who retire), these sectors are hit verry hard in a downturn. When things pick up again (after the german election, when europe will start monetairy easing on a big scale) spain should do realy well. 27% unemployment is enormous though , 27% unemployment in germany would mean the end of the eurozone. Have to say i admire the spanish for coping with it and i realy hope that this ordeal wont last much longer.
|
On April 26 2013 02:16 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2013 01:11 radiatoren wrote:On April 14 2013 23:42 AngryMag wrote:On April 14 2013 23:24 govie wrote:On April 14 2013 22:55 AngryMag wrote:
I just want to point out that the UK doesn't get bashed in Germany. Cohn Bendit and Lambsdorff are largely irrelevant in today's political process. Especially Cohn Bendit probably couldn't even walk the streets without catching atleast verbal abuse.
Point is that there is no general flaming, only some irrelevant guys shouting out their meaningless opinions over the media.
In general I am amazed that EU treaties are basically valid only for 1 year nowadays. Lisbon treaty already clearly violated (no bailout clause) and now we need "additions". WHy make treaties in the first place if they are broken at the first opportunity?
I have a hard time believing that so many people actually support our additional bureaucratic layer in Brussels. In my opinion the influence of unelected dudes in important positions (EU commission, banking and finance organs) on national politics needs to be cut down dramatically. Not they dont but everything that is important gets voted on by your and our prime ministers for example. In your country there are elections in the fall, if merkel isnt re elected there is a big chance the eurozone will fall. It is of most extreme importance to the EU no negative news reaches the germans (i.e. budgetcuts) about the euro until the fall. It is wierd that there was a 3% budgetnorm, but because this year there are alot of elections in the western countries like germany and therefore they may delay that norm for this and next year (no budgetcuts is very positive for merkels re election ofc).... And thats why i am not a big fan of the eurocurrency and the crisis it has unleashed over the good people of europe. Your merkel has her fist up van rompuy's ass every f&^%$ week But i can see reasons why they wanted a euro and they are good reasons. To bad they were a bit hasty with the introduction of the euro. But i feel that if the euro survives, i dont think it will in its current form but if it would, it will be the strongest currency in the world for centuries to come. Because this is the biggest test to a federal europe of the future. I just cannot agree to the institutional framework, I see it as somehow post-democratic with big bussiness lobyists having too much of a say. Prime example is always the EU commission. They have basically the whole guideline competence (like the german chancellor) and combine executive and legislative powers (that itself is quite problematic). In Germany the chancellor gets factually voted by the people (parties name their candidate around a year before the election and then the people can vote the parties, parties vote the chancellor). The EU commission gets appointed by national chancellors/prime ministers/presidents whatever they call themselves. Does any citizen in any EU country know which commissioner their respective government will appoint next? No, the whole process is intransparent and kept secret. For the position with the most power within the EU institutional framework, this is simply outrageous and I refuse to support such a framework. In the national governments/frameworks these appointment elections systems are reserved for politicians with only or mainly representative tasks (german president for example). Using such an election system for the most powerful position within the EU is eroding democratic rules and the chance of the people to vote for the people who shall represent them in the political sphere (that's one of the reasons for the term post-democracy). There are many others I could point out but that leads to far, you could name the relative unimportance of the eu parliament in comparison to national parliaments, the erosion of the subsidarity principle and a myriad of other things. As already said I will never support such a system. That is basically why Schäuble is saying no banking union under the current framework.. He knows that new treaties won't be achieved in the next time and agreeing to a banking unions or further integration would be the safest way to not see an office for his party in the next 30 years. There is an even bigger problem with the EU parliament: The elections are separate and therefore completely meaningless. In Denmark we can vote on a whopping 1.8 % of the members of the parliament and they all agree on more than 80 % of the biggest issues regarding EU... There is a slow increase in the relevance of the groups and therefore the relevance on who to vote for, but it is nowhere near the point where the danish politicians can influence much. When I vote for the parliament, I vote for danish representation in as many of the larger groups as possible, simply because no danish members in EPP is almost a surefire way of getting even more irrelevant than now. I actually would prefer a lower number of danish representatives, no elections, but a guarantee that we get a representative in all the major groups... So when you complain about the commission and their corruption (Has been shown several times, so if it is corrupt is not even a question!), you forget about the lack of true democracy in the parliament too! I find it unfortunate that UK are on their way out of EU, since one of their MEPs had a good idea about how to improve the parliaments democracy and he has fought incessantly for it! As for the council, it is the most democratic part of EU, but there are problems in that too. In the last french election, Merkel was completely clear about who she wanted elected and I am sure that is going to be the trend: Transnational parties with an EU-angle on every issue. It is unfortunate to see parliamentarians from Germany hating on the UK prime minister and it is unfortunately for Merkel to support a specific president in France since the nationally elected in France and UK are meant as internal affairs where their national interests are to be determined! Btw. Calling the euro doomed if Merkel loses the election in Germany is far too early to say anything about. Furthermore I think there are several german problems that, we as foreigners, do not need to get involved in at an election... EU is becomming all-encompassing in far too many ways and the war between the commission and the parliament combined with the internal and extermal fights with the council is not conductive for improving democracy. There needs to be severe reforms on all 3 of these main powers in EU and I am gettiong more and more convinced that nobody has the power and/or courage to change the foundations of these in fear of not getting elected again or simply getting shut down by other elected officials. The democratisation of EU feels like a dead horse and that worries me more than the economic crisis. Edit: Understandeability It is perfectly democratic that Danish representatives in parliament cannot influence much. Danish population is too small. I don't think lack of democracy is your issue
No parliament representative from any country can do much. Compared to national parliaments, the competences of european parliament are severly limited. Hyperboling a bit, one could say that the european parliament just has the competence to say yes or no in most questions (legíslature, budget, control of eu commission, voting function of commission president)
|
On April 26 2013 07:36 Rassy wrote:
Spain is just highly cyclic due to the nature of their economy.
They mostly rely on tourism and housing sector (building houses for europeans who retire), these sectors are hit verry hard in a downturn. When things pick up again (after the german election, when europe will start monetairy easing on a big scale) spain should do realy well. 27% unemployment is enormous though , 27% unemployment in germany would mean the end of the eurozone. Have to say i admire the spanish for coping with it and i realy hope that this ordeal wont last much longer.
If only the admiration of other Europeans employed those in Spain, Italy, Ireland, Greece, et al.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On April 24 2013 10:20 aksfjh wrote:Euro area is doing comparatively worse in this recession than in the Great Depression. Keep up the austerity, guys! I'm curious about something, though. Is 14% unemployment really "unalarming" to you guys? Are we searching for a threshold of pain where 20% of the population kills themselves, and THEN recovery can begin? At this point, every academic backing for austerity has been resoundingly refuted, every "quest for confidence" showing negative results, and yet your leaders soldier on sacrificing the public to some fairy that is promised by no one. So what amount of public suffering will you find "alarming"? How pale does the patient have to get before you stop sucking the "bad blood" out of them? It seems to me like you're more willing to kill them off and write it off as weakness.
austerity in europe is different from austerity in the UK. it has a lot of nationalistic politics in it, the idea that they are not spending government money but Our money on their bad behavior. there's also the dumb idea of holding a sovereign government beholden to bond market by not giving it power over its money. which makes these governments dependent on the central bank, which in turn is suspect to the political pressure.
|
there's also the dumb idea of holding a sovereign government beholden to bond market by not giving it power over its money. which makes these governments dependent on the central bank, which in turn is suspect to the political pressure.
Am not sure about this, this used to be the case before the euro when the national governments could try to influence their central banks policy with some succes, specially in the southern countrys.
Now it seems to be the other way around, the european central bank influencing politics in national states.
By using the power they have they forced berlusconi to resign (by stopping to support italian bonds and let the yield go up),they also forced cyprus to accept their deal (by threatening to completely cut off cyprus from monney) and they forced the eurozone as a whole into a temporarely austerity policy. It is a development that wories me a bit, european national states seem to have verry little say in their economic policy.
It kinda makes sense in one way, the european states should coordinate their economic policy off course if they want the eurozone to be a succes, and the central bank seems a good institution to execute this coordination and make the decissions, or rather describe the boundaries in wich the national states can make their decissions, but it undermines democracy as the european central bank is annything but a democratic institution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
