NationStates Jolt Archive

Before the new states joined people feared a huge influx of immigrants from the eastern states which lead to 12 of the 15 countries before the enlargement restricted free movement(which allows people to work in other EU countries without visas), in Britain this happend 175,000 immigrants came in and the terrible cost!? Their economy got a net gain of 500million and they took jobs britons couldn't take.

Nonetheless, the relatively high number of migrants constitutes only 0.4% of the total
working population. One also has to bear in mind that British economy also gained from
the presence of the extra workforce on its labour market: a net gain of around 500 million
pounds over 12 months, while only a tiny percentage of migrants sought the state aid.13

Migrant workers took up “hard-to-fill” jobs, because even if the UK has half a million job
vacancies, at the same time it has to deal with job shortages. The International Property
and Construction Organisation reports that Polish and Czech electricians, plasterers,
bricklayers or carpenters made up for the lack of skilled local workers in Britain.14

Labour shortage occurs outside the construction or farming sector too. For example
Britain lacks dentists and therefore recruits them from Central-Europe. In Warsaw, a
training school has been set up to prepare Polish dentists to work in Britain.15 Selected
candidates attend a six-week course to learn about the British National Health Service
and to perfect their technical and day-to-day English. Within the framework of this
training program 120 dentists found employment in Britain last year. The recruitment is
supposed to go on until 230 other posts are filled.


http://www.ecas.org/file_uploads/782.pdf


Alot of people believe in urban legends about the EU regulating the straightness of cucumbers and youghort being banned free the facts:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/press_communication/facts/index_en.htm

bump

Yay EU!

Honestly, I don't know what else you're expecting. Good for the EU? It was the same argument that you hear here that illegal Mexican immigrants are taking jobs from hard-working Americans, jobs that no one here wants to work anyway.

They need to reform the CAP. It is a useless, out-dated policy which favours the inefficient French farmers. How does agriculture need 50% of the EU budget?

Apart from that, i am pro-EU, which is different to most people here in the UK.

They need to reform the CAP. It is a useless, out-dated policy which favours the inefficient French farmers. How does agriculture need 50% of the EU budget?

Apart from that, i am pro-EU, which is different to most people here in the UK.
I agree blair is right on that, we should be spending more on science and technology.

I’m all for the free trade that the EU makes possible, but the freedom of movement act goes a little to far. A nation should be able to keep out criminals and potential terrorists, if it want. However, I think most European nations wouldn’t want to even if they could, so whatever.
On a whole, though, I see the EU as little more than a tool France uses to try and outdo the US. So, I guess I support it, with major changes relegating it to a simple free trade agreement and alliance.

I’m all for the free trade that the EU makes possible, but the freedom of movement act goes a little to far. A nation should be able to keep out criminals and potential terrorists, if it want. You don't know to much about Europe and the EU, don't you. The freedom of movement applies only to EU-citizens and people with a "schengen-visa". Criminals are quite efficiently prosecuted EU wide. The reason for this is, that criminals who commit a crime in one country can't hide in any other country. However, I think most European nations wouldn’t want to even if they could, so whatever.I can assure you that terrorist are also outlawed and posecuted in all EU states.
On a whole, though, I see the EU as little more than a tool France uses to try and outdo the US. No, the EU is not solely dominated by France. It is also, by no means a tool to outdo the US. It is a mean for all European countries to secure freedom and peace for all future generations. So, I guess I support it, with major changes relegating it to a simple free trade agreement and alliance.
I agree in that major changes have to be made. This changes however have to be made to represent the people more directly and impose more democracy.

The EU is beyond redemption. It needs to be scrapped and replaced by a pure trade allience and nothing else. The EU is not a country and should bloody well stop trying to be one.

Sverige ut ur EU!

The EU is beyond redemption. It needs to be scrapped and replaced by a pure trade allience and nothing else. The EU is not a country and should bloody well stop trying to be one.

Sverige ut ur EU!
So you liked WWI and WWII?

So you liked WWI and WWII?

That's the most laughable stance amateurish pro-EUites have. The delusion that the EU is what's prevented a new world war. No, honey, Europe's insignificance is what prevented a new world war with Europe as the centre.

Oh, and, psst: Sweden wasn't involved in any of the world wars, so you're really barking up the wrong tree.

The EU is beyond redemption. It needs to be scrapped and replaced by a pure trade allience and nothing else. The EU is not a country and should bloody well stop trying to be one.

Sverige ut ur EU!
I just agreed with Fass.
There aren’t enough :eek:s in jolt to express my shock.

That's the most laughable stance amateurish pro-EUites have. The delusion that the EU is what's prevented a new world war. No, honey, Europe's insignificance is what prevented a new world war with Europe as the centre.

Oh, and, psst: Sweden wasn't involved in any of the world wars, so you're really barking up the wrong tree.
Well, sweden just wasn't conquered by the germans in WWII because they bowed before them. As for the arguements: you made non, except "the EU is crap". I can also see no reason why Europe should have provoced a WWIII.

Fuck the EU. As if I want the bourgeoisie to consolidate their power.

That's the most laughable stance amateurish pro-EUites have. The delusion that the EU is what's prevented a new world war. No, honey, Europe's insignificance is what prevented a new world war with Europe as the centre.

Oh, and, psst: Sweden wasn't involved in any of the world wars, so you're really barking up the wrong tree.

Ok, so we were neutral and weren't occupied or a beligerant party. But, I think it's quite shameful to say we were'nt involved. Unfortunately, I think some of the things our nation did in world war 2 were quite embarassing and shameful. We should have helped the Finns more for a start. And we should not have let the Germans pass our territory. I have serious issues with some of our country's actions during that period. And yes, you can say "well, this was necessary to avoid invasion", and maybe this is true... but it's still shameful that we capitulated to German demands so much and refused to help our fellow Scandinavians. (Wow, I don't think I ever disagreed with Fass before!)

Anyway, I am for EU membership.. but I think that EU needs serious structural changes to make it more visibily and actively accountable to its citizens. The EU Parliament needs more powers over the Commission. The ironic thing is that the Constitution project would have clarified the role of the EU and partly addressed the EU's democratic deficit to an extent (a good start you could say). So, it would have actually been wise to approve it.

Alot of people believe in urban legends about the EU regulating the straightness of cucumbers and youghort being banned free the facts:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/press_communication/facts/index_en.htm
Here's the one I like and it's typical of a big bureaucracy to think that they best.

EC says pigs must be given toys
The Press: Why all our pigs are having a ball
"Farmers throughout the country have 90 days to put a toy in every pigsty or face up to three months in jail. The new ruling from Brussels, which is to become law in Britain next week, is to keep pigs happy and prevent them chewing each other. Official instructions to farmers are to give pigs "environmental enrichment" by providing "manipulable material", which the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs last night defined as balls. A spokesman said: 'We mean footballs and basketballs. Farmers may also need to change the balls so the pigs don't get tired with the same one. Different colour ones will do…"
(The Times, January 29, 2003)
The Facts: The article concerning the welfare of pigs was entirely misleading. There is no EU legislation that requires farmers to place toys in pigsties.
Two recently adopted directives, set to be implemented into UK law, require that pigs have access to materials such as straw, hay, wood, and sawdust to improve their welfare, but there is categorically no mention of toys anywhere in the legislation. If the UK government, via its implementing measures, wishes to impose such a rule on farmers this decision remains up to them.

The directive on pig welfare, which was adopted in 2001 and comes into force in January 2003, does foresee that pigs should have access to rooting material. This is based on scientific advice, showing that boredom in pigs could lead them to harm themselves and other pigs. The implementing directive states that pigs must have permanent access to a sufficient quantity of material to enable proper investigation and manipulation activities. This material could include straw, hay, wood, sawdust, mushroom compost, peat or a mixture of these. There is no mention of toys.

Why do a couple bureaucrats in an office think that they know more about hogs than the farmers that raise them? If hogs get cranky and start fighting, they only reduce the value that the farmer can gain from selling them. Farmers have every reason to maintain their hogs in a healthy manner.

Well, sweden just wasn't conquered by the germans in WWII because they bowed before them. As for the arguements: you made non, except "the EU is crap". I can also see no reason why Europe should have provoced a WWIII.

Then why the comment about world wars if you weren't implying that the EU would have had some sort of effect on them? You just fumbled your own non-existent point, and you accuse someone else of not coming with an argument, which basically saw you realise the irrelevance of your unintentionally amusing comment? With that sort of backtracking and reluctance to the obvious, you'd make a wonderful unelected EU politburo employee.

I just agreed with Fass.
There aren’t enough :eek:s in jolt to express my shock.

Even worse - you just semi-agreed to the Swedish leftist stance. You may want to run to the closest shower to rid yourself of the filth. ;)

More European Union is less unemployement.
More European Union is more social Welfare.
More European Union is a stronger economy.


But the EU constitutional treaty is the worst ultracapitalist document they could wrote.

It's necessary a European REAL constitution, not a Constitutional treaty ultracapitalist.

Why European Comission do not understand what means "Social Market Economy" ?

Why European Comission want a Europe as image as the unsuccefull USA?

Another Europe is posible, we must to fight to get an EUROPEAN NATION. Not a European States Club. We must to fight to get a SOCIAL EUROPE. Not an European Ultracapitalist Union dominated by the Nazi empire of USA.

Ok, so we were neutral and weren't occupied or a beligerant party. But, I think it's quite shameful to say we were'nt involved. Unfortunately, I think some of the things our nation did in world war 2 were quite embarassing and shameful. We should have helped the Finns more for a start. And we should not have let the Germans pass our territory. I have serious issues with some of our country's actions during that period. And yes, you can say "well, this was necessary to avoid invasion", and maybe this is true... but it's still shameful that we capitulated to German demands so much and refused to help our fellow Scandinavians. (Wow, I don't think I ever disagreed with Fass before!)

Actually, you didn't disagree with me. I agree with you on most of your points - Sweden should have done many of the things you mention. But that wasn't my point. My point was that the comment "So you liked WWI and WWII" is kind of misdirected at someone who lives in a country that didn't actually see any of the two wars directly, as it presupposes some sort of emotional response I expect would be expected further south (or east and west! ;)). It was just an attempt to make the person realise that this really was the wrong sort of person to attempt to affect with appeals to emotion, even more so than the average person he/she is accustomed to.

So, not to worry. We're still basically in agreement about this.

Anyway, I am for EU membership.. but I think that EU needs serious structural changes to make it more visibily and actively accountable to its citizens. The EU Parliament needs more powers over the Commission. The ironic thing is that the Constitution project would have clarified the role of the EU and partly addressed the EU's democratic deficit to an extent (a good start you could say). So, it would have actually been wise to approve it.

Here, we do disagree. I'm of the opinion that the constitution was tripe attempting to fix, while at the same time breaking even more (what the hell does the EU have to do with Sami rights to reindeer husbandry i Laponia, for instance, when Sweden, Finland and Norway seem to have that covered?), something that is unfixable. The EU should be a trade alliance - not some sort of federal state wannabe with a president and parliament and micro-managing legislation.

Then why the comment about world wars if you weren't implying that the EU would have had some sort of effect on them? You just fumbled your own non-existent point, and you accuse someone else of not coming with an argument, which basically saw you realise the irrelevance of your unintentionally amusing comment? With that sort of backtracking and reluctance to the obvious, you'd make a wonderful unelected EU politburo employee.
Well, after the WWII and the formation of the EWG, which became the EU, Western Europe faced the longest period of peace ever. Thats quite a strong arguement in my eyes. My maybe provocing arguement was made to provoce you to deliver any sound arguement, but beside personal insults you wasn't able to provide any arguement. So please foregive me if I enraged you and tell my why you thing that the EU has to be disassembled.

I forgot. One of the reasons of formation of the "montan-union" between France and post-WWII Germany was to prevent warfare between this both states. And as I see it, it succeded quite well.

Well, after the WWII and the formation of the EWG, which became the EU, Western Europe faced the longest period of peace ever. Thats quite a strong arguement in my eyes.

Your "argument" isn't an argument at all. It's a logical fallacy, in that in confuses simultaneity with causality. (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/confusing-cause-and-effect.html) It's sort of like saying that global warming has something to do with the shrinking numbers of sea-pirates since the 1800s, just because they are temporally linked.

My maybe provocing arguement was made to provoce you to deliver any sound arguement, but beside personal insults you wasn't able to provide any arguement. So please foregive me if I enraged you and tell my why you thing that the EU has to be disassembled.

You didn't enrage me. You made me laugh. And I did not attack your person anywhere, just your action of fumbling your own point and backtracking, and made a comment how those are things unelected EU politburo employees are proficient at. Also, I have already stated why the EU needs to be scrapped - read the thread before you comment in the future, please.

Yay EU!

Honestly, I don't know what else you're expecting. Good for the EU? It was the same argument that you hear here that illegal Mexican immigrants are taking jobs from hard-working Americans, jobs that no one here wants to work anyway.You see, that's slightly different here. They can't take our jobs unless they do it completely illegally or the job they apply for isn't accepted by first, a German citizen and secondly an EU citizen (at least in Germany). The problem is outsourcing and not illegal immigration.

Here, we do disagree. I'm of the opinion that the constitution was tripe attempting to fix, while at the same time breaking even more (what the hell does the EU have to do with Sami rights to reindeer husbandry i Laponia, for instance, when Sweden, Finland and Norway seem to have that covered?), something that is unfixable. The EU should be a trade alliance - not some sort of federal state wannabe with a president and parliament and micro-managing legislation.I disagree with you here, Fass. A political union was the goal in mind when the ECSC was founded. If you prefer Sweden not to be a part of it, then I suggest you vote for a party that proposes leaving the EU. The EU is not a trade alliance. That was covered by the EEC and is a thing of the past.

The EU should be scraped and replaced with a newer version of the European Common Market, with things like freedom of movement added in. The economical benefits of the EU are fine: however they are more than countered by EU interference with sovereignty.

The EU should be scraped and replaced with a newer version of the European Common Market, with things like freedom of movement added in. The economical benefits of the EU are fine: however they are more than countered by EU interference with sovereignty.The EU was never intended to be a common market. If you don't like it, get your government to leave.

I disagree with you here, Fass. A political union was the goal in mind when the ECSC was founded.

That was not how it was sold to the Swedish people by our politicians, and that is also not a shared opinion by all. Hence also why Swedish citizens are also the most EU sceptic of all EU citizens.

If you prefer Sweden not to be a part of it, then I suggest you vote for a party that proposes leaving the EU.

I already do that.

The EU is not a trade alliance. That was covered by the EEC and is a thing of the past.

Hence why it's a bad idea and needs to be abandoned.

Well, after the WWII and the formation of the EWG, which became the EU, Western Europe faced the longest period of peace ever. Thats quite a strong arguement in my eyes. My maybe provocing arguement was made to provoce you to deliver any sound arguement, but beside personal insults you wasn't able to provide any arguement. So please foregive me if I enraged you and tell my why you thing that the EU has to be disassembled.

Yeah there was an organisation that kept the peace in Europe - it was called NATO.

The only reason there hasn't been a war in Europe (which isn't technically true, see Kosovo) is because of the nuclear deterrant and the fact that the major players (Britain, France and Germany) have been completely desolated by large scale conflict and are in no hurry to repeat it.

The EU was never intended to be a common market. If you don't like it, get your government to leave.

No, the European Union was designed to be an all encompassing bureacracy run by a French and German super majority.

Oh and I already do vote for an anti EU party.

Your "argument" isn't an argument at all. It's a logical fallacy, in that in confuses simultaneity with causality. (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/confusing-cause-and-effect.html) It's sort of like saying that global warming has something to do with the shrinking numbers of sea-pirates since the 1800s, just because they are temporally linked.I perfectly know the difference between simularity and causality, it is just my opinion that the European Union or its precursor organisations are responsible for securing peace in Europe.



You didn't enrage me. You made me laugh. Nice to make you laugh. I personally enjoy laughing. :D And I did not attack your person anywhere, just your action of fumbling your own point and backtracking, Why did I fummbled my point. Because I got an different opinion than you?and made a comment how those are things unelected EU politburo employees are proficient at. Also, I have already stated why the EU needs to be scrapped If you have read my first post, you would have read, that I wrote, that we dearly need more democracy in the EU. BUT I don't want to give up the whole european idea because of that.
Well, "The EU is beyond redemption." and "EU is not a country and should bloody well stop trying to be one." are no real arguements. Why is thre EU beyond redemption and why do you have the impression that the EU is acting as an country? And even if it's true, why should the EU stop acting as one? Just because?

That was not how it was sold to the Swedish people by our politicians, and that is also not a shared opinion by all. Hence also why Swedish citizens are also the most EU sceptic of all EU citizens.That isn't the EU's fault. Don't blame the EU for other's mistakes. The Swedes could also have looked up people like Adenauer and Schumann on their own or the theory of functionalism if you want to go deep.
Hence why it's a bad idea and needs to be abandoned.Nope. Sweden can leave. Some countries don't mind it at all. If you don't want to be part of the party, don't ruin it for everyone else.

No, the European Union was designed to be an all encompassing bureacracy run by a French and German super majority.

Oh and I already do vote for an anti EU party.
why did they let big countries like poland and the UK join then? They don't have a majority at all.

No, the European Union was designed to be an all encompassing bureacracy run by a French and German super majority.

Oh and I already do vote for an anti EU party.Sucks that the British fell for the obvious trap then, doesn't it? Complain about your politicians. It's not the EU's fault you joined (especially not France's. De Gaulle kept you out for a long time, so don't say they tricked you).

I perfectly know the difference between simularity and causality, it is just my opinion that the European Union or its precursor organisations are responsible for securing peace in Europe.

A flawed opinion.

Nice to make you laugh. I personally enjoy laughing. :D

I wasn't laughing with you, but at you. And that's not a good thing.

Why did I fummbled my point. Because I got an different opinion than you?

No, because you asked a question that undermines your flawed opinion of the EU having kept the peace - the question of why Europe would have started a new war in the first place.

If you have read my first post, you would have read, that I wrote, that we dearly need more democracy in the EU. BUT I don't want to give up the whole european idea because of that.

And I disagree. What it needs is not more democracy - what it needs to be is an entity that doesn't require democracy in the first place, an entity that is not in position to make decisions made by a democratic government.

Well, "The EU is beyond redemption." and "EU is not a country and should bloody well stop trying to be one." are no real arguements.

Those are arguments. The EU is beyond redemption - it has taken on too many accoutrements of a federal state and way too much power and will not relinquish it, making reforms pointless. Scrapping is the only viable option, IMHO.

Why is thre EU beyond redemption and why do you have the impression that the EU is acting as an country? And even if it's true, why should the EU stop acting as one? Just because?

Just because it's hurting Europe.

(especially not France's. De Gaulle kept you out for a long time, so don't say they tricked you).
This was the most insidious part of the trap. You know, the forbidden fruits are the sweetest. ;)

Just because it's hurting Europe.
How?

EDIT:
And to the "super majority" person how is 143milion out of 450million a majority!?

I would like to explain to everyone who might have misperceived it just who kept the peace in Europe:
NATO supplied a firm military alliance against a common threat.
The ECSC, EEC, EG, and EU formed a political and social cooperation between blood rivals (Germany and France).

These are complementary roles. The NATO, for instance, would not have prevented another conflict between France and Germany on its own. It failed doing that in the case of Greece and Turkey, when it came to open hostilities. The EU had no forces with which to ensure peace.
Both contributions to European peace cannot be compared to each other since they worked on completely different levels of international relations. Neither one is solely responsible for peace in Europe, as neither would have ensured this peace on its own.

That isn't the EU's fault.

Not particularly that. But doing what you claim it wants to do so poorly is. Doing it at all, is.

Don't blame the EU for other's mistakes. The Swedes could also have looked up people like Adenauer and Schumann on their own or the theory of functionalism if you want to go deep.

Yes, because referenda are so known for the well-versed participants. :rolleyes:

Nope. Sweden can leave. Some countries don't mind it at all. If you don't want to be part of the party, don't ruin it for everyone else.

What? That comment is just silly. Are you trying to tell me that I can't have an opinon of what other EU countries should do just because I'm Swedish? Nice EU integration there! :rolleyes:

Sweden should leave, and so should the other countries. I hope they wise up and do.

How?

By being an unnecessary micro-managing wreck of a bureaucracy with failed economic policies (Euro-land is an economic joke!) and delusions of federacy.

the whole of europe should just be one big free-trade zone and notning else,maybe some cooperation in some other areas but thats for companies not governments,omnipresent eu-government type chooked morass is a waste of money and those brussels bueraucrats-rats know that!

Yes, because referenda are so known for the well-versed participants. :rolleyes: Which isn't the EU's fault :rolleyes:
What? That comment is just silly. Are you trying to tell me that I can't have an opinon of what other EU countries should do just because I'm Swedish? Nice EU integration there! :rolleyes: Nope. The former territories of the Holy Roman Empire decided on starting on a path of integration that should eventually lead to a political union according to their interpretetation of the theory of functionalism of David Mitrany. If Sweden didn't want that, they shouldn't have joined and then procede to block it. It's like saying "I want to be part of your club, but once I'm in we're not going to run it like it was intended."
I'm in no way saying you don't have a right to an opinion on other countries actions, I say you shouldn't ruin the EU for those that like it because you don't.
Sweden should leave, and so should the other countries. I hope they wise up and do.Exactly. It's not your decision what the other countries do.

the whole of europe should just be one big free-trade zone and notning else,maybe some cooperation in some other areas but thats for companies not governments,omnipresent eu-government type chooked morass is a waste of money and those brussels bueraucrats-rats know that!You don't come from an EU country, so please don't tell us what to do.

A flawed opinion. Who is to decide?



I wasn't laughing with you, but at you. And that's not a good thing.It's fine by me. I don't mind playing the clown.



No, because you asked a question that undermines your flawed opinion of the EU having kept the peace - the question of why Europe would have started a new war in the first place. I wrote provoced not started. That' a difference. I also stated that the EU and it's precursors prevented a new war in wester Europe. One of it's goals. And in my eyes it succeded well. I don't see why one of my arguements undermines any other arguement of mine.


And I disagree. What it needs is not more democracy - what it needs to be is an entity that doesn't require democracy in the first place, an entity that is not in position to make decisions made by a democratic government.



Those are arguments. The EU is beyond redemption - it has taken on too many accoutrements of a federal state and way too much power and will not relinquish it, making reforms pointless. Scrapping is the only viable option, IMHO.



Just because it's hurting Europe.
So if you and the majority you mentioned vote for this anti-EU party you already voted then sweden leaves the EU and is still in the free marked, because it's a member of the EFTA. Guess that would be a good solution. Free market, no EU regulation. You don't have to spoile the fun of the nations who like being a part of the EU.

By being an unnecessary micro-managing wreck of a bureaucracy with failed economic policies (Euro-land is an economic joke!) and delusions of federacy.
Give examples of HOW? What damage has it done? And I do not just want more statements like that /\.

Even worse - you just semi-agreed to the Swedish leftist stance. You may want to run to the closest shower to rid yourself of the filth. ;)
I don’t see why not politically tying yourselves to a bunch of countries that obviously don’t have your nation’s interest in mind would be leftists. It’s just common sense. Anybody that thinks Britain, German and French politicians care at all about the smaller nations in the EU are either fools, are naive or are lying to themselves.

I would like to explain to everyone who might have misperceived it just who kept the peace in Europe:
NATO supplied a firm military alliance against a common threat.
The ECSC, EEC, EG, and EU formed a political and social cooperation between blood rivals (Germany and France).

These are complementary roles. The NATO, for instance, would not have prevented another conflict between France and Germany on its own. It failed doing that in the case of Greece and Turkey, when it came to open hostilities. The EU had no forces with which to ensure peace.
Both contributions to European peace cannot be compared to each other since they worked on completely different levels of international relations. Neither one is solely responsible for peace in Europe, as neither would have ensured this peace on its own.
Thanks. I wasn't be able to express it that well.

Anybody that thinks Britain, German and French politicians care at all about the smaller nations in the EU are either fools, are naive or are lying to themselves.Which is probably why they are overrepresented in the parliament...

Thanks. I wasn't be able to express it that well.I had the wonderful opportunity of writing an exam on functionalism and the EU a month ago... ;)

I had the wonderful opportunity of writing an exam on functionalism and the EU a month ago... ;)
people must be so jealous of you! :) ;)

people must be so jealous of you! :) ;)It was actually quite enjoyable. We got a list of 10 questions which could be on the exam, knowing that we'd get 3 of which we'd have to answer 2. EU and functionalism and the UN were the questions I picked to concentrate on, since I like both topics a lot. One of the funnest exams I've ever written :D

Where have all the anti-EU people gone? I'm still waiting to hear all the damage that the EU has done, I don't mind if it's from someone other then Fass.

Where have all the anti-EU people gone? I'm still waiting to hear all the damage that the EU has done, I don't mind if it's from someone other then Fass.Carops is someone that will actually engage in an arguement instead of bashing. Haven't seen him around though...

Where have all the anti-EU people gone? I'm still waiting to hear all the damage that the EU has done, I don't mind if it's from someone other then Fass.
Maybe they are gone because saturday evening is approaching and they do do what we should also do. Preparing for serious partiing. :D

Maybe they are gone because saturday evening is approaching and they do do what we should also do. Preparing for serious partiing. :D
one last bump before I log out :D ;)

bump

bumpity bump

Why do a couple bureaucrats in an office think that they know more about hogs than the farmers that raise them? If hogs get cranky and start fighting, they only reduce the value that the farmer can gain from selling them. Farmers have every reason to maintain their hogs in a healthy manner.

Regretfully, not quite: Many may not keep they pigs treated in healthy manners because such treatment makes them incur in costs. Therefore, to be more competitive, they allow their pigs to basically bite the crap of each other, as long as it doesnt kill them, because then they can sell cheaper (though of worst quality) meat.

Now, putting aside animal rights or cruelty (blablabla) arguments, these laws were basically made so that every farmer had the same obligations, therefore every farmer starts from the same place. The one that works best, wins. You can argue that the EU should not implement such laws. But the thing is, the EU is a common market, were every trader must somewhat abide by the same rules, or others could work in less.. clear ways and get an unfair advantage.

It should also not be forgotten that all these norms have been demanded and requested for years by the industry and by the retailers

Well, there seems to be a majority FOR the EU :)

Many of us however, want change, and though spouse the general idea of the EU, have different visions of were it should go. Some want it more loose, others more togheter, some more capitalist, some more socialist.The constitucional treaty was flunked because it only adressed some sides of the issue. The thing is, how can we accomodate so many visions?

I guess that the way to make this, was by having a fully democratic elected European Parliament. But that, having the current powers of the comission, would make Europe a de-facto federal state. How can one ask this to be made, without risking the utmost fury of those less pro-European? Those, by the democratic nature of Europe, must have a say too. How can we advance and go deeper (or regress) in the project of European construction in a democratic and sustained way?

And how to manage the different agendas of each nation, maitaining fairness and democratic proportion, but without endagering the rights of smaller nations? I recognize as totally unfair the distribuition of deputies in the European Parliament, as smaller nations have way to many deputies, but how can one make the numbers proportional, without risking a "directory" where the two or three more populated nations could makeall decisions by themselves?

You don't come from an EU country, so please don't tell us what to do.
O_o

Where have all the anti-EU people gone? I'm still waiting to hear all the damage that the EU has done, I don't mind if it's from someone other then Fass.
I don't know if you have discussed it already (started to read this from the last page) but me thinks that they have done very bad agricultural decisions. Instead of supporting small farmers they have forced them to resign and the only surviving farms grow bigger and bigger all the time.

I'm not anti-EU though.

I don't know if you have discussed it already (started to read this from the last page) but me thinks that they have done very bad agricultural decisions. Instead of supporting small farmers they have forced them to resign and the only surviving farms grow bigger and bigger all the time.

I'm not anti-EU though.


Hell true. In Portugal, we made the worst deal of the century: We accepted (and still accept) huge handouts of the EU budget NOT to produce agricultural goods. Now everyone (not just we) are dependent on French Farmers :p that eat away 40-50% of the EU budget.. while fortunes are being spent in cold chambers to store the huge surpluses of meat and other agricultural goods that Europe produces :p

When CAP was made, it was okay, Europe was a net importer of agricultural goods, not a good thing. Though CAP was a sucess, it failed to be adjusted and reformed to the new times. Now its a huge drain in the budget.

Well, I do have some faith on Blair, and that he will sucessfully reform that policy. Regretfully, Chirac is bitter has hell, i doubt he will allow Blair to achieve any victory, just due to the sake of bad blood between them :/

Well, I do have some faith on Blair, and that he will sucessfully reform that policy. Regretfully, Chirac is bitter has hell, i doubt he will allow Blair to achieve any victory, just due to the sake of bad blood between them :/
They just have to (reform). If they don't EU will be ruined no matter what. The new members quarantee that.

I quess the French farmer is more hated than the Polish plummer among EU citizens

go EU its good i dont see how the daily mail and UKIP make up all these things and lies about it

The French get far too much out of the EU CAP, compared with other nations. Their argument? They have more farmers.
Our argument? The figures are per hectare, you idiots.
They'll not adequately justify why they feel they need to have so much more money per acre than any other nation, and they opposed the entry of Eastern European nations that would need the money to upgrade their farms. I don't see why they need it, after all, there's only so many 2CVs you can buy a year.
Reform the CAP, lower tariffs and start talking about efficiency in European institutions, then Europe can become the counterbalance to American economic dominance that the world needs.