NationStates Jolt Archive

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/EU_map_names_isles.png
-------------------------------
My question is, does it benefit these countries more to remain isolated, or to join the EU?

Please, for Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, list the positives and negatives of remaining isolated/joining the EU, and post it here.

Then, say if there are more posotives for remaining isolated or for joining the EU, in your opinion.

The Swiss, well, they're just not joiners, you know? As for the Norwegians, I think their main reason for staying out is that they want to continue whaling. I'm not sure about the Icelanders, but they do live on a giant bunch of volcanoes in the North Atlantic and thet's got to give you a different perspective on things.

As for the Norwegians, I think their main reason for staying out is that they want to continue whaling.

MWHAHAHAHAHAH *falls to floor*

warning, Ny Nordland has discovered your thread!

Iceland and norway both have the exact same reason not to join, their indrustrial base is so narrow that in the case of a economic downturn it is very advantageous to have economical independence and the manouverability it brings (if icelands fishing goes bust, they can just let their currency freefall until the prices they can put on those fish are so low they are again competitive. if they were in EU, they could not do that, and instead would be hit by mass unemployment.) Don't except iceland to join at least until they are energy-independent.

Fried Tuna;11783232']Iceland and norway both have the exact same reason not to join, their indrustrial base is so narrow that in the case of a economic downturn it is very advantageous to have economical independence and the manouverability it brings (if icelands fishing goes bust, they can just let their currency freefall until the prices they can put on those fish are so low they are again competitive. if they were in EU, they could not do that, and instead would be hit by mass unemployment.) Don't except iceland to join at least until they are energy-independent.

Iceland isnt energy independent? This thread is hilarious. Fried Tuna, are you American as well?

The EU is a rapidly sinking ship. It would be crazy to board it.

MWHAHAHAHAHAH *falls to floor*

It's what I heard. Actually, I don't care a rodent's rump if Norway joins the EU or petitions the American Congress to become the 51st state. Glad you enjoyed the laugh, though.

The EU is a rapidly sinking ship. It would be crazy to board it.

thats why its just admitted more members? and bush begging them to let turkey in.

you wish troll.

thats why its just admitted more members? and bush begging them to let turkey in.

you wish troll.

Well, "European Union" has, you know, "Europe" in its name, and Europe equals decadent, socialist, backward-looking and all that. OMG, gasoline is over $5 a gallon in most places and the people huddle together on public transportation. Why would anyone in his or her right mind join such a bunch? :D

Well, "European Union" has, you know, "Europe" in its name, and Europe equals decadent, socialist, backward-looking and all that. OMG, gasoline is over $5 a gallon in most places and the people huddle together on public transportation. Why would anyone in his or her right mind join such a bunch? :D
Norway is more socialist than most Euro countries...

Some insight: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3760/is_199610/ai_n8735634

http://eunews.blogspot.com/2005_11_01_eunews_archive.html

The EU is a rapidly sinking ship. It would be crazy to board it.
You have no idea about what you're on about.

It's going from strength to strength...

Anyway...

The Swiss - They're neutral.

The Norwegians - Aren't up for the regulations on fishing and whaling, don't want migrant workers, and they've no farmland for the CAP - they also trade pretty much freely with the EU states anyway.

The Icelandic people - They, too are pretty much neutral. They've no interests in farming, so the CAP doesn't benefit them, and the fishing regulations would be a pain in the arse for them.

It's what I heard. Actually, I don't care a rodent's rump if Norway joins the EU or petitions the American Congress to become the 51st state. Glad you enjoyed the laugh, though.

Petitioning to join USA? That's more sci-fi than Star Wars ;)

Petitioning to join USA? That's more sci-fi than Star Wars ;)
It'd make you a real country! Or part of one! :D

Well, "European Union" has, you know, "Europe" in its name, and Europe equals decadent, socialist, backward-looking and all that.
Aye, we're a bunch of decadent, ugly commies. That'd be it.

As opposed to Americans who are simply decadent, ugly exploiters of the poor.
OMG, gasoline is over $5 a gallon in most places
On the other hand, our cars use about half or less of the petrol of your cars. So it's actually better for us.
and the people huddle together on public transportation
Buses - the motorised symbol of pinkos worldwide, eh?

Plus our buses aren't utter shit like US ones - due to demand for them to be good, we spend good money on making them efficient and pleasant.
Why would anyone in his or her right mind join such a bunch? :D
Economic freedom, greater regional power, a middle finger to the US and aid in case of disasters, as well as economic benefits like the CAP.

Petitioning to join USA? That's more sci-fi than Star Wars ;)

It'd make you a real country! Or part of one! :D

Maybe the US should petition to become part of Norway. Just as long as we don't have to eat lutefisk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutefisk). Or is that the Swedes?

It'd make you a real country! Or part of one! :D

Why would we want to join a country whose living standarts are far inferior among other things? :D

Fried Tuna;11783232']Iceland and norway both have the exact same reason not to join, their indrustrial base is so narrow that in the case of a economic downturn it is very advantageous to have economical independence and the manouverability it brings (if icelands fishing goes bust, they can just let their currency freefall until the prices they can put on those fish are so low they are again competitive. if they were in EU, they could not do that, and instead would be hit by mass unemployment.) Don't except iceland to join at least until they are energy-independent.

And the Swiss?

Aye, we're a bunch of decadent, ugly commies. That'd be it.

There's no "we" in it. :)

As for the CAP, it's not something I'd brag about - it nearly became the cause in the potential derailment of the EU 2007-13 budget.

Maybe the US should petition to become part of Norway. Just as long as we don't have to eat lutefisk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutefisk). Or is that the Swedes?
Looks good to me.

Why would we want to join a country whose living standarts are far inferior among other things? :D
Monaco is part of inferior France, and now you too could be part of the inferior US. :)

Why would we want to join a country whose living standarts are far inferior among other things? :D

:confused:

Inferior? If by inferior you mean act as hard working people who try the best they can instead of leeching off the government, becoming socialist, drinking alcohol and getting depressed, then yes, I suppose we are inferior.;)

And the Swiss?

They have everyone's money anyway, except for what the Caymans have, why should they join?

Looks good to me.


Monaco is part of inferior France, and now you too could be part of the inferior US. :)

No, thx!!!!!
And Monaco is independent.

No, thx!!!!!
And Monaco is independent.
It's more or less a protectorate of France - France's bitch so to speak. :( Until it decides to annex it. ^^

:confused:

Inferior? If by inferior you mean act as hard working people who try the best they can instead of leeching off the government, becoming socialist, drinking alcohol and getting depressed, then yes, I suppose we are inferior.;)
Silly non-country people. :)

They have everyone's money anyway, except for what the Caymans have, why should they join?
I'm not saying they should, I'd just like to hear reasons for and against it, thats all.

:confused:

Inferior? If by inferior you mean act as hard working people who try the best they can instead of leeching off the government, becoming socialist, drinking alcohol and getting depressed, then yes, I suppose we are inferior.;)

Inferior living standarts would mean lower gdp per capita, lower hdi index, etc... Climate isnt counted.
Oh and some socialist Nordic countries are much more economically competitive than capitalist Mekka of USA. Funny, isnt it?

Inferior living standarts would mean lower gdp per capita, lower hdi index, etc... Climate isnt counted.
It helps when you have oil. ;)

There's no "we" in it. :)
I was talking generally about the people of Europe...
As for the CAP, it's not something I'd brag about - it nearly became the cause in the potential derailment of the EU 2007-13 budget.
Nearly did. Not actually did.

On the other hand, since it means that we get to eat, that's not really an issue.

It's more or less a protectorate of France - France's bitch so to speak. :( Until it decides to annex it. ^^

France's bitch? I always imgained France in feminene roles. Maybe they are lesbians HAHA

I was talking generally about the people of Europe...
Still no "we" in it. ^^

Nearly did. Not actually did.

On the other hand, since it means that we get to eat, that's not really an issue.
We'd still have enough to eat if we imported it - and at a lower price perhaps. So this is moot.

It helps when you have oil. ;)

Iceland doesnt but still is better than USA. Sweden would be too if it werent for the immigrant infestation.

Silly non-country people. :)

LOL:D

Inferior living standarts would mean lower gdp per capita, lower hdi index, etc... Climate isnt counted.
Oh and some socialist Nordic countries are much more economically competitive than capitalist Mekka of USA. Funny, isnt it?

Meh, I know your people live comfterably, but I'd rather be a real human, and work for my money, create new inventions, and capitalise off of them, and be independent instead of just having the governemnt keep my comfy because of North Sea Oil.

For these reasons, Switzerland is my favorite place in Europe, because they got their high standard of living from their handworking capitalism. I know you will disagree, but thats ok.:)

France's bitch? I always imgained France in feminene roles. Maybe they are lesbians HAHA
That'd make France a lesbian paedophile! :D

Iceland doesnt but still is better than USA. Sweden would be too if it werent for the immigrant infestation.
Iceland has a freer economy than the US, and is about a 1000 times tinier. Roughly. Much easier for it to make money. Sweden - eh, it's up in arms right now.

It helps when you have oil. ;)
And a tiny population in regards to how much land and oil you have. ;)
Iceland doesnt but still is better than USA. Sweden would be too if it werent for the immigrant infestation.

Could it possibly be that these Scandi countries are HUGE in comparison to the number of people that live there, and have TONS of resources and land in comparison to the population.

Could that possibly be it?;)

And a tiny population in regards to how much land and oil you have. ;)
Wouldn't be a non-country otherwise! :D

Still no "we" in it. ^^
*sighs*

Yes, yes there is... I was being sarcastic.
We'd still have enough to eat if we imported it - and at a lower price perhaps. So this is moot.
Not really... self-reliance is much better than importing from overseas.

Not really... self-reliance is much better than importing from overseas.
Even if it means paying less for your food, and thus having more money to spend on other things?

*sighs*

Yes, yes there is... I was being sarcastic.
And I was being pedantic. :)

Not really... self-reliance is much better than importing from overseas.
Erm, no. Not unless you are at war with poor, under-developed African and South American countries. Autarky at the cost of inefficiency and massive cash wastage is a pipe dream.

Iceland has a freer economy than the US, and is about a 1000 times tinier. Roughly. Much easier for it to make money. Sweden - eh, it's up in arms right now.

WTF? Iceland follows Scandinavian welfare state model.

Well, "European Union" has, you know, "Europe" in its name, and Europe equals decadent, socialist, backward-looking and all that. OMG, gasoline is over $5 a gallon in most places and the people huddle together on public transportation. Why would anyone in his or her right mind join such a bunch? :D


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Cretin or Sarcastic?
'Gasoline' or as we know it Petrol, costs about 80p.
And I would hardly call Britain and Germany socialist, also how are they decadent. Backward looking? So what, we have CULTURE.......

WTF? Iceland follows Scandinavian welfare state model.
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Iceland

Ja, sure it does. Freer than the US even. :D

And a tiny population in regards to how much land and oil you have. ;)


Could it possibly be that these Scandi countries are HUGE in comparison to the number of people that live there, and have TONS of resources and land in comparison to the population.

Could that possibly be it?;)

USA is huge as well. And economic competitiveness has nothing to do with resource population ratio.

USA is huge as well. And economic competitiveness has nothing to do with resource population ratio.
It does if you can finance lavish state projects with said resources (e.g. oil).

WTF? Iceland follows Scandinavian welfare state model.

Orginally, but its Right-Wing party has been changing that, too much success.

"The centre-right government plans to continue its policies of reducing the budget and current account deficits, limiting foreign borrowing, containing inflation, revising agricultural and fishing policies, diversifying the economy, and privatising state-owned industries. The government remains opposed to EU membership, primarily because of Icelanders' concern about losing control over their fishing resources.

Iceland's economy has been diversifying into manufacturing and service industries in the last decade, and new developments in software production, biotechnology, and financial services are taking place. The tourism sector is also expanding, with the recent trends in ecotourism and whale-watching. Growth slowed between 2000 and 2002, but the economy expanded by 4.3% in 2003 and grew by 6.2% in 2004. The unemployment rate of 1.8% (3rd quarter of 2005) is among the lowest in the European Economic Area."

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Iceland

Ja, sure it does. Freer than the US even. :D

Hong Kong 2006 1.28 1.0 1.8 1.5 1 1 1 2 1 1 1.5
Singapore 2006 1.56 1.0 2.1 3.5 1 1 2 2 1 1 1
Ireland 2006 1.58 2.0 2.3 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1.5
Luxembourg 2006 1.60 2.0 3.0 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1
Iceland 2006 1.74 2.5 2.4 2.5 1 3 1 1 1 2 1
United Kingdom 2006 1.74 2.0 3.9 2.5 1 1 1 2 1 2 1
Estonia 2006 1.75 2.0 2.0 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2.5
Denmark 2006 1.78 2.0 3.8 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 1
Australia 2006 1.84 2.5 3.9 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
New Zealand 2006 1.84 2.5 3.9 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
United States 2006 1.84 2.0 3.9 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1.5


Amazing to see Denmark having a more capitalist economy than USA. I guess economic freedom in this index means different than what you were thinking :rolleyes:

USA is huge as well. And economic competitiveness has nothing to do with resource population ratio.

America is huge, but with almost 300,000,000 people. How many people do you have, 8 million or something close to it?

Economic competitivness has EVERYTHING to do with it. Look at it this way, you have a tiny population, with a shit load or resources and oil, the selling of which can easily afford to finaince your massive welfare state.

Amazing to see Denmark having a more capitalist economy than USA. I guess economic freedom in this index means different than what you were thinking :rolleyes:
Or, maybe, just maybe, the US isn't as economically free as it is rumoured to be, eh?

Read an analysis of each country to see why they have their scores. Iceland is relatively freer to the US in most regards. And Hong Kong is, by any standards, one of the freest economies around. This index is accurate.

And I was being pedantic. :)
No shit.
Erm, no. Not unless you are at war with poor, under-developed African and South American countries.
Why would they suddenly have no money?

It's not like making food at home stops us giving aid to these nations.
Autarky at the cost of inefficiency and massive cash wastage is a pipe dream.
I don't really see how...

If we can make our own food, then we can stop worrying about the issue and concentrate more on other things.

Orginally, but its Right-Wing party has been changing that, too much success.

"The centre-right government plans to continue its policies of reducing the budget and current account deficits, limiting foreign borrowing, containing inflation, revising agricultural and fishing policies, diversifying the economy, and privatising state-owned industries. The government remains opposed to EU membership, primarily because of Icelanders' concern about losing control over their fishing resources.

Iceland's economy has been diversifying into manufacturing and service industries in the last decade, and new developments in software production, biotechnology, and financial services are taking place. The tourism sector is also expanding, with the recent trends in ecotourism and whale-watching. Growth slowed between 2000 and 2002, but the economy expanded by 4.3% in 2003 and grew by 6.2% in 2004. The unemployment rate of 1.8% (3rd quarter of 2005) is among the lowest in the European Economic Area."


Another example of how "socialism" is far superior to American style capitalism, and even without oil!

Or, maybe, just maybe, the US isn't as economically free as it is rumoured to be, eh?

Could be, it really depends on where you are (whate state). If you go to Mass, up in New England, things arnt as economically free as if you were to start a corporation in Florida, Texas, or my favorite, Las Vegas.

It really depends.

Another example of how "socialism" is far superior to American style capitalism, and even without oil!

Its not socialism, its the government trying to privatise more and move away from the scandi welfare state.

Another example of how "socialism" is far superior to American style capitalism, and even without oil!
Did you even read what he quoted? :p

Why would they suddenly have no money?

It's not like making food at home stops us giving aid to these nations.
They spend so little on defence budgets, relative to the EU and its allies, and stand to lose so much that what you speak of is both impractical and improbable.

I don't really see how...

If we can make our own food, then we can stop worrying about the issue and concentrate more on other things.
It won't stop others from doing it more efficiently than us, thus robbing us of a significant saving in prices and all the money we divert into this silly CAP. The CAP is doubly idiotic because not all countries need it - it should be converted into a direct cash fund for countries to spend as they please. France has more use of the CAP than, for instance, the UK.

America is huge, but with almost 300,000,000 people. How many people do you have, 8 million or something close to it?

Economic competitivness has EVERYTHING to do with it. Look at it this way, you have a tiny population, with a shit load or resources and oil, the selling of which can easily afford to finaince your massive welfare state.

Wrong wrong wrong. Why isnt Monaco most competitive then? And this is the competitiveness list:

1. Switzerland
2. Finland
3. Sweden
4. Denmark
5. Singapore
6. US
7. Japan
8. Germany

None of the countries above USA has oil. Singapore has no shit load of resources. If smaller meant more competitive why does USA rank higher than Belgium?

Could be, it really depends on where you are (whate state). If you go to Mass, up in New England, things arnt as economically free as if you were to start a corporation in Florida, Texas, or my favorite, Las Vegas.

It really depends.
Indeed - the equivalent (well, sort of) would be to take the whole of the EU up and sum its economic freedom - it'd be worse than the US on a whole, even though certain constituent states do better.

Wrong wrong wrong. Why isnt Monaco most competitive then? And this is the competitiveness list:

1. Switzerland
2. Finland
3. Sweden
4. Denmark
5. Singapore
6. US
7. Japan
8. Germany
Because, Monaco is not a country in its own right. I've mentioned why. If you check, you'll see Monaco is not even on that Economic freedom index I provided.

Or, maybe, just maybe, the US isn't as economically free as it is rumoured to be, eh?

Read an analysis of each country to see why they have their scores. Iceland is relatively freer to the US in most regards. And Hong Kong is, by any standards, one of the freest economies around. This index is accurate.

Or maybe economic freedom isnt lower taxes, more working hours, less welfare and all those traditional capitalist things.

Its not socialism, its the government trying to privatise more and move away from the scandi welfare state.

Did you even read what he quoted? :p

I suggest you 2 to read on scandinavian welfare state if you think privitization is conflicting with it. *shakes head*

None of the countries above USA has oil. Singapore has no shit load of resources.

Singapore IS a resource. Having a technologically advanced city-state existing right on one of the world's busiest trade routes, where one third of the world's GDP passes through annually, is a serious resource.

Because, Monaco is not a country in its own right. I've mentioned why. If you check, you'll see Monaco is not even on that Economic freedom index I provided.

Monaco isnt but Singapore is, or Hong Kong? You got some silly ideas about "non countries".

Or maybe economic freedom isnt lower taxes, more working hours, less welfare and all those traditional capitalist things.
Read each country you are comparing carefully. On the whole they are freer - not in absolute terms (f.e. Denmark has a low rating with regard to its taxation). The freest countries actually have lower taxes than the US, and spend less on government.

I suggest you 2 to read on scandinavian welfare state if you think privitization is conflicting with it. *shakes head*
Privatisation is strictly capitalist. If Scandinavian welfare economies use it, it is a capitalist doctrine they are putting to use. This is a movement towards right-wing economics. That is all.

Monaco isnt but Singapore is, or Hong Kong? You got some silly ideas about "non countries".
Hey, it's simply how they classify them! They work under different arrangements. If you don't like it, go and complain to whomever is in charge. If Monaco was actually on these lists, it'd likely top them all. :confused:

Read each country you are comparing carefully. On the whole they are freer - not in absolute terms. The freest countries actually have lower taxes than the US, and spend less on government.


Iceland is still what you'd call a "socialist" country. They still have huge welfare programs. If they spend less on goverment, it should be because they got no military, not because they are more "capitalist".


Privatisation is strictly capitalist. If Scandinavian welfare economies use it, it is a capitalist doctrine they are putting to use. This is a movement towards right-wing economics. That is all.

No shit! All european countries are capitalist. That's why I use "socialist" in quotes to highlight the difference between USA and European style capitalism. And currently you are arguing in favour of an American system.

Iceland is still what you'd call a "socialist" country. They still have huge welfare programs. If they spend less on goverment, it should be because they got no military, not because they are more "capitalist".
Government spending isn't the be-all and end-all of how capitalist a country is. Read each section carefully. They all matter. Iceland is what I'd call mildly Keynesian, sort of like the US. The US actually spends a lot on welfare - the problem is that it's inefficiently spent.

No shit! All european countries are capitalist. That's why I use "socialist" in quotes to highlight the difference between USA and European style capitalism. And currently you are arguing in favour of an American system.
Ermm...nope. The American system is irrelevant to me. Ireland has a freer system for crying out loud! None of these countries are as free as I'd like them to be - except maybe Hong Kong. As for "European capitalism" as opposed to "American capitalism" it's just Keynesiasism to varying degrees. Nothing new there. I dispute there even being such a thing as "European capitalism" - there is too much variation within the EU to allow for such a qualification - some countries are far freer than the US, for instance.

I really dont even have to argue, Europa Maxima says everything I want to say 2 1/2 minutes before I even think of it.:p


The US actually spends a lot on welfare - the problem is that it's inefficiently spent.
Ehhhhh, yeah thats true. Damn Democrat parrty.:(
Anyway, like I said before, it just depends on the state. Some states have shit loads more "job security", "unemployment insurance", and "welfare rules" than others. I hate them all, but things are much better in Nevada for economic freedom than in New England. It really just depends.

warning, Ny Nordland has discovered your thread!
.....ok?:confused:

Because, Monaco is not a country in its own right. I've mentioned why. If you check, you'll see Monaco is not even on that Economic freedom index I provided.

Monaco is actually an independent state. It has some traditional links with France but they were severed during some revolution or other. Monaco may not be present on that list but that is more likely due to an oversight on behalf of the compilers as the EU, USA and UN all recognise it as a fully fledged nationstate.

Monaco is actually an independent state. It has some traditional links with France but they were severed during some revolution or other. Monaco may not be present on that list but that is more likely due to an oversight on behalf of the compilers as the EU, USA and UN all recognise it as a fully fledged nationstate.
Yes, it is actually a principality in its own right - I realised this after looking up on it again. It's just that it's rarely, if ever actually on these kind of lists. I do remember though on the Economist PPP index it was included. So I suppose the statisticians really don't know what's going on in their little world.

In my opinion poland has made a mistake by joing the EU

In my opinion poland has made a mistake by joing the EU
Why? You do realise that the countrys I gave are economic miracles and places of great capital, Poland would SUCK much more than it does ow without all the benefits that the EU brings.

Unless you can convince me otherwise; why did Poland make a mistake by joining the EU? What does it have to lose by joining the EU? I'm asking in all honesty.

Sweden can just conquer Nowary.. AGAIN. and be done with the whole problem.
Iceland doesn't really need to join. And the switz have such a high currency becuase of all the gold they hold the euro would bring them down

Why? You do realise that the countrys I gave are economic miracles and places of great capital, Poland would SUCK much more than it does ow without all the benefits that the EU brings.

Unless you can convince me otherwise; why did Poland make a mistake by joining the EU? What does it have to lose by joining the EU? I'm asking in all honesty.
The EU will prevent any plans it has for getting back at the world for all those Poland jokes from ever happening.

Sweden can just conquer Nowary.. AGAIN. and be done with the whole problem.
Iceland doesn't really need to join. And the switz have such a high currency becuase of all the gold they hold the euro would bring them down

I'm sure the Norwegians would LOVE that.:D

The EU will prevent any plans it has for getting back at the world for all those Poland jokes from ever happening.
...LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! WE HAVE A WINNER!

What do we got for him, Jonny?

A BRAND. NEW. CAR!!!!

...LADIES AND GENTLEMEN! WE HAVE A WINNER!

What do we got for him, Jonny?

A BRAND. NEW. CAR!!!!

Is it an electric car?

I can't exactly afford gas.

Fucking Toronto and their Nazi gas that is 30 cents cheaper than gas here.
*blames all sociaties ills on Toronto*

I for one think that independence (in certain economic matters) is an important factor. I'm a Norwegian and against the EU (I like sovergenity of each nation)

You have no idea about what you're on about.

It's going from strength to strength...

Anyway...

The Swiss - They're neutral.

The Norwegians - Aren't up for the regulations on fishing and whaling, don't want migrant workers, and they've no farmland for the CAP - they also trade pretty much freely with the EU states anyway.

The Icelandic people - They, too are pretty much neutral. They've no interests in farming, so the CAP doesn't benefit them, and the fishing regulations would be a pain in the arse for them.


I don't think CAP really benefits anyone significantly other than France.

Sweden can just conquer Nowary.. AGAIN. and be done with the whole problem.
Iceland doesn't really need to join. And the switz have such a high currency becuase of all the gold they hold the euro would bring them down
And Monaco can conquer France and practically own the EU! ^^

I'm sure the Norwegians would LOVE that.:D
Anything to remove their non-country status. ;)

Why? You do realise that the countrys I gave are economic miracles and places of great capital, Poland would SUCK much more than it does ow without all the benefits that the EU brings.

Unless you can convince me otherwise; why did Poland make a mistake by joining the EU? What does it have to lose by joining the EU? I'm asking in all honesty.
In terms of aid Poland receives, perhaps. In that Poland has lost a measure of its fiscal (and eventually monetary) policy and must now abide by EU regulations, it has sacrificed some of its powers. Poland can easily trade with the EU without needing to join it, by entering the EEA much like Norge, Liechtenstein and Iceland did, or reaching special agreements with the EU like Schweiz. In a way this mimics the EU's original purpose of a free trade zone. The EU is heavily bureaucratic, highly unaccountable and isn't as efficient as it should be in formulating its budgetary plans. EU membership has its benefits, but it isn't necessary for European countries.

I don't think CAP really benefits anyone significantly other than France.
True - and some other nations. For most of the EU it's a waste of hard earned cash though.

Actually, the Swiss question is quite strange.
Most Swisses don't want to join the EU, and they stated it quite clearly in a referendum.
The Swiss government has adopted the "bilateral treaty" policy. That is, Switzerland and EU follow a diplomatical path of treaties between themselves. So Switzerland has a lot of the benefits of being part of the Schengen area without joining.
I think the Swisses are quite smart. If they would join the EU, they would just be a small alpine country like Austria, and would have a lot less importance than, let's say, Germany, Italy or France. But, since some of the most important commercial routes of Europe pass through Switzerland (Genova-Milano-Gotthard-Basel-Rhine-Rotterdam, Milano-Simplon-Geneve-Paris, Torino-Gr.St.Bernard-Bern-Basel, Lyon-Geneve-Basel-Stuttgart for example), if they stay out of the EU, they gain tremendous contractual strength - and their government (less than 10 millions people) can talk to the EU Commission as peer to peer.

Is it an electric car?

I can't exactly afford gas.

Fucking Toronto and their Nazi gas that is 30 cents cheaper than gas here.
*blames all sociaties ills on Toronto*
Its from Iceland, so its hydro-powered.;)

Actually, the Swiss question is quite strange.
Most Swisses don't want to join the EU, and they stated it quite clearly in a referendum.
The Swiss government has adopted the "bilateral treaty" policy. That is, Switzerland and EU follow a diplomatical path of treaties between themselves. So Switzerland has a lot of the benefits of being part of the Schengen area without joining.
I think the Swisses are quite smart. If they would join the EU, they would just be a small alpine country like Austria, and would have a lot less importance than, let's say, Germany, Italy or France. But, since some of the most important commercial routes of Europe pass through Switzerland (Genova-Milano-Gotthard-Basel-Rhine-Rotterdam, Milano-Simplon-Geneve-Paris, Torino-Gr.St.Bernard-Bern-Basel, Lyon-Geneve-Basel-Stuttgart for example), if they stay out of the EU, they gain tremendous contractual strength - and their government (less than 10 millions people) can talk to the EU Commission as peer to peer.
Good post. :)
In terms of aid Poland receives, perhaps. In that Poland has lost a measure of its fiscal (and eventually monetary) policy and must now abide by EU regulations, it has sacrificed some of its powers. Poland can easily trade with the EU without needing to join it, by entering the EEA much like Norge, Liechtenstein and Iceland did, or reaching special agreements with the EU like Schweiz. The EU is heavily bureaucratic, highly unaccountable and isn't as efficient as it should be in formulating its budgetary plans. EU membership has its benefits, but it isn't necessary for European countries. Agreed. :) What is this agricultural thing that everyone keeps talkina bout is only good for France?

Agreed. :) What is this agricultural thing that everyone keeps talkina bout is only good for France?
The Common Agricultural Policy. It's a portion of the EU budget that goes to agricultural subsidies. It currently occupies a massive portion of the budget (over 40%), even though most countries derive little benefit from it. Furthermore, it hinders free trade. It's been suggested that it be replaced with direct cash that countries may spend as they wish (or require).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Agricultural_Policy

For instance, agriculture doesn't even occupy more than 1% of the UK GDP.

In my opinion poland has made a mistake by joing the EU

It was the only thing Poland could do. If not, Poles would have started emigrating to Germany like crazy (or like Albanians do with Italy).
Plus, the US were quite happy of having one of their surest allies into the EU-25.

...and if Poland hadn't join the EU, a lot of Polish territory would have become EU all the same... think of how many tanks Germany has!:D

Good post. :)
Agreed. :) What is this agricultural thing that everyone keeps talkina bout is only good for France?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Agricultural_Policy

basically it gives money to help larger, ag focused countries, and it screws smaller nations. Very wasteful program, only kept around to make the french happy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Agricultural_Policy

basically it gives money to help larger, ag focused countries, and it screws smaller nations. Very wasteful program, only kept around to make the french happy.
Some of the larger countries, yes. It doesn't help Britain that much. Plus, for a Union devoted to free trade, such forms of protectionism are rather odd.

Well, "European Union" has, you know, "Europe" in its name, and Europe equals decadent, socialist, backward-looking and all that. OMG, gasoline is over $5 a gallon in most places and the people huddle together on public transportation. Why would anyone in his or her right mind join such a bunch? :D

Problem is, that we like a lot being fantastically decadent, hedonistic, socialist, and travel by high-speed trains instead of wasting 1.2 euro/litre for gasoline. :cool: Do you have high-speed trains in the colonies? And what on earth is a gallon, anyway?

Some of the larger countries, yes. It doesn't help Britain that much. Plus, for a Union devoted to free trade, such forms of protectionism are rather odd.

Well to me, Britain is more industrial than agricultural, so hence it wouldn't have a positive affect on the UK. But yes, it is rather ignorant to have protectionism like that in a free trade area.

Well to me, Britain is more industrial than agricultural, so hence it wouldn't have a positive affect on the UK. But yes, it is rather ignorant to have protectionism like that in a free trade area.
Service economy actually - Britain's moved on. :) A large portion of its economy is industrial though. Anyway, if something akin to the CAP must exist, then like I said, better that it be direct cash aid that can be spent as necessary by the recipients. Spending nearly 50% of the EU budget on something that only benefits a few countries is rather unfair.

Iceland isnt energy independent? This thread is hilarious. Fried Tuna, are you American as well?

Umm, no, finnish. Icelands number one import is petroleum products, they consume a whole lot and produce none, to me that sounds like they are not energy-independent. They have massive potential (probably the world's best) renevable energy, but most of it isn't being tapped. They are working on that though. Also, they are taking huge leaps towards hydrogen economy, they might be the only country on earth where that is not just viable but actually profitable. Anyway, their NR.1 long term policy is to become energy-independent, either trough use of hydrogen or homecooked hydrocarbons.

And the Swiss?

Have done their best to stay neutral for the last 600 years (or more), with varying degrees of success. Very probably the only country in europe never to join. I predict that in the future they'll have so much treaties with EU that they will become a member in all but the name. Then again, I have been known to be wrong.

Guys, just before the bloody France-bashing starts again:

France is a net contributor to the EU. It puts more money in than it gets out. Indeed, it pays quite a significant amount for the British rebate, which is really (looking at it from an equity standpoint) a lot more unfair than the CAP...France does have quite a few more farms than Britain for example.

That being said, they should take the money from the CAP and do an Ireland on everyone. EU money did wonders there.

Guys, just before the bloody France-bashing starts again:

France is a net contributor to the EU. It puts more money in than it gets out. Indeed, it pays quite a significant amount for the British rebate, which is really (looking at it from an equity standpoint) a lot more unfair than the CAP...France does have quite a few more farms than Britain for example.

That being said, they should take the money from the CAP and do an Ireland on everyone. EU money did wonders there.
Oh, I have nothing against France - I simply think the CAP is becoming a waste of money for most nations involved. As I said, allowing each country to spend the fund as it pleases would be preferrable.