NationStates Jolt Archive

The little brotherlings of Romenia and Bulgaria have finally joined the EU! (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/31/bulgaria.romania.ap/index.html)

May their presence enrich us all: More trade, more wealth, more strenght, more peace.

So.. that's two more countries to impede on the democratic process...

I for one welcome our new Bulgarian and Romanian overlords.

Does this mean the Romanians have an army now?

no 2 more countries fall into this trap. i have no idea what to say, except that this is not a good thing.

So, what are they bringing for cuisine?

Welcome Bulgaria and Romania, and hooray for the EU! May she press on to an ever closer union.

I was under the impression Bulgaria was rather unstable at the moment, is it really a good idea to allow their admission?

I was under the impression Bulgaria was rather unstable at the moment, is it really a good idea to allow their admission?

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.

So, what are they bringing for cuisine?
Bulgaria - anything not nailed down from the Greek and Turkish cuisine sets.
Romania - basically gruel, really.

The little brotherlings of Romenia and Bulgaria have finally joined the EU! (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/31/bulgaria.romania.ap/index.html)

May their presence enrich us all: More trade, more wealth, more strenght, more peace.

why thank you very much :D (i'm romanian - living in britain)

Does this mean the Romanians have an army now?

:) romania has 95,000 military personnel... thats just a bit more than britain btw:headbang:

As most of these new EU states have intergrated really well, I welcome the two new buddies into the club.

Hi!

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.

don't worry... the values of equality and freedom are better upheld there than in some western countries... e.g. we do not have anti-terror laws infringing freedom of speech (like the religious tolerance laws in britain)

but yes we are economically and politically backward... it will change with time, especially since entering the EU is sure to prevent extremism of either wing in both countries

Excellent

don't worry... the values of equality and freedom are better upheld there than in some western countries... e.g. we do not have anti-terror laws infringing freedom of speech (like the religious tolerance laws in britain)

But they also tend to be very religious and oppose the right to an abortion. They also tend to be virulently anti-gay. I think that should be dealt with before they are allowed entry.

abortion is not an issue... it has been illegal under communism and it has bread too many orphans so we know it is best to have it

i have to admit that you are right about the anti-gay thing... it's quite ridiculous but it is quite deep into the mentalities of the people and it is quite hard to force tolerance on them... (reminds me of the mess the gay pride parade made in bucharest last year:headbang: )

To be honest as long as they don't hyper-saturate the jobs market (which they wont now, first big Labour foreign policy breakthrough) I dont give a gypsy's ass about Bulgaria and Romania joining. The more the merrier

i have to admit that you are right about the anti-gay thing... it's quite ridiculous but it is quite deep into the mentalities of the people and it is quite hard to force tolerance on them... (reminds me of the mess the gay pride parade made in bucharest last year:headbang: )

We shouldn't force tolerance. But they shouldn't be allowed in until they come to it on their own.

Yay for Bulgaria and Romania maybe one day we will have our velvet glove over the whole of the European continent

To be honest as long as they don't hyper-saturate the jobs market (which they wont now, first big Labour foreign policy breakthrough) I dont give a gypsy's ass about Bulgaria and Romania joining. The more the merrier

well considering how Polish workers only stay for a few months and haven’t destroyed the job market labour is doing its usual bullshit IMHO

and might want to keep the stereotype of Romanians being thieves and gypsies as they have started pinning Britain as a land of drunks and child abusers

We shouldn't force tolerance. But they shouldn't be allowed in until they come to it on their own.

they wouldn't of been able to join the E.U if they weren’t reasonably tolerant (you will notice that Gay pride parades aren’t cracked down on)

no 2 more countries fall into this trap. i have no idea what to say, except that this is not a good thing.

bullshit. if they get a fraction of what ireland got out of it...

Bulgaria - anything not nailed down from the Greek and Turkish cuisine sets.
Romania - basically gruel, really.

Yummy, :)

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.The Uk seems to have integrated into the EU fairly well. What's your point?

Infact for new countries to join the EU you have to be compatible with the standards already set in place by the EU. This is non-negotiable. What they can negotiate is the the way in which they integrate EU law and sometimes they can negotiate a time table for compliance. New countries also have to pass a number of tests and indicators for the economy and society. Even if teh country matches up prefectly it will still be treated as junior member by old europe.

It's fun to be a new member state in the EU. It's even funner to trying to become one.

1) A formal application is submitted to the European Council.

2) The Council requests the opinion (avis - (bloody french)) of the Comission. This is a detailed report into the economy, social, and political structure of the applicant state. It also evaluates the applicants ability to cope with membership (the changes that will be made to their economic, social and political structure). And finally a recommendation is made. This is a very very very large document.

3) The Acession conference takes place. This deals with the negotiations of the 31 chapters of the acquis communautaire (bloody french). Each chapter must be have a provisional agreement made. You think this is small task then consider than the EU consititution was a consolidation of the 31 chapters of EU law into one single document. Here is a picture of it
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/66/Consttreat.jpg/180px-Consttreat.jpg
All member states must agree to adopt the laws and norms set out in these 31 chapters. They may negotiate a time table for adoption and on how each law and norm will be adopted.

4) The European council now looks over the acquis and may reject it and sent the acquis back to the negotiating table.

5) If the process gets this far it now has to be approved by the European parliament with an absolute majority

6) Nothing much is really going to stop the process at this point, but all member states and applicants must ratify the application. In some cases this is even done by referendum.

Points 2 and especially 3 are the huge stumbling blocks.

True equality will be when Turkey is admitted to the EU (who has been petitioning since before the Cold War ended... heck, I think they petitioned to join the ECC.) As a member of NATO, Turkey has done its part for Europe. (not to say all NATO members should join, since it is not yet the North American European Union :)

Yes, I understand the economic factors... I took a class on Contemporary European Politics during the last accession talks and still argued for Turkey... of course, it was pointed out that it would be like arguing for Mexico to join the US (that would solve our immigration problem :)

Anyway, welcome Bulgaria and Romania and hope your ratification of the EU Constitution goes better than France's and The Netherlands.

Ugh. Commiserations.

True equality will be when Turkey is admitted to the EU

hopefully after they sort there government out and the whole Cyprus question is answered

hopefully after they sort there government out and the whole Cyprus question is answered

Not to mention understand that respect for human rights is non-negotiable.

Not to mention understand that respect for human rights is non-negotiable.

and get marital rape listed as a crime

Turkey has a long way to go…

True equality will be when Turkey is admitted to the EU
Why would Turkey be admitted to the European Union?:confused:

The last thing Europe needs is 70,000,000 Turks....when Europe is currently trying to get a handle on immigration and cultural integration/assimilation....:headbang:

But they also tend to be very religious and oppose the right to an abortion. They also tend to be virulently anti-gay. I think that should be dealt with before they are allowed entry.

Someone remind me when Ireland was admitted into the EU...

and get marital rape listed as a crime


What was it '89 or so that it got on the books in the UK? - not so long ago.

But they also tend to be very religious and oppose the right to an abortion. They also tend to be virulently anti-gay. I think that should be dealt with before they are allowed entry.
Where did you get these ideas from? :confused: Abortion is a non-issue in Romania. It is legal and nobody's protesting against it. There are probably more opponents in the West than in Romania. As for the gays, well, everybody has the right to have sex with a person of the same sex (as long as there is consent, of course). Most people are indeed conservative regarding the issue of gay marriage, but if this qualifies Romanians as "virulently anti-gay", then most European states are virulently anti-gay, too.

Why would Turkey be admitted to the European Union?:confused:
Are you trying to say we shouldn't allow Turkey in the EU because most of its teritory is outside the continent of Europe? If so, we should kick Cyprus out. No part of its teritory is in Europe. ;)

no 2 more countries fall into this trap. i have no idea what to say, except that this is not a good thing.


Than stand up and say something offline.

Two points:
1)I have a Bulgarian friend so this'll be good.
2)Bulgaria and Romania have not yet actually joined the EU. Whats happening now is simply that its becoming easier for them to get into the UK

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.

As opposed to Turkey, right?

2)Bulgaria and Romania have not yet actually joined the EU. Whats happening now is simply that its becoming easier for them to get into the UK

I'm pretty sure they have.

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.

What?!

2)Bulgaria and Romania have not yet actually joined the EU. Whats happening now is simply that its becoming easier for them to get into the UK

http://europa.eu/abc/european_countries/index_en.htm

Romanians are so annoying.

Romanians are so annoying.

So are the French but you let them in. :D

So are the French but you let them in. :D

Bah!

At least the French have good food!

So are the French but you let them in. :D

1. Ruffie is not European.
2. France was not "let in". France, Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries started the EU. Get a history book.

1. Ruffie is not European.
2. France was not "let in." France, Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries started the EU. Get a history book.

somebody has no sense of humor and likes to flamebait. :rolleyes:

somebody has no sense of humor and likes to flamebait. :rolleyes:

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Romanians are so annoying.
Then we have something in common. :fluffle:

Someone remind me when Ireland was admitted into the EU...

1973

1973

Boo-urns.

Boo-urns.

Never thought you might like Hans Moleman? :confused:

Never thought you might like Hans Moleman? :confused:

Barney won that one. Hans got the Oscar.

Never thought you might like Hans Moleman? :confused:
Its a pretty common saying in the Van area. Never thought I'd hear Fass say it.

Barney won that one. Hans got the Oscar.

"but football in the groin has a football in the groin."

Its a pretty common saying in the Van area. Never thought I'd hear Fass say it.

The Simpsons are excellent purveyors of catch phrases, so don't have a cow, caramba.

"but football in the groin has a football in the groin."

But Homer has Marge.

Why would Turkey be admitted to the European Union?:confused:

The last thing Europe needs is 70,000,000 Turks....when Europe is currently trying to get a handle on immigration and cultural integration/assimilation....:headbang:

Constantinople/Istanbul/Byzantium has always been a part of Europe... regardless of cultural bias now, history regards that region as European, in fact at its best while the rest of Europe was running from a bunch of loin-cloth clothed Scandanavians. (yes, I know the Vikings even raided as far as Constantinople, but they didn't stay in Byzantium and not become the ruling class in some countries... like France, or England)

Beside, I thought the EU was supposed to be fair to all peoples within their borders. So what is good for Greece is not good for Turkey (and Cyprus is as much Greece's fault as it is Turkey's) and I am sure part of the problem is the historical hatred of Turkey (what was once the Ottoman Empire) by the rest of the Balkans, and to some extent Europe. True, their political instablility has been frightening, but what country in Europe hasn't had some political instablilty in the past 50 years or so? (ok, Switzerland, but they don't count... they're neutral :)

Also, I am sure that the same restrictions placed on Bulgaria and Romania regarding economic issues (reviewed every 6 months) and employment in other parts of the Union (something the UK pushed through), plus they would not benefit from a common currency until they become a full economic member. And Turkey has been contributing to the defense of Europe as a member of NATO... it's only the fair thing to do to allow acession talks.

Good. I support any movement that erodes the petty sovereignty of separate states.

Good. I support any movement that erodes the petty sovereignty of separate states.

Actually, I am as much for the rights of self-determination of nation-states as I am for Union, but one cannot deny the positives of the EU, a Union that has learned from the mistakes of the other Union (and we had to kill each other for 4 years to try and make it work). Ideally, and I mean it in the most idealistic sense for I know the realities of Euro-American relations, I would be for a Pan-Atlantic Union or accord that integrated the US, Canada and Mexico, and perhaps the Caribbean. Pipe dream, yes... but it would be something if we could put aside all differences and work together... it would effectively be an economic version of NATO I would suppose. Again, hardly realistic, but something for the future to consider.

Actually, I am as much for the rights of self-determination of nation-states as I am for Union, but one cannot deny the positives of the EU,

And one cannot deny its negatives, which far outweigh the positives.

And one cannot deny its negatives, which far outweigh the positives.

Oh it has negatives, that's for sure, but for some (like my country and a few others) it has done nothing but good. So we will always look at it in a positive light.

I think there's an old Genoese saying like, "It's better to have an Emperor far away; than next door".

And one cannot deny its negatives, which far outweigh the positives.
What are the negatives that outweigh unity, free trade and assured peace?

The little brotherlings of Romenia and Bulgaria have finally joined the EU! (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/31/bulgaria.romania.ap/index.html)

May their presence enrich us all: More trade, more wealth, more strenght, more peace.

EU is teh shit!America FTW!

EU is teh shit!America FTW!

Doesn't that mean:

EU is great. America is great.

:confused:

What are the negatives that outweigh unity, free trade and assured peace?

Undemocratic institutions, outward protectionism (including internal subsidies to failing businesses) and wide-spread corruption.

Oh it has negatives, that's for sure, but for some (like my country and a few others) it has done nothing but good. So we will always look at it in a positive light.

Ireland, no? Well, all that money you mooched off the EU teat certainly did you well, and to be frank, it isn't like you had anywhere but up to go...

Undemocratic institutions, outward protectionism and wide-spread corruption.
Undemocratic? You guys got to vote on your own constitution. I've no idea how the thing works but I assume that the EU people are appointed by elected officials. That's democratic. Of course, that might not be the case at all, but it can't be that bad.

Any nation has to be outwardly protectionist because every other nation is. The only way free trade will ever come about is through unions like these.

What kind of corruption and how bad? I can’t think of any that could outweigh the good of such a Union.

Ireland, no? Well, all that money you mooched off the EU teat certainly did you well, and to be frank, it isn't like you had anywhere but up to go...

So you can see why we like it :D

Anyway, we're now a net contributor to the EU since about 2000, so we're putting back into the kitty what we took out.

As anyone who knows me knows, I have no problem with people from other countries - and I watched a film with someone from the racist UKIP Party on it (or part of a film anyway) on a visit to Romania, and I was basically expecting it to be unjustified negative comments towards Romanians. It was - partially. But then the UKIP dude actually came up with some interesting stuff - for example, 2 weeks from joining the EU, a market selling meat didn't know about the changes in legislation that were to come into force (the market was very unhygienic), Romania's children are still being left uncared for, etc etc etc.

It seems to me taht it was a VERY bad decision to let Romania join. Not sure about Bulgaria.

Indeed. I felt that way about most of the eastern European nations entering the EU. Are they really compatible with western values of equality and freedom. One day maybe, but right now they are still a bit backwards when it comes to social matters.
What? Eastern Europe is generally similar enough to Western Europe.

Don't be so hard on yourself.
:cool:

Good. I support any movement that erodes the petty sovereignty of separate states.
That sounds like imperialism to me. Peoples have the right to self-determination.

And one cannot deny its negatives, which far outweigh the positives.
I disagree. The last sixty years in western Europe show that the EU, despite its flaws, has generally been a force for good.

I would be for a Pan-Atlantic Union or accord that integrated the US, Canada and Mexico, and perhaps the Caribbean. Pipe dream, yes
Washington's dream, surely. A union like that would be little more than a very large extension of the American Empire.

Why would Turkey be admitted to the European Union?
Turkey, and the Ottoman Empire before it, has been considered a European power for centuries.

What do you know, true-blue American anyway?

So you can see why we like it :D

If only all of us had had such charity to pull us up to the status of a developed nation, but alas, some of us had to work for it ourselves.

Anyway, we're now a net contributor to the EU since about 2000, so we're putting back into the kitty what we took out.

Isn't that cute. We've been so ever since we joined.

If only all of us had had such charity to pull us up to the status of a developed nation, but alas, some of us had to work for it ourselves.
Good that others do not have to then.
That sounds like imperialism to me. Peoples have the right to self-determination.
Even if that means that those devided peoples will fight?

If only all of us had had such charity to pull us up to the status of a developed nation, but alas, some of us had to work for it ourselves.
Some of us were colonised, had to fight a nasty war for freedom and then be involved in a ecomonic war with her neighbour (and the one of the world's powerhouses), all during the global depression in the 20's and 30's.

Then again, some of us were luckier than others. ;)



Isn't that cute. We've been so ever since we joined.
Helps doesn't it. Shame that famous Scandinavian sense of helping those who can't help themselves at the moment, doesn't extend beyond an imaginary line on a map.

Undemocratic? You guys got to vote on your own constitution.

No, "we" didn't. Some of us did, others did not. Others that did, for instance Ireland and the Nice treaty, got ignored and had do over and were schedled to do over and over and over until they voted "correctly."

I've no idea how the thing works but I assume that the EU people are appointed by elected officials. That's democratic. Of course, that might not be the case at all, but it can't be that bad.

Exactly - you've no idea how the thing works. The most powerful institutions in the EU, the ones that make decision that affects us? They're not democratically elected. Nor are they transparent.

Any nation has to be outwardly protectionist because every other nation is. The only way free trade will ever come about is through unions like these.

Ah, so protectionism = free trade? Wow, you're on your way to spouting bullshit almost as well as an EU bureaucrat.

What kind of corruption and how bad? I can’t think of any that could outweigh the good of such a Union.

Check into the Santer commission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_the_Santer_Commission), for one. The EU is notoriously corrupt and stricken with nepotism.

Some of us were colonised, had to fight a nasty war for freedom and then be involved in a ecomonic war with her neighbour (and the one of the world's powerhouses), all during the global depression.

Then again, some of us were luckier than others. ;)

You're breaking my heart, honey.

Helps doesn't it. Shame that famous Scandinavian sense of helping those who can't help themselves at the moment, doesn't extend beyond an imaginary line on a map.

Why who'd ever find anything wrong with sending our money to a foreign country not as aid in a crisis, but as a way to give them an unfair advantage over all the other poor countries and artificially construct their economy for them based on protectionism.

No, "we" didn't. Some of us did, others did not. Others that did, for instance Ireland and the Nice treaty, got ignored and had do over and were do over until they voted "correctly."
Well, that isn't good.
Exactly - you've no idea how the thing works. The most powerful institutions in the EU, the ones that make decision that affects us? They're not democratically elected. Nor are they transparent.
Democracy isn't the most important thing in the world. Freedom is, and nothing breeds freedom like peace and prosperity.
Ah, so protectionism = free trade? Wow, you're on your way to spouting bullshit almost as well as an EU bureaucrat.
Would you really have the EU openly compete with such protectionist markets as the US and China? The only way any free trade is ever going to happen is through mutual agreements, agreements that neither the US nor China would ever agree or adhere to. You have to be pragmatic about these things.
Check into the Santer commission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resignation_of_the_Santer_Commission), for one. The EU is notoriously corrupt and stricken with nepotism.
I'm sure it will get cleaned up in time. As far as I can tell, it serves the greater good.

You're breaking my heart, honey.

Sorry, didn't mean to bring a tear to your eye. More of a thank you to France, Britain and Germany for helping a small country come out of the doldrums and become a modern economic miracle. If Sweden was around to help, I would have thanked them too.

Now, we're helping those who need it. That aspect of the EU works perfectly.


Why who'd ever find anything wrong with sending our money to a foreign country not as aid in a crisis, but as a way to give them an unfair advantage over all the other poor countries and artificially construct their economy for them based on protectionism.
I dunno. Certainly not countries who like to stake out claims in emerging markets perhaps?
Its a win win for those being helped, and those helping.

Well, that isn't good.

That basically summarises the entire EU.

Democracy isn't the most important thing in the world. Freedom is, and nothing breeds freedom like peace and prosperity.

There's more of the EU styled BS. They'd surely love you...

You cannot have freedom without democracy. What you can have though is someone nepotistically appointed in Brussels telling you what to do without any democratic mandate or any recourse for you to challenge that undemocratic authority.

Would you really have the EU openly compete with such protectionist markets as the US and China?

I'd settle for it to compete freely with third world nations, which are the ones who cannot afford to subsidise their farmers and workers like the EU and US do. But, no, the EU'd rather see them unable to compete and stuck in perpetual poverty than to tell a French farmer or Irish moocher that the gravy train has come to a halt.

The only way any free trade is ever going to happen is through mutual agreements, agreements that the neither the US nor China would ever agree or adhere to. You have to be pragmatic about these things.

So there is indeed nothing "free trade" about the EU at all. Look at what the other older EU countries did to the new ones - how quick they were to close their labour markets for them.

I'm sure it will get cleaned up in time. As far as I can tell, it serves the greater good.

Actually, the EU resists any move towards accountability and transparency, and this problem has been ongoing for its entire existence with no end in sight. As far as I can tell, you haven't a clue about the EU and that shows in your arguments.

Sorry, didn't mean to bring a tear to your eye. More of a thank you to France, Britain and Germany for helping a small country come out of the doldrums and become a modern economic miracle. If Sweden was around to help, I would have thanked them too.

Well, you got only five years out of us. Thank heavens for that, or maybe we'd be in the same sorry fiscal state as France and Germany are in.

Now, we're helping those who need it. That aspect of the EU works perfectly.

Yes, which lagger or former lagger out there wouldn't love country-based welfare?

I dunno. Certainly not countries who like to stake out claims in emerging markets perhaps?
Its a win win for those being helped, and those helping.

Win-win for all! Except of course those for whom it is not a win-win, but just simply an unfair loss.

You cannot have freedom without democracy.
Sure you can. It just seems that way because all the affluent countries happen to be democratic, which has more to do with being in the West than anything else.
Wealth and peace breed freedom.
What you can have though is someone nepotistically appointed in Brussels telling you what to do without any democratic mandate or any recourse for you to challenge that undemocratic authority.
What exactly are they "telling" you to do?
I'd settle for it to compete freely with third world nations, which are the ones who cannot afford to subsidise their farmers and workers like the EU and US do.
That isn't going to happen.
But, no, the EU'd rather see them unable to compete and stuck in perpetual poverty than to tell a French farmer or Irish moocher that the gravy train has come to a halt.
Why can't they take care of both?
Actually, the EU resists any move towards accountability and transparency, and this problem has been ongoing for its entire existence with no end in sight. As far as I can tell, you haven't a clue about the EU and that shows in your arguments.
Still, I think unity, even corrupt unity, is better than no unity at all.

Well, you got only five years out of us. Thank heavens for that, or maybe we'd be in the same sorry fiscal state as France and Germany are in.
I don't really think you can blame the EU for the slightly flagging economies of those two. That's down to more internal decisions.

And to be fair to Sweden, we got fuck all from you. It was during the 1980's and early 1990's that the aid for infrastructure kicked in. By the mid-late 90's the country was flying, with EU money coming in almost level to how much was being given back. It was 2000 ish when the country became a contributer proper. Not bad for a place that had 50,000 emigrating every year in the early 1980's.


Yes, which lagger or former lagger out there wouldn't love country-based welfare?

Slovenia has already been touted as the next economic miracle, thanks to successful ecomonic changes from joining the EU.

If you don't like that type of governance, maybe you should move somewhere else? That States maybe.


Win-win for all! Except of course those for whom it is not a win-win, but just simply an unfair loss.
Such as?

Bar your lil lonesome self of course. ;)

Edit: Irish moocher that the gravy train has come to a halt.

That's hilarious! http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif Come on, you know more about the history of Irish people working abroad. 'Moocher' is the antithesis of it. Silly Fass, why do make yourself seem so ignorant? We know you're not.

Still, I think unity, even corrupt unity, is better than no unity at all.

Well, unity isn't an end in itself, but I'd rather have today's EU, with all the apparent flaws, than the Europe of 1914 or 1939.

I for one welcome Bulgaria and Romania in the Club. These two countries deserve a chance. It will benefit everybody, in the long run.

Well, unity isn't an end in itself, but I'd rather have today's EU, with all the apparent flaws, than the Europe of 1914 or 1939.
Actually, I do see unity as a mean in and of itself. Peaceful unity, though.

Actually, I do see unity as a mean in and of itself. Peaceful unity, though.

Ok with me.

I for one profit from the EU and free right to abode: Moved from Germany to the UK in 2004, found work straight away, and all with a minimum of bureaucratic hassle. Btw, tax credits rule. :D

Actually, the EU resists any move towards accountability and transparency, and this problem has been ongoing for its entire existence with no end in sight. As far as I can tell, you haven't a clue about the EU and that shows in your arguments.

I, presume, then that's one of the reasons Sweden is not a member? (and perhaps why the UK kept the pound and the Danes the krona?)

:cool:
That sounds like imperialism to me. Peoples have the right to self-determination.

I disagree. The last sixty years in western Europe show that the EU, despite its flaws, has generally been a force for good.

Washington's dream, surely. A union like that would be little more than a very large extension of the American Empire.



First off, self determination is fantastic, but if the people wish to join a European Union or a United States or even a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, then fine. If they don't let them go their own way. Easy. But don't call all Unions Imperialism because your vision is marred by British Imperialism in your country. You cry 'Imperialism', other nations say 'Thank God I don't have to live in filth and make 200 bucks a month the rest of my life'. We all can't nor want to live in your fantasy world.

Secondly, try 50 years of the ECC/EU. Those 10 years before that had more to do with the Marshall Plan (and virtually every historian will tell you the evil American Marshall Plan was a good thing... it allowed you to form the EEC. That being said, I wish we hadn't helped Europe recover, then I wouldn't have to listen to such pronouncements)

Lastly, my own Imperial ambitions have nothing to do with Washington. They would laugh at me for suggesting an idea, as would most Americans, since they can't see long term the benefits of a commercial union with the two most powerful hegemons in the world. In the end, you can't fight Imperialism... it already is. Everytime you have a puff or drink a Coke or complain about Britney naked, you sell a piece of yourself to American Imperialism. It is not my intention to come across as harsh, especially to the more reasonable people in this forum, but you take the cake. I would rather we live peacefully in a harmonious union, solving the world's ills, for we have some sincere evil in this world (and of course, all American created :rolleyes: But the world we live in is one of the politicians making, not just in the US, but in the EU, in the courageous countries that said, no... we'll do it our way, and those that fight to be a part of something better. Suffice to say my vison and your vision are impractical, but at least mine is not borne of a terminal hatred of the modern world.

I don't really think you can blame the EU for the slightly flagging economies of those two. That's down to more internal decisions.

One can surely blame the EU, and the EMU. After all, it is quite ironic to have seen French and German workers' tax money go to subsidise the establishing of companies in Ireland which then moved those jobs to it. And you speak to me about solidarity?

And to be fair to Sweden, we got fuck all from you. It was during the 1980's and early 1990's that the aid for infrastructure kicked in. By the mid-late 90's the country was flying, with EU money coming in almost level to how much was being given back. It was 2000 ish when the country became a contributer proper. Not bad for a place that had 50,000 emigrating every year in the early 1980's.

http://www.junepress.com/PDF/Vol%2010%20No%2020%20and%2021%20-%20Data%20Sheet%20No%2010.pdf

What's that? The Ireland still a net recipient in 2003? But how does that go with your claims that you became a net recipient by 2000? It simply doesn't, 'cause you pulled it out of your ass.

http://www.finfacts.ie/comment/irelandeunetreceiptsbenefits.htm

"we are still receiving large transfers from the European Union. Other European taxpayers are still funding us, with the largest shares paid by the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden."

http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2841

"From Ireland's perspective, the overall result was excellent. We expect that over the seven years covered by the Perspectives, our receipts from the EU will amount to 214 billion while our payments will be 213 billion, leaving us with a net benefit of 21billion. We anticipate that we will become a net contributor to the EU budget near the end of the seven-year period."

You may want to recheck your facts. Glad I did. So, in fact you aren't expected to become a net contributor until this year, and Sweden is indeed one of the countries that has been carrying your asses. So much for "fuck all" ...

Slovenia has already been touted as the next economic miracle, thanks to successful ecomonic changes from joining the EU.

Again, don't we all wish we could get free money that we can use to out-compete those we got the money from?

If you don't like that type of governance, maybe you should move somewhere else? That States maybe.

Or, you know, I can lobby for Sweden to leave the EU.

Such as?

Bar your lil lonesome self of course. ;)

I guess you former third worlders don't have much solidarity for the other third worlders, either. "Fuck the farmers in Africa - we'll just use EU money to prop up European inefficiency."

Edit:

That's hilarious! http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif Come on, you know more about the history of Irish people working abroad. 'Moocher' is the antithesis of it. Silly Fass, why do make yourself seem so ignorant? We know you're not.

Oh, the irony, seeing your claims about Irish net contributions as the bull that they are. Does that crow taste good? If not, you might want to fill up on some potatoes.

mmm... potatoes.

What's that? The Ireland still a net recipient in 2003? But how does that go with your claims that you became a net recipient by 2000? It simply doesn't, 'cause you pulled it out of your ass.


You may want to recheck your facts. Glad I did. So, in fact you aren't expected to become a net contributor until this year, and Sweden is indeed one of the countries that has been carrying your asses. So much for "fuck all" ...
Well, I didn't 'pull it out of my ass'. I did however base it on a link Neu Leonstein posted a fair, fair while back. I seemingly misread it, or glanced at the wrong line. I'm a big boy. I was wrong and I can admit it. Thanks for providing the figures by the way.



Again, don't we all wish we could get free money that we can use to out-compete those we got the money from?
Ok, so now the money is going back. The essence of give and then give back is still at the core of the Union. Regardless that my figures/timeline were incorrect - that at very least is still the premise of the EU and that's what you have the problem with.



Or, you know, I can lobby for Sweden to leave the EU.
You do that.


I guess you former third worlders don't have much solidarity for the other third worlders, either. "Fuck the farmers in Africa - we'll just use EU money to prop up European inefficiency."
Well bar from the 'third world' jibe (showing maturity there) it could be seen as "We'll just use EU money to make European states more competitive on the world market"


Oh, the irony, seeing your claims about Irish net contributions as the bull that they are.
Bull? No. That would imply I was maliciously misleading you. Wrong? Incorrect? False? Yes. And just for history's sake - I stand by my 'moocher' comment. I'm not an economist, I have however studied emigration and immigration in my and other countries for a few years.

Does that crow taste good?
Crowing? No. I simply fell for your (now legendary) barbs that got my blood up. I was stupid enough to take the bait and I paid for it. And for that you have my apologies.

If not, you might want to fill up on some potatoes.
Ah, you show your maturity once more. What, no alcohol or fighting jibes? Shame, you were on a roll.

meh, EU is a reactionary tool.

Well, I didn't 'pull it out of my ass'. I did however base it on a link Neu Leonstein posted a fair, fair while back. I seemingly misread it, or glanced at the wrong line. I'm a big boy. I was wrong and I can admit it. Thanks for providing the figures by the way.

So, you did indeed pull it out of your ass, and while you will refer to the excrement as what it is, you'll put up a show to still deny whence it came.

Ok, so now the money is going back. The essence of give and then give back is still at the core of the Union. Regardless that my figures/timeline were incorrect -

Which were all you had.

that at very least is still the premise of the EU and that's what you have the problem with.

I have a problem with the EU not being beneficial for my country, and screwing over so many others.

You do that.

Yes, I do.

Well bar from the 'third world' jibe (showing maturity there)

No, showing verisimilitude, something which one provenly cannot accuse your statements of.

it could be seen as "We'll just use EU money to make European states more competitive on the world market"

More "competitive" with unfair subsidies which will only serve not to hurt only them but also us in the long run.

Bull? No. That would imply I was maliciously misleading you. Wrong? Incorrect? False? Yes. And just for history's sake - I stand by my 'moocher' comment. I'm not an economist, I have however studied emigration and immigration in my and other countries for a few years.

No shit. And if one should give equal credence to your "studies" of this "emigration and immigration" as one should to your studies of EU contributions, well, one won't have to part with much of it, now will one?

Crowing? No. I simply fell for your (now legendary) barbs that got my blood up. I was stupid enough to take the bait and I paid for it. And for that you have my apologies.

I guess the crow is quite as foul as they say. :)

Ah, you show your maturity once more. What, no alcohol or fighting jibes? Shame, you were on a roll.

Oh, you should only know how many fire crotch innuendos I had in store.

So, you did indeed pull it out of your ass, and while you will refer to the excrement as what it is, you'll put up a show to still deny whence it came.
I'm only denying that I pulled it out of thin air. I was simply wrong. Unlike alot of other people on here, I can freely admit that when shown. Fa-la-la-la-la Fass is right, and I am wrong Fa-la-la-la-laaa-la-la-la-la


Which were all you had.
Yeah, I know. *slaps wrist* Bold Mongoose. Bold!


I have a problem with the EU not being beneficial for my country, and screwing over so many others.
Seemingly millions upon millions of people disagree with you. They voted their governments (most did - I know there were exceptions) in, who took the decision to enter. Seemingly these hundreds of millions see the benefit in the long term. And I agree that there are serious issues like you earlier raised (personally, I find the CAP the biggest waste of all).

You yourself said earlier "You're breaking my heart, honey" about the former harshness of European countries - it's that same sentiment that people say about farmers in Africa and why we don't help them more.


No, showing verisimilitude, something which one provenly cannot accuse your statements of.
As you (obviously) know, verisimilitude refers to something that has the appearance of being true - clearly not my points - but Ireland could not be considered a third world country, since... well, the 1920's at the very latest. That comes with the history of the country and colonisation. Not everyone was so lucky to have their own Kingdom. ;) Not trying to gain sympathy - that's just a product of our colonisation that it took decades to get over. Thanks to European money, we did. Now we're in a position to help others. That's why I have a love for the EU. We were given a chance.


More "competitive" with unfair subsidies which will only serve not to hurt only them but also us in the long run.
On agriculture I couldn't agree more. Business and trade wise... meh.



No shit. And if one should give equal credence to your "studies" of this "emigration and immigration" as one should to your studies of EU contributions, well, one won't have to part with much of it, now will one?
Well, I won't have to drop my pantaloons for that one.



I guess the crow is quite as foul as they say. :)
I reiterate: Unlike alot of other people on here, I can freely admit when I'm wrong.


Oh, you should only know how many fire crotch innuendos I had in store.
Firecrotch?

*goes to get hose*

I'm only denying that I pulled it out of thin air. I was simply wrong. Unlike alot of other people on here, I can freely admit that when shown. Fa-la-la-la-la Fass is right, and I am wrong Fa-la-la-la-laaa-la-la-la-la

You had no choice but to admit wrongdoing since it was easy to prove you wrong. And seeng as you had managed to have a time line and specific claims, that did not exist in reality at all, I'd call that pulling something out of thin air.

Yeah, I know. *slaps wrist* Bold Mongoose. Bold!

It'll learn you.

Seemingly millions upon millions of people disagree with you.

How lucky for me that the only millions that matter - other Swedes - tend to agree with me in that the EU was a mistake.

They voted their governments (most did - I know there were exceptions) in, who took the decision to enter. Seemingly these hundreds of millions see the benefit in the long term. And I agree that there are serious issues like you earlier raised (personally, I find the CAP the biggest waste of all).

You yourself said earlier "You're breaking my heart, honey" about the former harshness of European countries - it's that same sentiment that people say about farmers in Africa and why we don't help them more.

The difference being that the people in Africa are deserving, and that there is a difference between helping out of a crisis and carrying their asses even after this "economic miracle" (yeah, right - if strangers gave me free money I'd be able to pull off a "miracle", too) has occurred. The teat seems to have given some very sweet milk, since weaning has proved so prolonged... but then again, I wouldn't know, since no foreigners were kind enough to give me €350 for nothing. (http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10007375.shtml)

As you (obviously) know, verisimilitude refers to something that has the appearance of being true - clearly not my points - but Ireland could not be considered a third world country, since... well, the 1920's at the very latest. That comes with the history of the country and colonisation.

Puh-lease. Ireland was being industrialised from the 20s into the 60s. "Third world" might not apply geographically, but "undeveloped" certainly does. Hope that's more PC for you.

Not everyone was so lucky to have their own Kingdom. ;)

Or have people willing to work themselves into prosperity without free money...

Not trying to gain sympathy - that's just a product of our colonisation that it took decades to get over. Thanks to European money, we did. Now we're in a position to help others. That's why I have a love for the EU. We were given a chance.

Thank your lucky sugar daddies.

On agriculture I couldn't agree more. Business and trade wise... meh.

Just you wait.

Well, I won't have to drop my pantaloons for that one.

Please, do. Pantaloons are abomination.

I reiterate: Unlike alot of other people on here, I can freely admit when I'm wrong.

All the while muttering how mean that old Fass was for tricking you into saying untrue things and how dastardly he was to catch you in it. Nice "free" admission.

Firecrotch?

*goes to get hose*

It puts the lotion on its skin...

The difference being that the people in Africa are deserving, and that there is a difference between helping out of a crisis and carrying their asses even after this "economic miracle" (yeah, right - if strangers gave me free money I'd be able to pull off a "miracle", too) has occurred.
Not quite. Ireland, Greece and Portugal all got the same amount (roughly). Only one has managed to put it to good use.

The teat seems to have given some very sweet milk, since weaning has proved so prolonged... but then again, I wouldn't know, since no foreigners were kind enough to give me €350 for nothing. (http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10007375.shtml)
If it's that fucking CAP again....
I have no love for farmers in the EU- whatsoever. And I'm not happy in still receiving that amount. It's high time we started giving back. The only thing I can say is that the strategy was implemented 7 years ago when things may have not been as good. Regardless, from my experience here, we should have been giving back a lot, lot earlier. Hence my annoyance at being caught out....


Puh-lease. Ireland was being industrialised from the 20s into the 60s. "Third world" might not apply geographically, but "undeveloped" certainly does. Hope that's more PC for you.
Pfft. Not a chance. Ecomonic war with UK lasted until the Second World War. The country was already economically in the backwaters by the time that started. Only in the 50's did anything really happen -okish 60's, poor 70's, abysmal 80's. Underdeveloped yes, but I was talking third world = Sudan here!


Or have people willing to work themselves into prosperity without free money...
Like I said - history. When you've only been running your own affairs since the 20's and you just happen to start in the middle of the worlds greatest global depression - it's hard to get started!

You had no choice but to admit wrongdoing since it was easy to prove you wrong. And seeng as you had managed to have a time line and specific claims, that did not exist in reality at all, I'd call that pulling something out of thin air.


It'll learn you.


Thank your lucky sugar daddies.


Just you wait.


Please, do. Pantaloons are abomination.


All the while muttering how mean that old Fass was for tricking you into saying untrue things and how dastardly he was to catch you in it. Nice "free" admission.


It puts the lotion on its skin...

ALRIGHT FASS! I'm full of godamn humble pie. I'm trying to keep some semblance of dignity here. Piss off. :D :D

ALRIGHT FASS! I'm full of godamn humble pie. I'm trying to keep some semblance of dignity here. Piss off. :D :D

But it's so fun. :)

You're right, though. Shouldn't rub it in more than enough. That wouldn't be dignified of me.