[Kaiserschmarrn]

I'd like to see a resolution of the eurozone crisis, which, in my opinion, would involve the member states facing up to the realities of a currency union: Acknowledgement of the loss of sovereignty that would be required and the (potentially quite large) money transfers. Above all, clear communication to the citizens on these issues and an option to consent or refuse.

I realise that this is unrealistic, though.

[SE23]

Not all Britons are anti-EU.

Some are pro-EU.
Some who oppose the EU are not opposing it altogether, but fear a federal Europe and loss of sovereignty.
Others wish to just have a free trade area.
And some want to pull out all together

You seem to fail to appreciate this and lump everyone into the fourth group. I think you do this because you wish to create a bogey-man type character. It's easier to blame us than to face up to EU problems.

You also seem to ignore the fact not everyone in Europe is pro-EU. In fact many countries have a substantial cross-section of their populace who want out of the EU. In fact according to some surveys, the EU has more support in the UK than the Czech Republic! Not to mention Spain or Greece.

Finally, do you honestly think most Brits give a shit what you or the EU thinks? We don't.

Good point, the only way they can deal with any form of criticism, is by lumping them all together into one enemy. "You have concerns about creating a federation of Europe, Bam ! you are a xenophobic fascist nationalist blah blah". It's pathetic as it comes down to name calling and playing the whole "stupid is cool" logic which really doesn't make sense, with a bit of associative fallacy thrown into the mix. The reason why actual far right organisations are gaining momentum in Europe is because the morons in government and media are failing to recognise failures in the way they are doing things, and trying to bash even sensible opposition, this tempering turns moderate opinions, such as being against a European Federation but being for free trade, into something that becomes extreme.
Besides being a nationalist in contemporary politics isn't the same as being a nationalist in say 1930's or even Cold War era, as Globalisation and supranational organisations such as the European Union, have actually posed genuine threats on the sovereignty of nation states, it is not an irrational fear nor a populist one which is made out to be by many intellectuals. Nationalism has become a dirty word by so called left wingers, even though many left wing movements have championed nationalism as being their ideology. Again simple Left wing vs Right wing politics works like a paradigm, hence why student politics is so full of shit.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

To be fair, the sound-bites that come out of the UK make it easy to get a distorted impression of British sentiment towards the EU. On the other hand, the pro-EU rhetoric on the continent probably seems quite dominant from the UK's perspective. Overall though, my impression is that Britain has maintained comparatively high EU-skepticism throughout its membership (and there is nothing wrong with that), while other countries' enthusiasm may have varied over time, but hasn't been as low continuously.

[Decky]

To be fair, the sound-bites that come out of the UK make it easy to get a distorted impression of British sentiment towards the EU.

It's not distorted, everyone but the politicians hate it. They promise referendums and then when they get in they don't hold them (as they know everyone would tell Europe where to go).

[marjy]

Norway's foreign minister has urged the UK to assess the advantages of staying in the European Union, rather than consider leaving.

So let me get this straight.

The foreign minister of a country that is not in the EU is offering advice to a country that is in the EU?

As far as one can see, there is no imminent chance of Norway joining the EU - according to the EU they are neither an acceding country nor a candidate country.

How very interesting.

Do you happen to know if he had any words of advice for Greece?

[marjy]

To be fair, the sound-bites that come out of the UK make it easy to get a distorted impression of British sentiment towards the EU.

I think you are right. The media in the UK is probably more voluble than the people and may not entirely reflect true opinion.

Conversely, I get the impression there is more dissatisfaction, or at least disquiet, about the EU among the German people than there is in the German media.

Perhaps Brits have a healthier disregard for their politicians and the media than some Europeans?

Don't forget, even Churchill lost the election immediately after the war.

It may be simply politic for European Federalists to point to a convenient scapegoat for the lack of progress of the European 'project'. Compared to European farmers (and notably French farmers) for instance, British farmers are complete pussy cats.

It is getting more difficult, in an increasingly global world, to take the once noble aspirations of the EU seriously. I can't see that China, which is the biggest exporter of goods to the EU, has been impeded by non-membership of the EU. Neither has McDonalds, Starbucks or GAP.

I think most people would now concede that the EU represents a mid twentieth century protectionist trading bloc that is now sadly ill suited to the 21st century and the global economy.

[Corporatios]

I was a fan of EU 15 but now I don't care much. I have no disrespect for the new members. It is just that EU back then was more composite and there were truely common goals in many issues. Now it is a total mess. Now it seems that EU policies come from some global elite and most countries are actively trying to find ways not to implement them. I know many people will say that this was the case before, but it wasn't, not in that extent at least.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

I think you are right. The media in the UK is probably more voluble than the people and may not entirely reflect true opinion.

Conversely, I get the impression there is more dissatisfaction, or at least disquiet, about the EU among the German people than there is in the German media.

Perhaps Brits have a healthier disregard for their politicians and the media than some Europeans?

Yes, it is my impression that the Brits are more skeptical and distrustful of their politicians, maybe the state in general. They also distrust European experiments I think, even if they are part of it (which is a bit ironic).

It may be simply politic for European Federalists to point to a convenient scapegoat for the lack of progress of the European 'project'. Compared to European farmers (and notably French farmers) for instance, British farmers are complete pussy cats.

It is getting more difficult, in an increasingly global world, to take the once noble aspirations of the EU seriously. I can't see that China, which is the biggest exporter of goods to the EU, has been impeded by non-membership of the EU. Neither has McDonalds, Starbucks or GAP.

I think most people would now concede that the EU represents a mid twentieth century protectionist trading bloc that is now sadly ill suited to the 21st century and the global economy.

I wouldn't go as far. Regarding protectionism with respect to the rest of the world, leaving the food security policy (which includes the CAP) aside, the EU is not all that bad. As far as I know, tariffs are comparatively low and it is constantly looking out for free trade agreements. Since it represents a rather large economic block it has a more powerful position vis-a-vis other large economies than any individual European country could have. When you look at protectionism inside Europe, the EU is actually a liberalising force which strikes me as being quite in line with the UK's economic position. Granted, there are many countries which try to and often succeed in circumventing EU rules, but we can't really blame the EU for these violations. As a side note, the UK actually has a good record regarding compliance with EU regulations compared with the rest of EU members, which seems rather counter-intuitive given its frequent and at times noisy criticism.

Overall, I can't find much to criticise about the EU as a trading block up to and including the customs union. Starting with the Single Market, the EU's competences are, in theory, only limited by what we consider to be an area of economics which, it seems to me, can be almost everything or nothing, depending on how you look at it. So everything that goes beyond the customs union can (and probably should be) up for debate and there are probably as many opinions as there are people in the EU. Personally, what I'd like to see most is an open debate about where this is supposed to lead. While ever closer integration is clearly a central guiding principle of the EU, most people on the continent are, in my experience, either ignorant or somewhat in denial about it. The EU has existed for decades and people, for the most part, have got used to it. I think Europeans are ready for a proper discourse on whether they actually want a 'superstate', and if so, how it should be achieved.

[marjy]

As a side note, the UK actually has a good record regarding compliance with EU regulations compared with the rest of EU members, which seems rather counter-intuitive given its frequent and at times noisy criticism.

Well Brits did invent the rules for most modern sports. I think it's to do with the British sense of 'fair play'. If there are rules they like to see people sticking to them. This is probably the biggest problem the UK has with the EU - there are rules, which are then conveniently ignored.

Personally, what I'd like to see most is an open debate about where this is supposed to lead. While ever closer integration is clearly a central guiding principle of the EU, most people on the continent are, in my experience, either ignorant or somewhat in denial about it.

Well obviously it's a federal state but such creations are rarely bloodless or achieved without pain. Witness the situation in Greece for example. At some point the democratic deficit in the EU will have to be addressed.

[Ombrageux]

Well obviously it's a federal state but such creations are rarely bloodless or achieved without pain. Witness the situation in Greece for example. At some point the democratic deficit in the EU will have to be addressed.

I'm actually cautiously optimistic economically about most of the eurozone assuming the current plan (EU debt guarantee and ECB loans) continues slowly happening. As I never tire of saying, if borrowing costs of Italy and Greece fall low enough, they automatically have surpluses as they already have primary surpluses. They have done all the austerity-related economic pain they strictly need to do and all further failure is entirely attributable lack of solidarity at eurozone level, causing massive growth-killing market uncertainty (high borrowing costs, business uncertainty in general). At least we can say that EU leaders have (finally) figured out much of the problem, even if implementation is gradual, and the crisis can theoretically be overcome assuming Italy/Greece can simply tolerate an unusually long and deep Depression (and unemployment) due to their membership of the economically inefficient union that is euro.

The only holes in the plan as I see it is are the depth of the Spanish abyss (already 25% unemployment, 0.5 million further layoffs expected, massive primary deficit, to get worse as banks get bailed out by government) and the limits of German solidarity. Spain can only, MAYBE, survive if there is total solidarity with Spain on the part of eurozone: both of the zombie Spanish banking sector (banking union to include legacy debt) and to maintain public spending by reducing borrowing costs (massive lending by ECB). Perhaps the Germans, and the rest of the eurozone, will accept such solidarity if they know that if Spain is devoured by the markets there may be a catastrophic domino effect on the rest of the eurozone. But I am not sure if this aid is either possible or sufficient, it may be, but I am not sure.

As to a federal state something like one is emerging but I am much, much more pessimistic on the prospects for it being democratic even if we assume an economic recovery. The current plan has been and is:
* The elimination of all control by democratic parliaments over monetary policy (now entirely in hands of the independent ECB, whose statutes can only be reformed by unanimity). It is now entirely controlled by unelected central bankers.
* The elimination of all control by democratic parliaments over significant elements of fiscal policy (anti-Keynesian bias embedded into EU law, anything above 3% will be outlawed regardless of circumstances or, at best, have to be approved by EU authorities). It will not be controlled by unelected judges and Commission bureaucrats (and the law will only be reformable by unanimity).
* The massive reinforcement of the power of the ECB, the EU's least democratic institution, in order to create the banking union. This is all a bit mysterious but it boils down to now the ECB, not parliaments, will regulate the financial sector AND it will be effectively responsible for automatic bailing out of the financial sector. Assuming the ECB's record of incompetence continues, the EU taxpayer will automatically be on the hook for Spanish/Irish financial bubbles, with no legal or democratic recourse.

At some point, certainly, this level of democratic deficit will have to be addressed. Regular EU politics, having much lower stakes, has been made pretty democratic (Parliament is co-equal, Council decides by QMV). However, I am quite certain on the eurozone that Germany will ever tolerate potentially having its monetary and fiscal policy determined by foreigners, potentially by a majority of Latins and Greeks. The antidemocratic, antisocial and antieconomic character of the eurozone is going to be a very, very lasting thing.

In any case we will have paid an exorbitant price for EMU. Maybe the crude crypto-federal union created as a result, should it not prove TOO costly in terms of economy and democracy, will be worth it in some sense if it gives Europe a quasi-permanent guarantee of peace and puts us on the path to a democratic unity. But we should be aware of the cost we are paying.

[Xbow]

For me, I am going to learn at least 1 programming language. If I can, my goal is to learn 3 for 2013. Currently I know zero.

Start With C as it puts you 'close to the metal' and explore a bit of what is actually going on and then move to C++ and any time you spend exploring computer architecture is a real bonus.

operating system
kernel (The Bridge)
assembler
firmware
hardware

And always make copious /* comments/* or //comments// in your code that reminds you what any particular block of code you have written is supposed to do otherwise debugging will be a real bitch. And give your variables meaningful self explanatory names for the same reason.

Note:
/*your comment/* used in C
//your comment// used in C++

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/

[Rainbow Crow]

Xbow has entered the European forum, could this be the start of a Pofo world war?

[Xbow]

Xbow has entered the European forum, could this be the start of a Pofo world war?

My first post was helpful I think. I just want to spread the same degree of good will to the European forum as the Europeans spread to the NorthAm forum.

On Topic: I can't imagine why the UK would want to surrender one ounce of its sovereignty for the sake of the EU.

[Decky]

On Topic: I can't imagine why the UK would want to surrender one ounce of its sovereignty for the sake of the EU.

The people don't but the government has been bought ad payed for by business and the makes profit making easier (for the big guys anyway).

[Xbow]

The people don't but the government has been bought ad payed for by business and the makes profit making easier (for the big guys anyway).

Decky, I have never thought of Great Britain as even remotely European. In my mind it has always been unique and British and I would like it to stay that way. The continent is a degenerating house of diseased cards from which the UK via further intercourse can only catch an unmentionable social disease. Most of the Continental Europeans hate the UK almost as much as they hate the USA. I say to hell with them.

But its the same story on this side of the pond. Our government has been bought and paid for by the fat-cats that wan't brown illegal immigration and brown immigration in general as a source of dirt cheap unskilled scutt work labor in conjunction with globalization.

If it was up to me I would have the USA pull out of NATO and evacuate from Western Europe completely and invite the UK and all the English speaking people of the world into a better military and economic alliance while maintaining and pursuing better relationships with Eastern Europe and Russia. The likely Russian axes of advance into central Europe should never be the concern of of the USA or the UK. What about Poland? Have them build a number access routs to the border of Germany for Russian use if they ever need them.

The notion that the EU is anyone's friend but its own is a hallucination. Never has there existed a more pernicious conglomeration of dirty skunks than the continental Europeans.(The Swiss and the Finns are excluded from this group of degenerate skunk apes).

[Baff]

I wouldn't go as far. Regarding protectionism with respect to the rest of the world, leaving the food security policy (which includes the CAP) aside, the EU is not all that bad. As far as I know, tariffs are comparatively low and it is constantly looking out for free trade agreements. Since it represents a rather large economic block it has a more powerful position vis-a-vis other large economies than any individual European country could have.

The UK had to give up all it's other free trade agreements globally, such as it's free trade agreements with New Zealand for example, in order to join the EU.
We would like free trade agreements, not just with EU members but with many other countries too.
Equally there are some countries in the EU that we do not want free trade agreements with at all. Germany for example. Those that can outproduce us in our doemstic industries, such as car manufacturing or beef production, Steel etc.

The problem with being part of a larger block is that our national intrest gets outvoted by the national intrests of other members of the EU.
While we have a "a say" in the protectionism the EU signs us up for, we do not have the ability to make that decision for ourselves. We have a voice, but not the authoirty to make our own decisions.
It's often billed to us as a trade off.
Either we can have free trade in the EU, or we can have free trade with the rest of world. Either, or is the deal the EU currently offers us. or at least that's what we are told.

Or... apparently... we can be like Norway who can have free trade agreements with every nation. EU or non EU alike, as best suits them at any particular moment of their choosing.
Only we aren't Norway so we can't. If we had a control of a critical resource that the EU needs like Norway does, we could, but we don't. What we have on offer is direct competition for their industries, not an abundance of cheap fuel. The deal that is on offer to them is not the same as any deal that will be on offer to us.


I don't honestly think we can get a free trade with the EU if we leave.
It's not in their intrests to be in competition with a country that refuses to cripple it's own economy.
Example, working time directive.
A country like Japan, with no significant natural resources can achieve a higher standard of wealth for it's people by allowing them to work as many hours as they wish.
All countries may achieve a higher standard of wealth if their citisens undertake more labour.
People like me want this. I like to work very long hours to get more money. Under EU rules however this is illegal. I simply cannot legally work the number of hours required to get businesses like I have started in the past, up and running any more.
Why? Because the French and others have decided that nationally they wish to make a compromise. To all work less and raise the price of imported goods so that domestic (lazy) industries can still compete on price. To protect their way of life.

Now this is a perfectly reasonable aspiration and for a country such as France with so many of the natural resources and infrastructures that it needs little from abroad anyway, this makes much sense.
But the UK is not France. It's closer to Japan. We need foreign trade. We need to compete internationally to feed ourselves. Not "want". Need.
And currently we are failing to do so and have been for a very long time. The longer this goes on the greater and greater the need to address this becomes. Urgency increases over time and without intervention will become a crisis. A crisis in which people will starve.
The last time we were starving, the great people of New Zealand sent us food aid. What incentive do they have to do this for us next time, now that we are no longer mutually dependant trade partners?


I predict that if we leave the EU there will be punative repercussions.
The first and easiest being to deny us the only thing we ever wanted from the EU anyway, a free trade agreement.
There is no divorce without bad feeling.

You see Free Trade is the only thing the EU has to offer us that we want from it. It is it's single and only bargaining chip.
If it wants something from us, taxes or reduced competition for it's industries for excample, Free Trade is the only carrot it has. It could try building an army of course, using the stick hand, but then we would just wipe the whole of them out in under an hour.
So either we respond to their carrot, or we are beyond their ability to control.

So the only thing it has to control us with is a free trade agreement. If we don't do as they say, they will take it away from us.



Financially. Should they do so, certain people will gain from this and certain people will lose from this.
Broadly speaking some multi-national companies will move their headquarters to other EU nations because Free trade and more importantly tax exploitation means that they want to headquarter their EU operations in the lowest tax areas in the EU. (Which is part of the reason why many choose Britain).
So we will lose such people. The highly mobile parts of multi-nationals. The headquarters. We won't lose them all, but we will lose some of them.

The winners of course are not the big multi-nationals, they are the private citisens, those who pay tribute to the EU in the form of taxation but make no finacial return from the relationship on an individual level. At least... we would hope these people would be the winners, but frankly I do not expect any tax surplus to ever be returned to the tax payer anyway. So the actual winners are more likely to be the areas of government spending that our EU taxes will be diverted to in it's stead.


Free trade with the EU is not in itself anything we fear losing, however. Once the EU uses protectionism against us, we will reply in kind. As a net importer, we have nothing to fear from this at all. It actually advantages us at this time. We are then also free to make whatever deals with the rest of the world we prefer. And we do the bulk of our international business outside of the EU.
All the rest of the world trades successfully in the EU without being a member of it, so can we.

[marjy]

However, I am quite certain on the eurozone that Germany will ever tolerate potentially having its monetary and fiscal policy determined by foreigners, potentially by a majority of Latins and Greeks. The antidemocratic, antisocial and antieconomic character of the eurozone is going to be a very, very lasting thing.

Thank you for such a detailed and interesting analysis in response to my very brief comment.

I mentioned earlier that British reservations about the EU were based mainly on the sense of fairness and fair play (or lack of) in the EU.

This spirit of fair play also extends to Germany. It is simply unfair that the hard working (and hard saving) German citizen is increasingly being called upon to underwrite the reckless folly of others.

How do you see attitudes in Germany towards the EU developing in the future? What tactics might Germany employ to limit such foreign interference and, more importantly, do you think Germany has the political will to resist such foreign interference?

[Euroman]

Unfair? Fair play?


Why is the question constantly "What can Europe do for the UK?" Why isn't the question that the British ask, "What can the UK do for Europe?"


It's easy to always ask for advantages. It is harder to offer help.

[Ombrageux]

marjy - How has there been lack of "fair play" towards the UK? The UK gets most of what it wants: opt out of Schengen, opt out of the euro, opt out of justice and home affairs, opt out of of the emerging eurozone structures, veto of the banking union, special rebate on the budget. Where has the UK been mistreated exactly?

As to Germany: The question is not at all one of "foreign influence." The Germans clearly far more influential in the EU today than any other country so it would be hard for the EU to feel like "foreign" interference. They, like most Continentals, feel they own the project far more than Brits do.

The issue for Germany will simply be money: How much "German money" will be required to save the eurozone? This is both bailout money/Eurobonds (German money then needed as collateral, but they could get it back) and explicit/implicit transfers (if the helped country (Greece) is forced to default). So far the Germans have gotten away with minimal solidarity. In exchange, they are designing all the new eurozone rules, which will be valid eternally (für ewig) and only modifiable with German agreement (Fiskalpakt, Banking Union), just as they old eurozone rules of Maastricht ("independent" central bank, inflation-targeting is only objective, no debt financing).

So far Germany has been fairly happy with this arrangement: Merkel is overwhelmingly popular and, in fact, has the European policy closest to the German center of gravity. There will be more solidarity required however, particularly in Spain it will be massive, and it's not clear if the Bundesbank or her right-wing FDP allies can accept the scale of aid required.

[Baff]

Unfair? Fair play?


Why is the question constantly "What can Europe do for the UK?" Why isn't the question that the British ask, "What can the UK do for Europe?"

It's easy to always ask for advantages. It is harder to offer help.

What the UK can and does do for Europe is to provide security and money and safeguard your human and property rights. We will also provide aid to you if you are in need.

We will always do this. With or without the EU.

marjy - How has there been lack of "fair play" towards the UK? The UK gets most of what it wants: opt out of Schengen, opt out of the euro, opt out of justice and home affairs, opt out of of the emerging eurozone structures, veto of the banking union, special rebate on the budget. Where has the UK been mistreated exactly?.

The UK doesn't want opt outs. Only opt ins.
We didn't join the EU because we wanted some "opt outs".
We don't want a special rebate either. [facepalm]We didn't join the EU to get an EU tax cut.[/facepalm]
"We could have asked you to pay more tax?" Wow what a favour the EU is doing us by only overtaxing us an unreasonable amount instead of an even more unreasonable amount.

We don't owe it to the EU to do what they say. To pay as much money to them as you would like us to.
Our refusal to do so is not the EU giving us something we wanted. It is us refusing to let you take something that is not on offer and not yours.

Fair is that we rigourously abide by EU rules we sign up to even when they are unfavourable to us and unfair is that no one else does. (Or at leasts that is the public perception).

Ombrageux edit: Don't double post. Treat other users with respect.