European thread

[Ancient Grudge]

how bout this solution the U.K, Denmark and norway form their on union and let the rest of europe crap up their countries. LOL

serioulsy to withdraw from the union would be a gd idea no more hassele from france and germany. Bit like the relationship between blair and bush. whos the puppy in the french/german on ecoz blair is the puppy in the U.K/U.S.A one

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by insurgent


I continue to dispute it...

2. You know what you don't have a part in. You don't have a part in the Franco-German CAP settlement, and that it's not an alliance against you.

3. Yes, we are closer to your opinion than to those of many continental nations. I don't think the Dutch are, they've always been very pro-European, I believe. But yes, we are skeptical as you are. And that's good.
But we don't participate in the debate, we are neutral at the time, we have to be. So I maintain that point, just as the two others.

Fine. If you're happy to be wrong, who am I to interfere?


My problem with your original point was with :

Britain has no part in that and is therefore not at odds with Germany and France over the CAP

Every country should be involved in the decisions over the CAP. It is the single most important issue facing the EU, devours half of the budget, and for its future to be decided by Schroeder and Chirac behind closed doors is disgraceful.

 

[insurgent]

Britain has as much influence on decisions as France and Germany. And as much as Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Portugal, Greece, and Italy. All nations in the EU have equal mandates in the ministerial council. It's a confederate construction and therefore in its nature bureaucratic, unpopular, etc.
In the parliament you have the same number of mandates as Germany, Italy, and France.
You are really as powerful as any of them.

I refer you to my previous posts if you want to know what I think should be done, but it includes subjecting the Union directly to the people by giving the Parliament legislative powers, and take it away from the Ministerial Council.

Also, I'm not sure the Norwegians are doing so smart a thing. They ratify about 80% of the EU directives and regulations (something I believe should be limited very very much), and yet they are not engaged in the makings of them.
They accept the rules, but they have no saying in making them. That's not too smart to me.
I understand they may fear that a lot of money will be taken from them because of their oil, but leaving the OPEC would really solve much of those potential problems.

 

[Ancient Grudge]

The only way to settle rifts in the E.U is for each public to have a vote wether they want to stay in the E.U or not

 

[insurgent]

Originally posted by Pillager
My problem with your original point was with :

Britain has no part in that and is therefore not at odds with Germany and France over the CAP

Every country should be involved in the decisions over the CAP. It is the single most important issue facing the EU, devours half of the budget, and for its future to be decided by Schroeder and Chirac behind closed doors is disgraceful.

Isn't Britain involved in the decision-making of the EU? Britain certainly can be involved, if it isn't then it should begin to involve itself. And I think it does.
That quote of mine was really just a bad formulation of what I meant, because I thought you'd understand. But I meant what I said in my answer to your first remark about it.


I have to go. Really, what I am doing now, is that I am sitting by my pc, it's 11:17 PM, and I am to deliver an assignment tomorrow. I'll have to meet at 8 o'clock, and I'm not nearly finished yet. So, I have to go, as much as I would like to engage in a pointless debate which can only turn bitter as we continue and continue while we are getting more and more tired...

...

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by insurgent
Britain has as much influence on decisions as France and Germany. And as much as Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Portugal, Greece, and Italy.

You really believe that every country in the EU has equal voice? Theroetically, perhaps, but since when has theory counted for anything in practical diplomacy?

France and Germany have decided the future of half the EU budget behind closed doors with no reference to anyone else. If you're happy for 40 billion to be carved up by two men in a supposedly equal status union, fine. I'm not.

 

[Ancient Grudge]

Ofcourse all countires dont have an equal voice at the E.U it just isnt true it should be but it isnt. Why france and Germany 40billion is everyones money so why should they get the say in what happpens to it withdraw now before its to late or stick it out and hope that eventually britain will get something back.

 

[MrPresident]

Ofcourse all countires dont have an equal voice at the E.U it just isnt true it should be but it isnt.

I would prefer it for each person in the EU to have one vote rather than give each nation equal say. I mean what logic says that Luxembourg should have an equal voice with that of Germany?

The only way to settle rifts in the E.U is for each public to have a vote wether they want to stay in the E.U or not

That will never work because you can't just leave the EU. We (Britain) have integrated our market and open our borders to the EU and it is impractical to suggest that all that could be dismantled quickly. Hell it took something like 40 years to get close to a single market, why throw that away now?

how bout this solution the U.K, Denmark and norway form their on union and let the rest of europe crap up their countries.

We tried that already.

Everyone deserves help. But there are more urgent cases eg Africa not a european country such as spain.

So I don't suppose you support giving economic aid to poor areas of Britain, like Cornwall?

I'm aware of that point, I just couldn't be bothered to type any more .

It seems to me that you're saying that political union is a prerequisite for the Euro's success, but that English should be spoken by all before we even consider political union. Well, obviously, it is not spoken by all, so what should we do?

Personally I don't see how you can have political union without at least having a main language (currently I believe there are 8 offical languages in the EU). And I don't see how the Euro can be a true success without some form of political union. I think the ideal solution would be the phasing out of most European languages, or at least requiring all citizens to learn one standard language as well as their own.

Despite the convergance in Europe, there will be a time where different parts of the Eurozone are in recession and expansion

That is true of any single currency area.

labour mobility is an exremely important part in any economic unit.

Yes but if you don't have high labour mobility then it doesn't matter if your economies are convergenced enough (like the core of the EU).

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by MrPresident
Personally I don't see how you can have political union without at least having a main language (currently I believe there are 8 offical languages in the EU). And I don't see how the Euro can be a true success without some form of political union.

Not quite. English and French are the official languages of the EU.
Germany has (understandably) tried to establish German as the third offficial language. However, all non-native English/ French speaker recieve all material interpreted or translated into their native tongue.

Personally, I fiercely oppose any 'über-language'.

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by MrPresident

Personally I don't see how you can have political union without at least having a main language (currently I believe there are 8 offical languages in the EU). And I don't see how the Euro can be a true success without some form of political union. I think the ideal solution would be the phasing out of most European languages, or at least requiring all citizens to learn one standard language as well as their own.


Yes but if you don't have high labour mobility then it doesn't matter if your economies are convergenced enough (like the core of the EU).

1. I'm sorry, I'm confused.

I thought you were a proponent of us joining the Euro , but what you say indicates you are not:

Euro, only with political union --> political union only with one language --> adoption of single language. And that is never going to happen. Therefore, you are must be against our joining the Euro, indeed against the whole project.

2. You seem to be presenting my view as one that says we should join the Euro. I agree that if there is no labour mobility, then it's screwed. And you agree.

 

[MrPresident]

I thought you were a proponent of us joining the Euro

I don't know what I believe sometimes. In principle I support Britain joining the Euro but in practice I could go either way.

adoption of single language. And that is never going to happen.

I think it will. If you had said to people in 1939 that Europe would be ruled by a union of all the countries based onto free trade they would have laughed in your face. To them the only options were a Nazi-controlled Europe or a Europe divided once again by war. Time can do strange things to the impossible. That is why I never say never, except during that sentence.

I agree that if there is no labour mobility, then it's screwed. And you agree.

No there is labour mobility it is just that is very low (especially when compared with America). What I am saying is that you can still have a successful single currency area with low labour mobility if you have high enough economic convergance. It is the same situation as with America but in reverse. They have low economic convergance but have high enough labour mobility to compensate. The problem with all this is it is based upon economics that is anything but accurate. So you can't say we shouldn't join the Euro because of the low labour mobility because we don't really know the true labour mobility value and are only guessing. Understand? If you do you are a better man than me.

English and French are the official languages of the EU.

I thought all EU documents were produced in eight different languages.

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by MrPresident

I don't know what I believe sometimes. In principle I support Britain joining the Euro but in practice I could go either way.

I think it will. If you had said to people in 1939 that Europe would be ruled by a union of all the countries based onto free trade they would have laughed in your face. To them the only options were a Nazi-controlled Europe or a Europe divided once again by war. Time can do strange things to the impossible. That is why I never say never, except during that sentence.

Fine, so you're not sure, but you could envisage voting yes tomorrow if asked.

However, you don't believe that it can work without political union, which, in turn, won't work without a common language. A common language you believe will come about. Seeing as you could vote yes tomorrow, you must be willing to join the Euro and wait for sufficient numbers of people to speak English so that political union can occur, so that the Euro can work.

I don't believe that we will bring about a common language anytime soon, and I certainly would not want to join the Euro whilst we wait for this to happen. It would take years and years and years for people to speak English. Then many more years for political union to occur. And you're willing to join and wait? That strikes me as very foolish.

BTW, go to Paris, hey anywhere in France, and suggest to them that English should be the lingua france of Europe. Good luck.

Originally posted by MrPresident

So you can't say we shouldn't join the Euro because of the low labour mobility because we don't really know the true labour mobility value and are only guessing.

Well, it's a pretty easy thing to guess. It's very, very low.

 

[MrPresident]

Fine, so you're not sure, but you could envisage voting yes tomorrow if asked.

Probably.

However, you don't believe that it can work without political union, which, in turn, won't work without a common language. A common language you believe will come about. Seeing as you could vote yes tomorrow, you must be willing to join the Euro and wait for sufficient numbers of people to speak English so that political union can occur, so that the Euro can work.

I believe it can't work without political union but that is the long run. So by joining the Euro we will be forcing some form of political union to get started and will be forcing the move towards a common language. So the requirements for a successful single currency (in my opinion) will be advanced by us joining the single currency. If that makes senses.

I don't believe that we will bring about a common language anytime soon

Most of Europe already speaks English as a second language. It is not that big a step (political maybe but not in logistic terms) to move onto a common language.

BTW, go to Paris, hey anywhere in France, and suggest to them that English should be the lingua france of Europe.

Go back 20 years and ask the same people if they would want to get rid of the French Franc.

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by MrPresident

I believe it can't work without political union but that is the long run. So by joining the Euro we will be forcing some form of political union to get started and will be forcing the move towards a common language. So the requirements for a successful single currency (in my opinion) will be advanced by us joining the single currency. If that makes senses.

Yes, it makes sense, but I can't agree that it's a sensible policy to follow. The Euro has the potential to be a massive disaster, and joining in the hope of pushing for the unrealistic (in my view) standardisation of language is, to put it bluntly, madness.

Originally posted by MrPresident

Most of Europe already speaks English as a second language. It is not that big a step (political maybe but not in logistic terms) to move onto a common language.

Go back 20 years and ask the same people if they would want to get rid of the French Franc.

1. No they don't. The majority of the educated elite might, but the majority of lower-middle/lower class don't. Anyway, there is a big difference between having some knowledge of English as a second knowledge and being capable enough to use it as an everyday working language thus providing sufficient labour mobility for the Euro to work.

2. Fair point, but there is big difference for the average Frenchman between accepting a communal currency with no nationality, and accepting the hated language des Rosbifs You might know this already, but there is a law in France that requires that French radio stations play a certain percentage (40% I think) of their music output in French. Utterly ridiculous but indicative.

 

[insurgent]

Originally posted by Panda
Personally, I fiercely oppose any 'über-language'.

I don't see why one tongue would be necessary in a federal Europe. We're doing alright lingually now, I think. We just need a language for the central administration - there's no reason to force a language down on the people. The languages are part of the cultural traits of the peoples of Europe, and they should be maintained.

Besides, if you want to use that argument, the correct German term would be an "Übersprache", I believe.
The Germans called themselves the "Herrenvolk" during WWII. "Herr" means lord, so perhaps "Herrensprache" is better to draw a more obvious parallel to the Nazis, right?

 

[MrPresident]

The Euro has the potential to be a massive disaster, and joining in the hope of pushing for the unrealistic (in my view) standardisation of language is, to put it bluntly, madness.

Everything has the potential to be a massive disaster (especially a Tory government). I would agree with you that basing support for joining the Euro on the hope that it will push for the standardisation of language is madness. If that were what I was saying. I think standardisation of language is oneof the considerations/benefits of joining the Euro. It is not the only one, it isn't even the main one, it is simply one of the reasons.

but the majority of lower-middle/lower class don't.

That is not what I have discovered on my many trips to Europe.

Fair point, but there is big difference for the average Frenchman between accepting a communal currency with no nationality, and accepting the hated language des Rosbifs

I disagree. It takes a lot to simply give up a currency (as we have discovered) and it is not that much further from giving up a currency to adopting a new one even if that is the currency of another nation. The same goes for language.

You might know this already, but there is a law in France that requires that French radio stations play a certain percentage (40% I think) of their music output in French. Utterly ridiculous but indicative.

I believe it is closer to 15%. However that is an example of the already increasing use of English on the contient.

 

[insurgent]

I have never heard of any common continental European who support the standardisation of language in Europe - I've only heard Brits say that. It is different from the currency.

About the French language regulations, there are other countries that have ratified similar and to us silly legislation about the use of the English language. I believe Russia and Ukraine have something similar, and Iceland is renown for its "re-invention" of foreign words.

MrPresident: You say, "That is not what I have discovered on my many trips to Europe." My question (out of interest) is, whether Britons don't consider themselves Europeans. Do they? Or do they think of the rest of us as Europeans as opposed to themselves? I thought you called us continentals, and yourselves islanders...(?)

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by insurgent
I have never heard of any common continental European who support the standardisation of language in Europe - I've only heard Brits say that. It is different from the currency.

Quite.

Originally posted by insurgent

My question (out of interest) is, whether Britons don't consider themselves Europeans. Do they? Or do they think of the rest of us as Europeans as opposed to themselves? I thought you called us continentals, and yourselves islanders...(?)

Bit of both really. We are obviously European and we know it. But we also talk about going to Europe, and say x happens here, but y happens it Europe. This is partly as shorthand for continental Europe, but also partly because it reveals our mindset.

We have always looked out far more widely, what with Empire, and even now we are much closer to what happens in the US than are European countries () Being in the EU, we do view the rest of the world through European eyes, but we also view Europe as another part of the world, as is the US, as are Aus/NZ, etc.

No doubt MrPresident will now contradict me and say that we are as European as the French, but don't listen to him.

I could rattle off a list of things that show how we are not just another European country, how we have more in common with countries outside of Europe than do all other European countries (economic figures, etc) but I can't be bothered now.

 

[Pillager]

Originally posted by MrPresident
Everything has the potential to be a massive disaster (especially a Tory government). I would agree with you that basing support for joining the Euro on the hope that it will push for the standardisation of language is madness. If that were what I was saying. I think standardisation of language is oneof the considerations/benefits of joining the Euro. It is not the only one, it isn't even the main one, it is simply one of the reasons.

You said the Euro cannot work without political union, and that political union cannot work without a standard language. Therefore, the Euro cannot work without everyone speaking English. That seems to be a jolly major consideration to me - with it it could work, without it it will not. Ergo, we do not join.

 

[MrPresident]

Therefore, the Euro cannot work without everyone speaking English

No, I meant we should be like America and have a main (not single) language. In America a large portion of the population do not speak English but the majority do and more importantly so does the government. That needs to be the case in Europe. The EU needs a single language in which to produce all its offical documents.

You said the Euro cannot work without political union, and that political union cannot work without a standard language.

I say that the Euro cannot work without political union in the long run.

No doubt MrPresident will now contradict me and say that we are as European as the French, but don't listen to him.

I will surprise you by agreeing with most of what you said. Wait for it...I agree with most of what you said.

I thought you called us continentals, and yourselves islanders

I have never referred to myself as an islander.