Switzerland in the EU, when?

[Hayek]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
Where's the centralization in the EU ? What are those taxes you're talking about ? Once again, someone who doesn't know about what he's talking about.

Come on! Everybody knows the EU is keen on centralizing, it might be that because you're from already very centralized France that you don't notice this, but that's the way it is.

Taxes? I heard in another thread that 0.25 per cent (IIRC) of the British budget goes to the EU. That's money which Britons have payed in taxes to the EU. It's small, but it is still tax money. Besides the EU often talk about the importance of "tax harmonization", which always mean taxes are going to be raised.

 

[Adebisi]

Originally posted by Hayek
Besides the EU often talk about the importance of "tax harmonization", which always mean taxes are going to be raised.

Not for Finland

I have no ideological reasons behind supporting the EU and the European monetary union. My reasons are purely pragmatic

 

[r4ge]

I was born in Zurich, Switzerland though i only lived there 10 days. I can say looking from a foreing a country that Switzerland need to suave many obstacles before entering the EU. The trouble is that if Switzerland ever joins the EU, it will lose it's position as a neutral coutry, as well as giving up some of its wealth to the porer countries as the stonesfan mentioned. She would also have to comply with many EU rules which will make the leading banks look no longer appeasing.
On other hand it will gain economic benefits by joining the EU. There are too many to list... though this is the main picture.
However Switzerland will never join unless it reforms its electory system. Giving votes to provinces. Unfortunately those who live in rural provinces (being many) dont seem to undersand much about the benefits of entering EU.

 

[Yago]

Dissolving Cantons ? Taking away their voters rights ?


no, no, no, no.

I doubt anyway, that the urban/rural contrast is that important in the long run. The central cantons have some plausible concerns with traffic, while I think that the devil is in reality hidden in some other Cantons, which actually don't look so rural at all. By the way, I am all for shutting down the Gotthard for some time, just for the fun of it.

 

[Dr. Dr. Doktor]

Switzerland is a mysterious country. Supposedly democratic, yet one of the last countries to grant women the vote. Supposedly insular, yet CERN is an international science project that has attracted many nobel prices. Supposedly conservative, yet in experiments in granting free drugs to addicts it is very advanced.
So the idea that Switzterland is simply a haven for former rockstars, and a manufacturer of ****oo clocks is too simplistic.
I think that basicly Switzerland is a very good example on how a multiethnic state might possibly function according to specifically democratic rules. You have the French, the Germans, The Italians, and the Roman speaking population supposedly living together in perfect harmony.
One thing that is perhaps not so charming is the impossibly high price of property, which sadly leaves a great deal of the population in the lurch. It does submit the people to their working stations nevertheless.
Should Switzerland join the EU that would be rather a moot point since I am sure that the people who will take their time out to vote on the subject would not be ready to give up the privileges this splendid isolation gives. And quite frankly I cannot percieve what benefit the EU would derive from Switzerland joining.

 

[Mazarin]

And quite frankly I cannot percieve what benefit the EU would derive from Switzerland joining.

more subjects to our Empire of Evil

 

[klazlo]

Switzerland has no significant agriculture that needs to be subsidized from other countries' income so it's not worth for them to be in the EU...

 

[hawai_74]

Originally posted by Dr. Dr. Doktor
And quite frankly I cannot percieve what benefit the EU would derive from Switzerland joining.

Surprisingly, that's Switzerland who gave benefit to the EU. VGE (the "creator" or the first real european constitution, not yet accepted) had to be inspired by the swiss constitution and its manner to vote (double majority). EU (i don't try to compare) is like a big Switzerland, Switzerland is the laboratory.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by hawai_74
Surprisingly, that's Switzerland who gave benefit to the EU. VGE (the "creator" or the first real european constitution, not yet accepted) had to be inspired by the swiss constitution and its manner to vote (double majority). EU (i don't try to compare) is like a big Switzerland, Switzerland is the laboratory.

I agree with you on that point. Switzerland is IMO a very inspiring model of society to me. I'm sure that the only solution to keep Iraq united would be to get inspired from Switzerland : very small cantons that doesn't necessarily respect the "language" borders and that are very autonomous... with a central power that is mainly dedicated to common national interests and especially defense. Iraq won't survive if we keep today's division in three big states (one sunni kurd, one sunni muslim and one shiite muslim). That solution would lead the country to its burst.

Originally posted by Hayek
Come on! Everybody knows the EU is keen on centralizing, it might be that because you're from already very centralized France that you don't notice this, but that's the way it is.

I'm not a fond of "everybody knows" argumentation actually. The fact I live in a centralized country doesn't make your point smarter, England is much more centralized than France actually. Now let's see how "centralized" is the EU :

- The EU parliament is based in Strasbourg.
- The EU commission (and parliament sometimes) is based in Brussels.
- The EU Justice Court is based in Luxembourg.
- The EU Central Bank is based in Frankfurt.
- The EU Stock Exchange (if it exists one day) would be based in London.

How can you consider such a thing as "centralized" ? I really don't see your point. Actually, I consider personnaly that just for a better efficiency the EU Parliament should be permanently in Brussels. It's not because I'm very fond of centralization, only because I consider it's a waste of money as it is now.

However, can we say generally speaking that with a budget representing 1% of the European GDP, Europe is a monster of tax ? Is an organization fighting against national companies really that "socialist" and promoting "centralization" ? Can we consider by the way, an open market as something "lefty" ?

Hayek, you may consider collectivism as better than individualism, I personnally don't. It's not because "everybody" are supposed to "know" something that "everybody" is necessarily true. There's actually nothing less centralized and more against taxes than the EU. Most of figures from the WTO proves the US is using a lot more trade barriers than the EU for example. To me, your point proves nothing else than the fact you're against the EU for emotional reasons that have nothing to do with a well-thought argumentation.

 

[stormbind]

EU Parliament should be in Luxembourg. The only place that inherently has no physical power of it's own

Alternatively, London, as that has the widest reaching international influence.

 

[stormbind]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
..., your point proves nothing else than the fact you're against the EU for emotional reasons that have nothing to do with a well-thought argumentation.

A most insightful notion, and a quote worthy of a place in any history book!

But how can we be convinced your own pro-EU stance is not driven by emotion?

 

[Adebisi]

Eh, those are some very poor arguments Marla. I think you understand yourself that it wasn't geographic centralization he meant, rather the centralization of power. Personally I think we could have a free trade union without all the "harmonisation" of laws.

It is true that Bush has re-introduced lots of protectionism (steel tariffs, farm subsidies) and made the US more "European". But it still doesn't change the fact that the EU is very keen on protecting it's own industries and agriculture. Subsidies or tariffs - in reality the difference is not that big.

There's actually nothing less centralized and more against taxes than the EU.

(...)

To me, your point proves nothing else than the fact you're against the EU for emotional reasons that have nothing to do with a well-thought argumentation.

The irony...

 

[EzInKy]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
Where's the centralization in the EU ? What are those taxes you're talking about ? Once again, someone who doesn't know about what he's talking about.

C'mon Marla, you know very well Europe is centralized in Germany and France. Now matter how much we all want the EU to succeed, once Switzerland joins the union it will be subject to the whims of the heavier populated nations because there is no system in place for smaller nations to over rule majority opinion.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by Adebisi
Eh, those are some very poor arguments Marla. I think you understand yourself that it wasn't geographic centralization he meant, rather the centralization of power. Personally I think we could have a free trade union without all the "harmonisation" of laws.

The harmonisation we've seen in the EU are just here for the good of the Open Market. It's mostly made to make it easier for companies to sell faster and more efficiently in the whole market. The harmonisation of markets inside the EU has been made in a much lesser scale than what we've seen for example in the US. Of course the US is one country when the EU is 15 (soon 25), but I don't consider the US as typically "centralized".

It is true that Bush has re-introduced lots of protectionism (steel tariffs, farm subsidies) and made the US more "European". But it still doesn't change the fact that the EU is very keen on protecting it's own industries and agriculture. Subsidies or tariffs - in reality the difference is not that big.

Actually, even during Clinton's time, the US was more protecting its economy than the EU. EU trade barriers are mostly made in the agricultural market and as things are going, it won't last very long. I don't see where the EU is protecting their own industries by the way.

Originally posted by Stormbind
EU Parliament should be in Luxembourg. The only place that inherently has no physical power of it's own

Alternatively, London, as that has the widest reaching international influence.

I would love to see the EU parliament in London. However, I think brits are those who are making the most so that it's not the case. Even for something like a United Stock Exchange market based in London, brits make everything so that I wouldn't be the case. You shouldn't complain about that to me but mostly to yourselves.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by EzInKy
C'mon Marla, you know very well Europe is centralized in Germany and France. Now matter how much we all want the EU to succeed, once Switzerland joins the union it will be subject to the whims of the heavier populated nations because there is no system in place for smaller nations to over rule majority opinion.

It's not centralized on Germany and France. Both countries made the most in the building of the EU, but that doesn't mean it's centralized on them. If Britain hasn't more influence in the EU, it's mostly because of Britain itself. It's not Germans and French people who decided Britain should keep the pound, it's British people themselves. Considering the EU as something centralized is utterly stupid.

 

[EzInKy]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
It's not centralized on Germany and France. Both countries made the most in the building of the EU, but that doesn't mean it's centralized on them. If Britain hasn't more influence in the EU, it's mostly because of Britain itself. It's not Germans and French people who decided Britain should keep the pound, it's British people themselves. Considering the EU as something centralized is utterly stupid.

No, it is not stupid. The EU failed to get a constitution passed over that very issue. Without some mechanism to offset the power of the more populist states Europe is bound to be subjugated to the will of Germany and France.

 

[Yago]

That with subjugation to Germany and France is pure nonsense. All other countries combined are as big as them. Even more so with the new members. Italy isn't small either, Italy is a biggie too, the Netherlands and Spain aren't too small countries either. In other words, Germany and France don't dominate, like Canada is dominated by its neighbours, for example. For now, it just means that there is no consent in how many votes the countries get. And I do not think that this question is resolved very soon. Of course, the more voting to power to small countries, the better.

 

[hawai_74]

Its better to subjugated to the will of Germany and France, than to the will of the US.

UK has to fully enter the EU. Europe has to be first rule by these 3 countries to stabilize the EU

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by EzInKy
No, it is not stupid. The EU failed to get a constitution passed over that very issue. Without some mechanism to offset the power of the more populated states Europe is bound to be subjugated to the will of Germany and France.

Italy and the UK ain't less populated than France ! The double majority rule is a very balanced way to move on more efficiently in the EU. The 13 less populated countries represent a majority of country but only 11% of the whole population ! Do you decently consider 11% of the European population should be able to decide for the other 89% ? On the other way, if we needed only a majority of population then only France, Germany, the UK and Italy could decide for the 25 countries... it wouldn't be better. With the double majority we balance the two systems and I sincerly think it's hard to find another system as fair as that one.

By the way, the constitution wasn't about France and Germany against the rest of the EU, it was actually Spain and Poland against the rest of the EU ! Britain was one of the first support of the constitution. All countries supported actively the EU consistitution, as much small states than large states, only the two "middle" states were against it. Actually, the failure of the EU constitution had just proved that France and Germany weren't that powerful so your example is going totally backward to what you were supposed to prove.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Switzerland is doing very well outside of the EU. If it's not broken, why fix it?