The European Project: the future of the EU.

[Hrothbern]

I hate to say it, but both Napoleon and Hitler both also came close to politically unifying Europe (albeit, by different approaches). But, like the EU, the "stiff upper lip" of the British and the refusal of the "Russian bear" to cooperate heralded the ends of their unification schemes too.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Haha
That's why I believe much more in the Holy Roman Empire model. Emperors changing all the time. And no real controlling empire as well.
Officially the Netherlands was part of that for a while, we even delivered one emperor. In practice nobody cared that much about that emperor doing "something important" somewhere and the Hanseatic League fuelled the local manufacturing of the Guilds just enough to get the economy developing splendidly around the trading routes.
Not much politics except the usual rivalry keeping the overlords busy with each other.

 

[innonimatu]

Do we need EU imposed better anti-corruption laws ? imo absolutely. Corruption in a EU member country is a big risk for a reliable stable partnership adding value to the EU, protecting the low income people of that country. Romanian politicians need to be set as example. I have no mercy there for those politicians. They are criminals. A fair trial and conviction.

A trial by whom? What is the power above national level that gets to put national politicians on trial and convict them? What if the locals actually liked the politicians, will an EU army march in to depose him?

And if Macron wants that federal EU (why is that idiot talking about something that has no backing ?), he can make his federation with Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy.

Even if you want to stretch things and call Greece a former empire over the Byzantines, it was a colony for five centuries afterwards. Former Empires to add to that would be the Netherlands and Belgium. None of the european Empires but the british gave up easily. And the british only after the humiliation of Suez. There's also the failed German Empire. And the delusions of greatness that the hungarians clung to. I'm afraid that Macron would get plenty of backing for an imperial project, if he could defend it openly and offer one all those countries agreed to. Kind of a new Berlin Conference. Fortunately, he can't.

Have you ever been in East Europe ?
Have you ever seen the manufacturing halls from the communist time ?
Their machinery, hopelessly outdated, with craftmen a master in repairing the repairs from the repairs ?
Their office furniture giving you the impression that the clock turned backward to pre WW2 and the 50ies ?
When your car is a total loss you scrap it.
I have visited BTW the old Skoda site in Plzen several times. A disaster.

=> The money from the EU is and has been exactly doing what a government does as flanking infra investments. Creating the infra for companies for their greenfields and brownfields (existing obsolete halls) to make it more attractive to invest. The money for the roads to connect industrial areas to clusters, and those countries with the West.
The trading security of the single market of the EU, lowering the risks of those Big Corporate investments, making them worthwhile. The Big Corporate companies fuelling the little family owned old companies with orders, enough for them to hook on and buy new equipment.
And it worked good enough considering the means available.
What you do with your remarks is disowning the constructive efforts done and achievements made by the EU...

I have not know eastern Europe of that time, but I do not question your description, it matches many others. What I do question is the assumption others might draw from it that these countries were hopelessly doomed without "help" from the EU. Because the EU swallowed the area whole we can't have counter-factual, can we? At most we could have Serbia, but Serbia was very much punished by the EU for daring not to play the game. A country that was ostracized, gradually dismembered and then bombed by the EU (its leading countries) might naturally not be in a good shape.

The single market is old, at least as far as goods is concerned. We could have it under the old EEC rules, pre-Maastricht. I'm not against that (though the EEC already contained some restrictions that should be removed). I'm against the EU.

 

[Patine]

Haha
That's why I believe much more in the Holy Roman Empire model. Emperors changing all the time. And no real controlling empire as well.
Officially the Netherlands was part of that for a while, we even delivered one emperor. In practice nobody cared that much about that emperor doing "something important" somewhere and the Hanseatic League fuelled the local manufacturing of the Guilds just enough to get the economy developing splendidly around the trading routes.
Not much politics except the usual rivalry keeping the overlords busy with each other.

The Holy Roman Empire, in terms of vaunted and high-minded pretense, but ineffectiveness, internal division, and inability to get all member states on board and obey unpopular decisions in many ways presaged the much later League of Nations and UN.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The EZ urgently needs to be reformed, I suggested cutting away the southern debt based economies like spain, italy, greece etc and instead EZ should just cover the northern stable economy countries
As it is the mish mash of economic policy because of the lack of EU consensuses, domestic political considerations has resulted in the failed auserity and uneven stimulus. It will be hard to untangle the common currency but I dont see any other solution

Immigration is another issue, at least Germany has decided that it has taken too many refugees and is in the process of expelling the less western orientated, compatible refugees it was clearly a major mishandling even the mighty german economy is unable to take so many, in a single wave. I also think it is stupid to send money to places like greece to control immigration, the millions that the EU has sent have all vanished producing next to nothing. Instead EU should quietly just fund the barbwire wall at Austria, Bulgaria and other more realiable places.

EU spending model if countries no long want to pay into this, then it should be greatly reduced I can see that there is sound reasons for the EU to rebuild up Poland as a buffer state and future trading partner for example
But the benefits dont outweight the discontent felt by EU rich paying for EU poorer members. Honestly though EU funds should be contingent on carrying out economic and social reforms

 

[Hrothbern]

A trial by whom? What is the power above national level that gets to put national politicians on trial and convict them? What if the locals actually liked the politicians, will an EU army march in to depose him?

The Romanian people are very strongly against the widespread corruption of their government. The protests against the pardoning and on top a relaxing of the anti-corruption laws were huge. Much bigger than the gilets jaunes in France.

Immediately after it was announced that the ordinance was passed, more than 25,000 people protested that night. The next day, on 1 February, the protests swelled to over 300,000 people throughout the country, continuing then daily and peaking on 5 February, when over 500,000 Romanians protested throughout the country, making the protests the largest since the fall of Communism and the overthrowing of Nicolae Ceaușescu.[35][36][37]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017–2018_Romanian_protests

And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption, the EU does not need an army. There are courts of Justice where it applies and trade sanctions. Just like with North Korea.

I have not know eastern Europe of that time, but I do not question your description, it matches many others. What I do question is the assumption others might draw from it that these countries were hopelessly doomed without "help" from the EU. Because the EU swallowed the area whole we can't have counter-factual, can we? At most we could have Serbia, but Serbia was very much punished by the EU for daring not to play the game. A country that was ostracized, gradually dismembered and then bombed by the EU (its leading countries) might naturally not be in a good shape.

The problem with developing countries is that the growth of the economy has to go faster than the desire of the people to want more in their personal lifes.
A bit similar to the other basic characteristic of a developing country that the growth of the food production has to go faster than the population growth (Africa in the trap there).
To keep on growing your economy as developing country you have the big advantage that you do not need innovation, but you do need to attract, finance and implement in your country higher level economical features fast enough to prevent a stagnating GDP growth per capita. Flanking infra investments by the government are fundamental to keep the speed up of private investments in companies.

And robots are important for a developing industry !
They increase the labour productivity of employees tremendously, increasing their wages, increasing their level needed (shopfloor education), increasing the tax a government can extract to invest in infra, education and societal stability (all the long term investments not done by commercial business).
The success of for example S.Korea, of Singapore is not only coming from (compared to western countries) low wages and obedience (obedience from state system and strong growing wages).


Here below a graph of the top 21 countries of robot density in Manufacturing. And do note the countries not in the top 21.
And below that the gigantic catch up needed in motorway infra in East Europe with two graphs: the existing network and the motorways incl now being build and planned. (whereby "planned" in some countries is more a kind of fluff that never seems to happen).
Also noted: a Motorway is defined as minimal 2+2 lanes plus 2 safety lanes and multilevel crossings. In areas where the motorway density is very high, there are often improvements under construction or planned to extend the number of lanes, especially at crossings. For much truck transport you need a minimum of 6 lanes + 2 safety lanes.
That gigantic infra catch up from roads to utilities is enormously expensive and grows too slow when self financed from the taxes of that country.

=> the East European countries were likely to self boot at a decent, but slower speed, but at the severe risk to stagnate somewhere north of the Latin America level of GDP per capita.

Red: current, dark blue: under construction, light blue: planned, yellow: outside EU.

What you can see nicely from the motorway densities is that the Bratislava area (Slovakia) close to Brno (Czech), Gyor (Hungary), is a nice area for an automotive cluster (like for JLR). The graph below in one color easier for that.
You can there also see easier how important the motorway connections are to the biggest EU ports Rotterdam, Antwerpen, Hamburg, Amsterdam.

 

[Yeekim]

What I do question is the assumption others might draw from it that these countries were hopelessly doomed without "help" from the EU. Because the EU swallowed the area whole we can't have counter-factual, can we? At most we could have Serbia, but Serbia was very much punished by the EU for daring not to play the game.

What about Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Bosnia, Macedonia, Albania, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan?

 

[Patine]

The Romanian people are very strongly against the widespread corruption of their government. The protests against the pardoning and on top a relaxing of the anti-corruption laws were huge. Much bigger than the gilets jaunes in France.


And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption, the EU does not need an army. There are courts of Justice where it applies and trade sanctions. Just like with North Korea.



The problem with developing countries is that the growth of the economy has to go faster than the desire of the people to want more in their personal lifes.
A bit similar to the other basic characteristic of a developing country that the growth of the food production has to go faster than the population growth (Africa in the trap there).
To keep on growing your economy as developing country you have the big advantage that you do not need innovation, but you do need to attract, finance and implement in your country higher level economical features fast enough to prevent a stagnating GDP growth per capita. Flanking infra investments by the government are fundamental to keep the speed up of private investments in companies.

And robots are important for a developing industry !
They increase the labour productivity of employees tremendously, increasing their wages, increasing their level needed (shopfloor education), increasing the tax a government can extract to invest in infra, education and societal stability (all the long term investments not done by commercial business).
The success of for example S.Korea, of Singapore is not only coming from (compared to western countries) low wages and obedience (obedience from state system and strong growing wages).


Here below a graph of the top 21 countries of robot density in Manufacturing. And do note the countries not in the top 21.
And below that the gigantic catch up needed in motorway infra in East Europe with two graphs: the existing network and the motorways incl now being build and planned. (whereby "planned" in some countries is more a kind of fluff that never seems to happen).
Also noted: a Motorway is defined as minimal 2+2 lanes plus 2 safety lanes and multilevel crossings. In areas where the motorway density is very high, there are often improvements under construction or planned to extend the number of lanes, especially at crossings. For much truck transport you need a minimum of 6 lanes + 2 safety lanes.
That gigantic infra catch up from roads to utilities is enormously expensive and grows too slow when self financed from the taxes of that country.

=> the East European countries were likely to self boot at a decent speed but at the severe risk to stagnate somewhere north of the Latin America level of GDP per capita.

View attachment 514969

View attachment 514971


View attachment 514972
Red: current, dark blue: under construction, light blue: planned, yellow: outside EU.

What you can see nicely from the motorway densities is that the Bratislava area (Slovakia) close to Brno (Czech), Gyor (Hungary), is a nice area for an automotive cluster (like for JLR). The graph below in one color easier for that.
You can there also see easier how important the motorway connections are to the biggest EU ports Rotterdam, Antwerpen, Hamburg, Amsterdam.
View attachment 514973

The current members of the Romanian government have seemed to conveniently forgotten what happened to the Ceaucescus (sp). This lapse of memory is perhaps not exactly wise...

 

[Lexicus]

Nothing will be scrapped, but there will be reforms. There always have been reforms. The Euro will be fixed somehow (or dropped in a controlled manner). We're already relatively quite good in Worker's Rights and protections, but can always do better. We got the GDPR to protect our privacy. We're gonna get a a Right to Repair at some point. There are forces working to fix the weaknesses with Corporate Tax Avoidance. We're working on increasing coordination of Social Security systems.

I am sure there will be reforms, but given that the EU itself was constituted purposely in such a way as to prevent national governments from seriously challenging capital, I don't believe that the reforms necessary to prevent the system's disintegration will happen. "Fixing" the Euro will never happen as long as Germany dominates the union, and dropping the Euro would undermine the ability of the Germans to condition the economic policy of the other states.

Nobody is denying that,

On the contrary, the people who actually run the EU do not view the unemployment in Southern Europe as "too high," they view it as either a necessary market correction: a period of "adjustment," or else they outright view it as a disciplinary measure to stop the working classes from demanding a bigger share in society's wealth. To those market fundamentalists, there is no such thing as "too high" unemployment. And you can watch as the ones you are claiming share the view of "social democracy", propose to "fix" unemployment by scrapping labor protections and by deflating wages...

The reactionaries and the racists and the nationalists and the fascists have been predicting the downfall of the European Union ever since the Coal and Steel Union

I am curious, which one of these am I?

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The Romanian people are very strongly against the widespread corruption of their government. The protests against the pardoning and on top a relaxing of the anti-corruption laws were huge. Much bigger than the gilets jaunes in France.


And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption, the EU does not need an army. There are courts of Justice where it applies and trade sanctions. Just like with North Korea.



The problem with developing countries is that the growth of the economy has to go faster than the desire of the people to want more in their personal lifes.
A bit similar to the other basic characteristic of a developing country that the growth of the food production has to go faster than the population growth (Africa in the trap there).
To keep on growing your economy as developing country you have the big advantage that you do not need innovation, but you do need to attract, finance and implement in your country higher level economical features fast enough to prevent a stagnating GDP growth per capita. Flanking infra investments by the government are fundamental to keep the speed up of private investments in companies.

And robots are important for a developing industry !
They increase the labour productivity of employees tremendously, increasing their wages, increasing their level needed (shopfloor education), increasing the tax a government can extract to invest in infra, education and societal stability (all the long term investments not done by commercial business).
The success of for example S.Korea, of Singapore is not only coming from (compared to western countries) low wages and obedience (obedience from state system and strong growing wages).


Here below a graph of the top 21 countries of robot density in Manufacturing. And do note the countries not in the top 21.
And below that the gigantic catch up needed in motorway infra in East Europe with two graphs: the existing network and the motorways incl now being build and planned. (whereby "planned" in some countries is more a kind of fluff that never seems to happen).
Also noted: a Motorway is defined as minimal 2+2 lanes plus 2 safety lanes and multilevel crossings. In areas where the motorway density is very high, there are often improvements under construction or planned to extend the number of lanes, especially at crossings. For much truck transport you need a minimum of 6 lanes + 2 safety lanes.
That gigantic infra catch up from roads to utilities is enormously expensive and grows too slow when self financed from the taxes of that country.

=> the East European countries were likely to self boot at a decent, but slower speed, but at the severe risk to stagnate somewhere north of the Latin America level of GDP per capita.

View attachment 514969

View attachment 514971


View attachment 514972
Red: current, dark blue: under construction, light blue: planned, yellow: outside EU.

What you can see nicely from the motorway densities is that the Bratislava area (Slovakia) close to Brno (Czech), Gyor (Hungary), is a nice area for an automotive cluster (like for JLR). The graph below in one color easier for that.
You can there also see easier how important the motorway connections are to the biggest EU ports Rotterdam, Antwerpen, Hamburg, Amsterdam.
View attachment 514973

It looks like China and Russia have not entered into the robotic age yet. Well, at least Skynet won't have it so easy there.

 

[innonimatu]

The Romanian people are very strongly against the widespread corruption of their government. The protests against the pardoning and on top a relaxing of the anti-corruption laws were huge. Much bigger than the gilets jaunes in France.

And that is an issue for the romanian people to deal with. Not for the EU. Otherwise it would be the EU carrying the "white man's burden" of improving its "colony" Romania... appoint a governor perhaps because those romanians cant govern themselves efficiently?

And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption, the EU does not need an army. There are courts of Justice where it applies and trade sanctions. Just like with North Korea.

Trade sanctions huh? So you're of the school of "let's make the population suffer until the change their government to something we like"? Don't forget Iraq also, perhaps if a million romanian babies die the romanians will make further haste to overthrow their government? Though Saddam didn't get toppled that way...
Really, you think the RU should be declaring trade sanctions against member states as a political tool? It worked in Greece, sure (the ECB freezing Greece's payments systems and therefore trade) but I don't think they'd have dared keep up such a campaign if Greece hadn't been governed by cowards who immediately surrendered at the time.

And robots are important for a developing industry !
They increase the labour productivity of employees tremendously, increasing their wages, increasing their level needed (shopfloor education), increasing the tax a government can extract to invest in infra, education and societal stability (all the long term investments not done by commercial business).
The success of for example S.Korea, of Singapore is not only coming from (compared to western countries) low wages and obedience (obedience from state system and strong growing wages).

Fine, let's talk robots again, you have a thing for robots and there is a correlation to economic productivity. The thing is, robots get installed to serve in particular industries. Having more robots means that a country is more heavily invested in those industries, just that. Did someone gift South Korea with all those robots? Did it take cohesion funds from ASEAN to build infrastructure? No and no. They just used the state to heavily support strategic investment is some industries they chose to compete with. In shipbuilding it eventually went quite wrong , though they had their time. Now it is semiconductors and electronics. Could an EU member state, under EU rules, do what the koreas did? NO! And that has been my point.

Highways are useful, but they also require maintenance. By themselves they are ann ongoing expense, one that only makes sense where other developments help pay for that expense. And the EU has outlawed, out-ruled, any direct or indirect state investment in productive industry as "market distortion". Building railroads didn't work in late 19th century Portugal and Spain to catch up with the UK, France, Germany or Belgium, because those had unsurmountable advantages at the time: plenty of coal and iron to feed their industry. Instead it saddled these poorer countries, and the latin-america ones, and others, with a huge debt from the quick building of all those railroads, that they would need to serve and could go on to keep draining their government's resources preventing other investments.
Overbuilt highways, and high-speed rail in Spain, and similarly ruinous, a repeat a century and a half later of that strategic mistake. They create debt that must be serviced but do not add to "competitiveness" enough to attract productive industries from the "core Europe", those areas nearer to the main urban/population concentrations and where there is still "cheapish" labour to be had. Worse, for the more automated, capital-intensive ones the appeal of locating near "core Europe" is even greater. To counter that a country would have to develop some particular cluster of technology and production, the South Korea strategy, instead of passively waiting to attract foreign capital. But that is forbidden in the EU.

 

[Lexicus]

I don't think they'd have dared keep up such a campaign if Greece hadn't been governed by cowards who immediately surrendered at the time.

But what other outcome was plausible? How could any Greek government keep going in the face of that? I would reiterate that the only option available to the Greeks other than knuckling under to the EU was immediately exiting the Euro, which was off the table because the Greek people were against it. Now, you could say the Greek government could have made the case and brought enough people around, and I would agree that it was incompetence on their part that they did not even attempt this.

 

[Hrothbern]

And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption, the EU does not need an army. There are courts of Justice where it applies and trade sanctions. Just like with North Korea.

Trade sanctions huh? So you're of the school of "let's make the population suffer until the change their government to something we like"?

As I stated clearly in my post on which you react:
And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption.

I do not want EU companies to deal with them, engaging in corruption.
If the people and the government are united, they can enjoy the lack of trade united.

 

[innonimatu]

But what other outcome was plausible? How could any Greek government keep going in the face of that? I would reiterate that the only option available to the Greeks other than knuckling under to the EU was immediately exiting the Euro, which was off the table because the Greek people were against it. Now, you could say the Greek government could have made the case and brought enough people around, and I would agree that it was incompetence on their part that they did not even attempt this.

Who knows if the greek people, under those circumstances, were against it? Pooling is more often that not used to advance particular political goals, keep that in mind...

Hadn't the greeks just voted, overwhelmingly and unexpectedly to the surrender monkeys in power there, against the capitulation agreement that the government wanted to take? 61% voted no, and many of those can't have been so ignorant that the EU would then do its worse. I strongly suspect that those voting No had nearly no assets anyway, if the banks went under it would be rightful punishment for the ones who had previously been benefiting from selling out Greece, might have been their logic. In any case the bank shutdown was enacted in June 28, and the referendum happened in July 5, therefore people already knew, when they cast their vote, the kind of enemy they were up against. They still voted no. And were then promptly betrayed by their government, whose leader decided that saving the banks was a priority. The polls citing greek attachment to the euro were the one political cover he could call upon...

As I stated clearly in my post on which you react:
And when the people and the government would be united behind something like mass corruption.

I do not want EU companies to deal with them, engaging in corruption.
If the people and the government are united, they can enjoy the lack of trade united.

That's a funny notion, the people and the government united in mass corruption. I thought corruption was some few people taking more that their legal share of things. If the people and the government are united to have some corruption, wouldn't they just make this corruption legal and no longer corruption?
And for the people to unite with a government to have some kind of mass corruption, I expect that the people would be profiting from it somehow. Say, the government raised their wages, or pensions, or what? Surely that would justify imposing crushing trade sanctions on them. How do they dare setting a bad example!

Now, without the sarcasm, your modified point above just makes no sense. A corrupt government that gets the overwhelming backing of its population is corrupt how? What tou are really suggesting, if you follow that argument to its logical conclusion, is that democracy is bad when people do not vote on the right leader according to some foreign judgment. The suppression of democracy. The very thing I (and many other people, though few here) have been denouncing the EU for.

 

[Patine]

I am sure there will be reforms, but given that the EU itself was constituted purposely in such a way as to prevent national governments from seriously challenging capital, I don't believe that the reforms necessary to prevent the system's disintegration will happen. "Fixing" the Euro will never happen as long as Germany dominates the union, and dropping the Euro would undermine the ability of the Germans to condition the economic policy of the other states.

"We are completely against the EU, and, despite claims of our 'Nazi agendas,' Lebensraum is not a policy we pursue. But, since we practically own Europe as it is, thanks to Madame Chancellor's generosity in loans to other nations and spreading German economic power thickly, military solutions may not even be needed," quoted excerpt from an interview of former National Democratic Party of Germany leader Odo Pastors, originally made on Stormfront, but later disseminated across the web

 

[Ironsided]

I’m for the EU. It’s a lot better than the alternative. What would you like Poland to do if Sweden starts dumping toxic wastes into the Baltic Sea? Embargo, declare war, or settle it within a union where other countries effected can also be heard? We need cooperation within Europe much more than national sovereignty. We desperately need more cooperation on immigration, environment and security. In fact if the UN was not completely strangled and abused by the US and other Security Council members that would be a far better long term option for cooperation than the EU - but the UN has become just that – a place to posture and win cheap political points at home for the US, Russia and other despicable nations

 

[Hrothbern]

I’m for the EU. It’s a lot better than the alternative. What would you like Poland to do if Sweden starts dumping toxic wastes into the Baltic Sea? Embargo, declare war, or settle it within a union where other countries effected can also be heard? We need cooperation within Europe much more than national sovereignty. We desperately need more cooperation on immigration, environment and security. In fact if the UN was not completely strangled and abused by the US and other Security Council members that would be a far better long term option for cooperation than the EU - but the UN has become just that – a place to posture and win cheap political points at home for the US, Russia and other despicable nations

yes
The UN fails to really protect the people of "the many" (small nations). The big powers making sure of that.
The same applies to a lesser degree for the WTO. Because there the smaller nations have at least a platform that enables them to work better together.
Both platforms cannot really enforce, because of veto's or just getting ignored, or by not signing important convenants.
But when China violates protective rules, when the US ignores, the real power relation is clear

And where there is no protection from above, the many small nations will seek protection by flocking together, by uniting on specifics for their interests.

It is like the traditional 1% within a country that is the opponent, who thrive on encouraging divisions between the 99%...
The rivalry between the 99% disguised by the enormous amount of kind of divisions possible on material and immaterial convictions and interests.
All kinds of people, from left to right, from progressive to conservative, in good faith or narrowminded, adding to the turmoil....
Tabloid news adding distracting emotions and "ad hominem" dirt and fake dirt. Many citizens joining without thinking through, against their own interests.
The word "deplorables" for them coined.

The governments of the real powerfull nations in the world, that "1%", who thrive on disabling supranational structures, who are encouraging divisions between the other states, do the same.
And again the rivalry between the smaller nations, irrational aspects of nationalism a nice boost, confuses the total picture

The arguments are always the same
"supranational is bad"... "supranational is opaque bureaucratic, grabbing money"... "supranational NGO's are corrupt"... etc... undermining the flocking together and flocked aid..
Just like unions and grassroots are attacked at domestic level.
There are always some smaller nations that do (temporary) well, and they are marginalised or attacked for abuse of something
The arguments often accompanied by "ad hominem" approach at nation level.

When we talk EU, Germany and France are attacked, are accused of all kinds of things... especially on power abuse to the smaller nations
Feeding the divisions and rivalry between the 99%.

And again, similarely, we have "the deplorables" at nation government level, and at nation people level. Blinded or not. In good faith and bad faith.

I think the EU is embarking into its more political phase, it has to explain better to itself and its people what the benefits are in the current era.
Where it started as a peace maker after many devastating wars on our home soil (unlike so many other western nations)
Where it continued to get the single market economical benefits the really big nations had for free.
It takes notice from the changed geopolitical situation

And it will now flock further together,
forced to find solutions in its structure to deal with another more agressive behaviour of the real powerful nations, with the differences as they are, the sentiments as they are (now), and the common interests moving to above directly economic.
(the wars seems to be forgotten apparently by many)

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Unlike China or the US, there's no real shared identity, which throws out the possibility of that kind of unity further.

I had a really long think about whether this statement is true or not. China may be more, or at least, as diverse as the EU on an ethnic / language basis (or at least it used to be before ultraHanification that's been going on for decades), but otoh Europeans have other things they share. really complicated issue.

 

[Lexicus]

Who knows if the greek people, under those circumstances, were against it? Pooling is more often that not used to advance particular political goals, keep that in mind...

Hadn't the greeks just voted, overwhelmingly and unexpectedly to the surrender monkeys in power there, against the capitulation agreement that the government wanted to take? 61% voted no, and many of those can't have been so ignorant that the EU would then do its worse. I strongly suspect that those voting No had nearly no assets anyway, if the banks went under it would be rightful punishment for the ones who had previously been benefiting from selling out Greece, might have been their logic. In any case the bank shutdown was enacted in June 28, and the referendum happened in July 5, therefore people already knew, when they cast their vote, the kind of enemy they were up against. They still voted no. And were then promptly betrayed by their government, whose leader decided that saving the banks was a priority. The polls citing greek attachment to the euro were the one political cover he could call upon...

Well, that's exactly the problem. Support for the Euro (I won't dismiss the polls out of hand without some good reason to do so) and support for rejecting the ultimatum were mutually incompatible. And it is worth mentioning that, as bad as things turned out, it's entirely possible they'd have turned out worse had Greece decided to leave the Euro. That would not have been an easy situation for any government to negotiate. And I don't think I recall reading at the time, that even the most anti-EU economists out there were not predicting that Greece would have an easy time leaving the Euro.

I also don't think it is really true that a banking freeze would only hurt those with assets. It hurts anyone who needs checks to clear, which is to say essentially anyone who participates in the formal economy. I would also question the idea that everyone with assets was 'benefiting from selling out Greece'.

 

[Hrothbern]

Median wealth of Greek adults is higher than you would expect
There is a lot of lack of financial solidarity between Greek people. Between the old and the young. Between the mainstream wealthier and the have-nots.

 

[REDY]

Stop any EU donations. Its just making south europeans lazy, eastern europeans corrupt, western europeans angry and mafians wealthy.
EU officials should work for free. Only EU income would be donations from associated countries like UK for staying in EU market.
Eurovison should be banned and its singers arrested. Renew Jeux sans frontières instead.

That would increase EU credibility for folk.