The European Project: the future of the EU.

[innonimatu]

The EU is finished. When it has managed to lose the bought-and-paid-for politicians down south... It's cheap to buy politicians, it's more expensive (apparently too expensive) to share the profits of EU centralization. My heartfelt thanks to the dutch and german for killing it.

"Eurobonds" would have kept this damaging construct going, causing more harm to the people of Europe. Better to end it now, when "economic damage" of a couple percent of the GDP or somesuch has been properly and truly put in perspective compared to the damage of the inaction and dependence and lack of responsibility it fosters and then betrays.

 

[EnglishEdward]

... if nobody is talking about the EU, that means nobody is talking about what the EU is doing well either...

Nobody is stopping them or you.

 

[Gorbles]

Nobody is stopping them or you.

Not exactly relevant to the point, though. Not being digitally or physically restrained from doing something doesn't mean there's impetus, either.

Besides, I'm not here to Google things for overtly and obviously anti-European posters. Not only would it not help, it's something that they're not being stopped from doing either. They're opting not to, for whatever reasons that are entirely up to them.

 

[mitsho]

The EU is finished. When it has managed to lose the bought-and-paid-for politicians down south... It's cheap to buy politicians, it's more expensive (apparently too expensive) to share the profits of EU centralization. My heartfelt thanks to the dutch and german for killing it.

"Eurobonds" would have kept this damaging construct going, causing more harm to the people of Europe. Better to end it now, when "economic damage" of a couple percent of the GDP or somesuch has been properly and truly put in perspective compared to the damage of the inaction and dependence and lack of responsibility it fosters and then betrays.

Citation needed?

I really dont know what you are talking about.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Not exactly relevant to the point, though. Not being digitally or physically restrained from doing something doesn't mean there's impetus, either.

Besides, I'm not here to Google things for overtly and obviously anti-European posters. Not only would it not help, it's something that they're not being stopped from doing either. They're opting not to, for whatever reasons that are entirely up to them.

I am not anti-European. I am merely sceptical of the European Union and think the UK better out of it.

If the EU is not promoting what it has done well, one asks oneself why it is not promoting what is has done well.

The most obvious conclusion is that it is not doing much at all well.

We note that the pro-Remain campaigns never put across a vision that was at all positive to the people in the UK.

 

[innonimatu]

Citation needed?

I really dont know what you are talking about.

The southern european countries have had it with the EU and austerity. There simply won't be any toleration for a repeat of 2008. You're not seeing protests now because everyone is worried about the virus, but you will see them after. Germany and its hangers-on are bent on not doing anything EU-wide, which is to say repeat what was done in 2008: push loans and demand more political control, more "austerity", after. It's going to blow, and that's me saying, not quoting anyone.
Just as this emergency with the virus was predictable, and could have been far less bad if prepared in the time available, but "no one" in positions of power saw it coming. Some did of course, but political considerations precluded action then... so too "no one" is seeing the end of the EU coming. But some do of course, it's just not the correct political time to say it out loud. After the virus has been dealt with.What I have been seeing is their adjustments of attitude. I have no quotes, no political scientists or talking head to quote - just my observations and cold political logic. Keep in mind that no pundits were talking in the media about the need to close borders when I was saying already that they'd have to be closed even if governments didn't want to: circumstances would force that.

The only way an EU collapse won't happen is if Germany, Netherlands, etc agree to actualized debt without political strings attached. I just don't expect that to happen. If the EU were to cease serving these countries' interests exclusively then they will rather end it. The only consequential country with a ruling clique really invested in the EU is France, but the french cannot bend the germans. The dutch are ruled by idiots who know they've been having it good, but do not grasp just how good, and will let it go to hell. The Belgians are a non-country more worried with their parochial squabbles. The swedes have always been ready to bail if and when tshtf. The germans believe they have carved a lebensraum in central Europe already ad can keep it. The austrians are also run by idiots worried only with internal politics. The irish are having to take brexit into consideration. And central europans have a long memory, contrary to the german's expectations.

There's a reason the southern political elites are so desperate for eurbonds: it's not concern over their populations so much as concern about their political future, those eurobonds were the only way to prevent their precious political world from collapsing. If those do not come through they'll be having to adapt to a post-EU existence, with no excuses to shield them from their population. But the smarter ones are already planning for that reality, they know there's a snowball's change in hell of the EU being changed to "do the right thing".

 

[Gorbles]

I am not anti-European. I am merely sceptical of the European Union and think the UK better out of it.

If the EU is not promoting what it has done well, one asks oneself why it is not promoting what is has done well.

The most obvious conclusion is that it is not doing much at all well.

We note that the pro-Remain campaigns never put across a vision that was at all positive to the people in the UK.

I didn't say you specifically were, but uh "sceptical of it and wanting the UK out of it" is the same thing. The same goes for your apparent refusal to Google any EU action on Covid-19.

You can note whatever you want, but you are not a collective (unless! ), and therefore it's "I", not "We"

 

[mitsho]

The southern european countries have had it with the EU and austerity. There simply won't be any toleration for a repeat of 2008. You're not seeing protests now because everyone is worried about the virus, but you will see them after. Germany and its hangers-on are bent on not doing anything EU-wide, which is to say repeat what was done in 2008: push loans and demand more political control, more "austerity", after. It's going to blow, and that's me saying, not quoting anyone.
Just as this emergency with the virus was predictable, and could have been far less bad if prepared in the time available, but "no one" in positions of power saw it coming. Some did of course, but political considerations precluded action then... so too "no one" is seeing the end of the EU coming. But some do of course, it's just not the correct political time to say it out loud. After the virus has been dealt with.What I have been seeing is their adjustments of attitude. I have no quotes, no political scientists or talking head to quote - just my observations and cold political logic. Keep in mind that no pundits were talking in the media about the need to close borders when I was saying already that they'd have to be closed even if governments didn't want to: circumstances would force that.

The only way an EU collapse won't happen is if Germany, Netherlands, etc agree to actualized debt without political strings attached. I just don't expect that to happen. If the EU were to cease serving these countries' interests exclusively then they will rather end it. The only consequential country with a ruling clique really invested in the EU is France, but the french cannot bend the germans. The dutch are ruled by idiots who know they've been having it good, but do not grasp just how good, and will let it go to hell. The Belgians are a non-country more worried with their parochial squabbles. The swedes have always been ready to bail if and when tshtf. The germans believe they have carved a lebensraum in central Europe already ad can keep it. The austrians are also run by idiots worried only with internal politics. The irish are having to take brexit into consideration. And central europans have a long memory, contrary to the german's expectations.

There's a reason the southern political elites are so desperate for eurbonds: it's not concern over their populations so much as concern about their political future, those eurobonds were the only way to prevent their precious political world from collapsing. If those do not come through they'll be having to adapt to a post-EU existence, with no excuses to shield them from their population. But the smarter ones are already planning for that reality, they know there's a snowball's change in hell of the EU being changed to "do the right thing".

Oh, ok. I thought there was some event or speech or decision or anything that prompted you to wrote that. I do agree, the aftermath of the Corona-Virus-Pandemic will be interesting to see. Crisis always begets change. You will not be surprised that I don't share the belief in the attributes you attach to the peoples or countries of Europe in that paragraph, but you will probably agree that it is futile to discuss this since we will not change each others opinions. It's just, I haven't yet seen any kind of reaction with regard to the Corona-Pandemic that makes me think of a special Northern-Southern Divide (with regard to the Corona-Pandemic). So yeah, we will see.

 

[innonimatu]

@mitsho Over here the PM, very much "pro-european" and always too much of a diplomat, called the dutch finance minister's latest tirade repugnant. Plus a few more considerations about the dutch. He can guess what kind of winds will blow and his repositioning accordingly... You'd have to know how wedded to "europe" his party has been, even since being founded and financed with german money in the 1970s, and know how cautious the guy is, to appreciate what him saying this to the media means.

Portugal’s prime minister António Costa has launched an extraordinary attack on Dutch finance minister Wopke Hoekstra, one of the four key moneymen standing in the way of a concerted European plan to face the economic recession caused by Covid-19.
The moment came during the tense EU ‘summit’ that went ahead yesterday via videolink.
Hoekstra suggested the EU “should investigate countries like Spain that say they have no budgetary margin to deal with the effects of the crisis provoked by the new coronavirus in spite of the fact that the eurozone has grown for seven consecutive years”.
Costa told journalists after the six-hour long meeting – which ended without answers – that the discourse was “repugnant”.
“No one wants to hear the Dutch finance minister say what was said in 2009, 2010 and 2011. Spain did not import the virus. The virus hits everyone equally. If one country in the European Union thinks it can resolve the problem by leaving the virus in other countries, it doesn’t understand what the European Union is…

In Italy too there is huge popular anger now at the very idea of "europe" that the local established political elites (now again in government, what a mistake they made!) so depend on. There they know that turning their back on Europe means handing power over to Salvini, but not turning means their downfall once the virus ends. They are even more desperate to see those eurobonds, else it's gave over for them: you'll know it is when many rats there start jumping from the ship to set up new parties and pretend they were always "nationalist". Until the virus emergency ends those moves re on standby.

The spanish have a collection of fools on their government, completely out of their depth either handling this emergency or addressing the issue of the EU (which is the economic issue for any recovery plan) afterwards. Which they should be doing now, but do not know how. Italy will lead, Spain will follow. Probably with a new government also.

The european union will be finished. Absent direct financing to states by the ECB, which Germany and its allies will never approve, the people of Europe at this point have nothing to lose but their chains, there is no threat the ECB can hold over countries already devastated economically.

What has the EU done for Italy this very month of March? Oh right, it fined Italy for €7.5 million for "state aid" to the tourism sector hit during during the 2008 crisis. Right during the time when countries all over the EU are giving state aid to companies hit by the current crisis.
This is the EU. This will always be the EU. During a crisis, make it worse for the worse hit. The EU must be destroyed.

Court of Justice of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No29/20
Luxembourg, 12March202

Italy is ordered to pay pecuniary penalties for failing to recover aid unlawfully granted to the hotel industry in Sardinia
That Member State will therefore have to pay to the budget of the EU a lump sum of €7500000as well as, as from today, a periodic penalty payment of €80000for each day of delay

In 2008, the Commission decided1that certain aid granted to Italy in favour of the hotel firms of Sardinia was incompatible with the common market. Consequently, Italy was required to recover that unlawful aid (of a total amount of approximately €13.7 million) immediately and effectively from the beneficiaries.
[...]
While recognising Italy’s efforts to recover the aid at issue (in 2019, 89% of the total capital amount had been recovered, that is83% of that capital amount together with interest), the Court deems it appropriate to impose on Italy pecuniary penalties in the form o fa periodic penalty payment and a lump sum.

As regards the periodic penalty payment, the Court takes into consideration the seriousness of the infringement, which resulted in distortion of competition, and its considerable duration(over seven years as from the Court’s first judgment).

Applied bureaucrats those at the European Court of "Justice". They managed to squeeze in this decision as Italy was already in despair and just before the rest of the EU had to shut down, including their democratically unnacountable supranational court.
Market uber alles! Except if it is France, parce que c'est la France. Or Germany. Then the Commission waives whatever sanctions, or creates special rules.

 

[innonimatu]

A few more pointers on the perversity of the European Union. During the "sovereign debt crisis" 10 years ago the EU created an "investment vehicle" called "European Stability Mechanism", a fund which was capitalized with €80 billion from all member states in quotas proportional to their GDP. The ESM was chartered to "invest" this paid-in capital and, thanks to the miracle of financial markers annulment of risk, would in turn issue debt worth nearly 10 times more (€700 billion), to loan to european countries in financial distress. The idea was that thanks to financial markets miracle this fund that lent to countries deemed not creditworthy was going to be credit worthy! And so it was...

Anyone with half a brain can see this is smoke and mirrors. The ESM fund was "credit worthy" because the ECB and the EU said so, and its pet rating agency obliged. Not because 80 billion in "safe" investments could guarantee up to 700 billion in less safe ones - that was the exact kind of lies that had caused the 2008 crisis. So why this smoke and mirrors? Because the usual virtuous calvinists refused to simply create the money. They would only agree to set up this kind fund, and only if they dictated their rules, otherwise the EU would do nothing to address the crisis - they'd block any decision.

And it just so happened that the fund's rules imposed basically two things:
1. Privatizations on already financially strapped (both public and private sector) countries, so that they were forced to do fire sales of assets to foreigners who had available capital or credit. The chinese kind of spoiled the planned party of the virtuous calvinists on this one though.
2. The fund's capital, those 80 billion contributed equally by everyone, had to be "invested" on "safe" bonds, which just so happened to be the ones issued by the virtuous calvinists. Hence those €80 billion were a subsidy to the state and corporate sectors of Germany, Netherlands, etc which had "A" of better "credit ratings". It has ever since remained a tool to subsidize the wealthy in this way.

They're certain to be cooking up something like this again. And proclaim their virtue loudly. The reality such public speech disguises is an intention to have another go at organized looting, by the wealthy elites of those countries, all over Europe. They think they can threaten the poorer countries into submission again, and they certainly count on fooling the plebs of their own countries with the virtue and sin speech.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I didn't say you specifically were, but uh "sceptical of it and wanting the UK out of it" is the same thing.

No, it is NOT the same thing. Jeremy Corbyn was a notorious euro-sceptic yet he supported Remain.

It is also possible to believe that some sort of european comunity union may be a good thing for
adjacent countries in continental europe without believing that the UK should be part of it.

The same goes for your apparent refusal to Google any EU action on Covid-19.

I googled a lot about the EU prior to the referendum and more recently for action on Covid 19 and other
things, and I did not found very much of substance. Mainly platitiudes and unsubstantiated claims.

You can note whatever you want, but you are not a collective (unless! ), and therefore it's "I", not "We"

I m not the only Leave voter who noticed that the Remain campaign was essentially negative, so my use of the plural is correct.

More specifically this is the thread for believers in the European project to say what they believe in and why.

If they choose not to do so, one wonders why not?

 

[Hrothbern]

The Euro highlights a big cultural divide in Europe and therefore in the EU on how to govern your country regarding financial policies. That cultural divide never changed the last 40 years during the Euro creation, never changed since WW2.
Despite all political changes within the involved countries, despite all different political constellations of the EU.
A cultural divide.
From La Fontaine: more ants in the North, more crickets in the South.
More politicians who believe in makeability or campaign with that in the South, more sceptical politicians towards makeability in the North.
There are a thousand cultural indicators demonstrating that cultural divide of the countries matching pretty good with this financial divide.
From practical day-to-day antibiotics prescription rates (2-3 times as high in Southern countries) to more abstract indicators as the power distance culture being much higher in the South (also encouraging all kinds of favoritisms and corruption), and this general culture divide does reflect ofc also in politics with for example much bigger Green political parties in the North.

When the idea of the Euro came into being four decades ago, the objective was to create a strong hard currency including rules. The countries who wanted to join knew this and started three decades ago financial policies to get there. Two decades ago the Euro was launched.

The Euro was originally based on Germany and France having one currency for geopolitical reasons and because Mitterand preferred to force a strong currency discipline on domestics poolitics of France.
The joining in of Belgium, Italy, and other South European countries was at that time in no way encouraged by the rich Northern countries.
It was seen as unwise because of the difference in financial culture.
They were used in governing with budget deficits, with inflation, with their currency weakening gradually over time compared to the DeutchMark.

And yet they joined the disciplining period of the 90ies, and yet they did not abort the disciplining period, and yet they joined the Euro two decades ago.
Perhaps the people in those countries were fed up with their inflations ?
Perhaps the wealthy in those countries saw opportunities ?
Perhaps everybody believed in miracles of the makeability of economics being separated from culture ?
Perhaps the political elites in those countries were afraid to miss the boat ?
Perhaps France was afraid to be the only country with a culture of a weak currency and sought travelling fellows ?
Perhaps Southern countries thought they could change over time the Euro into a weaker currency ?

Who knows
Fact is they did join a hard currency agreement needing strong financial discipline and returning lower interests on bonds.

And what now ?
A question asked since the Euro was there.
Change their culture or get out ? Or meddle on together ?
And will that be the choice of the peoples or the choice of the political elites ?

Nothing new.
The budget meetings for the new 7 year budget already in that sign.
The Corona crisis, the biggest crisis so far, adding urgency and rhetorics. But there was always during those 40 years some crisis during budget meetings heatening the rhetorics.
The only real thing that changed is that the UK, traditionally strongly against federation thinking and joined finances, has left.
And the cultural divide, right through the middle, still there: the border between the Netherlands and Belgium and the borders between Germany-Switzerland-Austria and France-Italy.
Almost similar to the old Roman-Germanic borders.

For sure rhetorics between leading politicians is not going to help finding practical solutions for the new 7-year budget and the need for high amounts of money for Corona.
But yeah... that is the proverbial hammer and nails.
Politicians forget all the time that the EU is for such money decisions more like a bargaining business platform, and not a domestic election campaign.

 

[Gorbles]

No, it is NOT the same thing. Jeremy Corbyn was a notorious euro-sceptic yet he supported Remain.

Ah, right, so you supported Remain then? I don't believe you did, though it would lend some extreme irony to all your complaints about "Remainers". You can't have it both ways. My definition was both being skeptical of the EU and wanting an early / important member out of it. Corbyn doesn't qualify for that, because for better or worse, he went with his party's line.

And Edward, please don't speak for people who aren't yourself. There are plenty of people that agree with me on things, but I don't invoke them to win arguments on the Internet. My posts are my opinion, as yours are yours. They're nothing bigger than that.

Regardless, I submit that you didn't Google very hard. At all. There are problems, sure, but action is still being taken.

 

[innonimatu]

A cultural divide.
From La Fontaine: more ants in the North, more crickets in the South.

And the phony virtue preaching is here too! You can't help yourselves, can you? You actually believe that crap?

From practical day-to-day antibiotics prescription rates (2-3 times as high in Southern countries) to more abstract indicators as the power distance culture being much higher in the South (also encouraging all kinds of favoritisms and corruption), and this general culture divide does reflect ofc also in politics with for example much bigger Green political parties in the North.

You know who destroyed the effectiveness of known medical anti-fungal compounds? The dutch, using them in a massive scale to cultivate bloody flowers. Don't preach me about use or overuse of antibiotics among the southerners due to their "culture".
You know who made it tax deductible to corrupt foreign officials? The germans. Who made it a practice of buying politicians in southern Europe (see the activities of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Portugal, Spain, Greece and Italy during the 1970s and 80s), corrupting the "left" parties into neoliberals? The germans. Plus itts immitators in Germany, the Konrad Adenauer, Hanns Seidel, Friedrich Naumann Foundations, and the sewedes and the dutch, and the french and british also. It was a party, "financing" (corrupting) the southerners and "guiding" them into the EU. I was here, I know all about it.

he Euro was originally based on Germany and France having one currency for geopolitical reasons and because Mitterand preferred to force a strong currency discipline on domestics poolitics of France.
The joining in of Belgium, Italy, and other South European countries was at that time in no way encouraged by the rich Northern countries.

The joining of all of southern Europe, in fact all of the EU, was a requirement of the single currency project from the start. It was and is called the "Economic and Monetary Union". The evidence is in the treaties themselves, back to the Maastricht Treaty: they require that all countries of the EU join, and exceptions had to be carved out (opt-out) for countries that totally refused to, initially only he UK. Denmark was saved by its own population being given the chance to refuse the treaty. Membership of the whole EMU is not optional, it is a requirement of the EU:

Article 119
1. For the purposes set out in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, the activities of the Member States and the Union shall include, as provided in the Treaties, the adoption of an economic policy which is based on the close coordination of Member States' economic policies, on the internal market and on the definition of common objectives, and conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition.
2. Concurrently with the foregoing, and as provided in the Treaties and in accordance with the procedures set out therein, these activities shall include a single currency, the euro, and the definition and conduct of a single monetary policy and exchange-rate policy the primary objective of both of which shall be to maintain price stability and, without prejudice to this objective, to support the general economic policies in the Union, in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition.
3. These activities of the Member States and the Union shall entail compliance with the following guiding principles: stable prices, sound public finances and monetary conditions and a sustainable balance of payments.

You do not carve out an exception unless there was a binding obligation otherwise:

1. Unless the United Kingdom notifies the Council that it intends to adopt the euro, it shall be under no obligation to do so.

4. Articles 119, second paragraph, 126(1), (9) and (11), 127(1) to (5), 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, 138, 140(3), 219, 282(2), with the exception of the first and last sentences thereof, 282(5), and 283 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union shall not apply to the United Kingdom. The same applies to Article 121(2) of this Treaty as regards the adoption of the parts of the broad economic policy guidelines which concern the euro area generally.

What has happened since is that a series of other central european governments noticed the batshit insanity of joining the Euro in servitude to the mercantilist northwestern (central EU) Europe, and simply refused to do so despite the treaties. Outside the ECB direct reach, and absent an occupation Wehrmacht, the EU has been unable so far to force them to comply.

Perhaps the people in those countries were fed up with their inflations ?
Perhaps the wealthy in those countries saw opportunities ?
Perhaps everybody believed in miracles of the makeability of economics being separated from culture ?
Perhaps the political elites in those countries were afraid to miss the boat ?
Perhaps France was afraid to be the only country with a culture of a weak currency and sought travelling fellows ?
Perhaps Southern countries thought they could change over time the Euro into a weaker currency ?

Who knows

The people of those countries were not asked. Their politicians were bribed, outright bribed (see the above, financing of political parties...), to join the EU. and they refused to put up the question to public discussion: it was "the future" and all big parties had been bribed, that was it. Those recently transitioned into liberal democracy were especially vulnerable to external influence. Much like central and eastern Europe would be in the 1990s. Who knows? I know, I saw it being done.

And what now ?
A question asked since the Euro was there.
Change their culture or get out ? Or meddle on together ?
And will that be the choice of the peoples or the choice of the political elites ?

What now? End the EU. Against the will of the political elites who were very cozy and feeling protected inside it, but who now fear the consequences of clinging to it.
The divorce will be hard? Independence is hart at the beginning, we'll deal with it. If the germans want to retaliate we'll simply seize their physical assets here and tariff their exports to hell We'll make do without them until we have replacements, just as we are having to make do during this crisis. We'll trade with China and the US and Russia and South America and the UK and each other among the crickets in sinful southern europe. Germany's export economy and the Netherlands's trade economy can and should crash and burn for all I care Let them appreciate, too late, how good they had it and what they destroyed in their greed to have ever more.

 

[Hrothbern]

And the phony virtue preaching is here too! You can't help yourselves, can you? You actually believe that crap?



You know who destroyed the effectiveness of known medical anti-fungal compounds? The dutch, using them in a massive scale to cultivate bloody flowers. Don't preach me about use or overuse of antibiotics among the southerners due to their "culture".
You know who made it tax deductible to corrupt foreign officials? The germans. Who made it a practice of buying politicians in southern Europe (see the activities of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Portugal, Spain, Greece and Italy during the 1970s and 80s), corrupting the "left" parties into neoliberals? The germans. Plus itts immitators in Germany, the Konrad Adenauer, Hanns Seidel, Friedrich Naumann Foundations, and the sewedes and the dutch, and the french and british also. It was a party, "financing" (corrupting) the southerners and "guiding" them into the EU. I was here, I know all about it.



The joining of all of southern Europe, in fact all of the EU, was a requirement of the single currency project from the start. It was and is called the "Economic and Monetary Union". The evidence is in the treaties themselves, back to the Maastricht Treaty: they require that all countries of the EU join, and exceptions had to be carved out (opt-out) for countries that totally refused to, initially only he UK. Denmark was saved by its own population being given the chance to refuse the treaty. Membership of the whole EMU is not optional, it is a requirement of the EU:



You do not carve out an exception unless there was a binding obligation otherwise:



What has happened since is that a series of other central european governments noticed the bat**** insanity of joining the Euro in servitude to the mercantilist northwestern (central EU) Europe, and simply refused to do so despite the treaties. Outside the ECB direct reach, and absent an occupation Wehrmacht, the EU has been unable so far to force them to comply.



The people of those countries were not asked. Their politicians were bribed, outright bribed (see the above, financing of political parties...), to join the EU. and they refused to put up the question to public discussion: it was "the future" and all big parties had been bribed, that was it. Those recently transitioned into liberal democracy were especially vulnerable to external influence. Much like central and eastern Europe would be in the 1990s. Who knows? I know, I saw it being done.



What now? End the EU. Against the will of the political elites who were very cozy and feeling protected inside it, but who now fear the consequences of clinging to it.
The divorce will be hard? Independence is hart at the beginning, we'll deal with it. If the germans want to retaliate we'll simply seize their physical assets here and tariff their exports to hell We'll make do without them until we have replacements, just as we are having to make do during this crisis. We'll trade with China and the US and Russia and South America and the UK and each other among the crickets in sinful southern europe. Germany's export economy and the Netherlands's trade economy should burn. Let them appreciate, too late, how good they had it and what they destroyed in their greed to have ever more.

Inno
your appreciation of the EU is very distorted

 

[innonimatu]

You deny the corruption of the southern politicians by their "elder brothers" of the north in the 1970s and 1980s? And then of the central european ones (didn't go so easily...) in the 1990s?

You deny that the EMU is a requirement of the EU?

What, if anything, in what I wrote is false?

You saw your country prosper within an EU constructed to benefit it, benefit from its rules as they were written. I saw my country being ruined, by the same rules - we did not benefit from the EU, we benefited from modern technology solely despite the EU hindering us. Different perspectives indeed.
It was Upton Sinclair who said "it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it".

 

[Hrothbern]

You deny the corruption of the southern politicians by their "elder brothers" of the north in the 1970s and 1980s? And then of the central european ones (didn't go so easily...) in the 1990s?

You deny that the EMU is a requirement of the EU?

What, if anything, in what I wrote is false?

Almost everything you say is wrong or the timing is wrong or your hopes are wrong about what the people in South European countries would decide when given the choice.
You have to face the international realities of Big Money. Not that much wriggling room.
The EU is regarding money not about perfection but about the lesser evil, going steps forwards and backwards all the time. Driven by the political choices on who governs within its members.

Coming in in this EU thread with the general rhetorics treat during the Corona crisis is opportunity bad taste behaviour.

 

[innonimatu]

Bad taste, to say the least, is the finance minister of the Netherlands replying that "Spain should be investigated for misuse of EU funding" when Spain now asks for help with holding up its finances during the coronavirus crisis. The reality is what it is, and especially when dealing with a crisis it must be met full on. Not with lies and dissembling. The reality is that the EU is worst that useless at this time, it's actively sabotaging reaction to the crisis: no central bank to use, and an ECB that refused to act. The precious "four freedoms" suspended, state aid granted in the unique special countries even as Italy is fined for having granted state aid, and so on.

The international realities of big money were and are empowered by the EU. Eurodollars are a thing of the 1970s any really took off with the EMU project. The primacy of markets as global ideology was impossible without the EU picking it up from the US and them imposing it on central Europe, creating an apparent "global consensus". It is indeed the root of the evils harming the world.

And: exactly what I said was wrong? I linked to evidence and if you want proof of corruption I can point to prior posts with details, and can post even masses of information pertaining my country.
Let me be clear: I will not tolerate, not stand by, through more discourses about virtuous northerners and and cricket southerners.

 

[Hrothbern]

Bad taste, to say the least, is the finance minister of the Netherlands replying that "Spain should be investigated for misuse of EU funding" when Spain now asks for help with holding up its finances during the coronavirus crisis. The reality is what it it, and especially when dealing with a crisis it must be met full on. Not with lies and dissembling. The reality is that the EU is worst that useless at this time, it's actively sabotaging reaction to the crisis: no central bank to use, and an ECB that refused to act. The precious "four freedoms" suspended, state aid granted in the unique special countries even as Italy is fined for having granted state aid, and so on.

The international realities of big money were and are empowered by the EU. Eurodollars are a thing of the 1970s any really took off with the EMU project. The primacy of markets as global ideology was impossible without the EU picking it up from the US and them imposing it on central Europe, creating an apparent "global consensus". It is indeed the root of the evils harming the world.

I did nowhere say that I supported what Hoekstra said except the general remark: " Politicians forget all the time that the EU is for such money decisions more like a bargaining business platform, and not a domestic election campaign"

I found the statements of Hoekstra heartless
And unwise as well because the consensus in the Netherlands is already that when confronted with a burning house (Corona) you start extinguishing the fire first regardless what it takes, also the houses of your neighbors.

What Hoekstra did was for domestic politics, to be more precise to prevent losing more voters to the Eurosceptic populist right parties (now 20%) who are eurosceptic because they are of the opinion that they pay too much.
And some could come from his frustrations about the whole situation, But that's not his job to whine about that.

The EU useless ???
The ECB has already started buying debts of countries since last Wednesday and will continue to do so. The international money vultures are circling but so far they have no chance: the "whatever it takes" is in place. The interest on bonds was back in the cellar soon after that start.
And as I said in the Corona thread, for the Netherlands this could be borrowing in the size of 15%-22.5% of GDP. Assuming that other countries need similat borrowings as % of GDP, that money will be there.
Yes it will increase the national debt of the EU overall with that something 20%... but that is still lower than the UK, the US, Japan, etc, etc.
What also happens in the background is that consensus is developing to separate government investments from government running costs regarding the build up of national debt. That gives a lot of leeway above that 60% debt target.

The real reality Inno is that HERE IN EUROPE the mainstream capitalist welfare state consensus and actions are simply much faster and effective than leftish politics and activists are able to produce at this moment.
Unfortunately but true.
Just lots of whining and no vision. Too little too late because of the totally splintered movement.
For you nothing is good enough... confusing short term with long term... and by that your input is great as analysis to think about but mostly counterproductive to act.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Ah, right, so you supported Remain then? I don't believe you did,

I only suppported Remain in 1975, for the vote on the EEC.

I did not support Remain in 2016, for the vote on the EU.

Jeremy Corbyn's voting record prior to the 2016 referendum makes it very clear he was a Eurosceptic.

Regardless, I submit that you didn't Google very hard. At all. There are problems, sure, but action is still being taken.

First link demonstrates EU officialdom concern about the impact of the corona virus on the economy.
The second link demonstrates EU officialdom concern about the potential impact on the Euro currency.

Neither of those links demonstrates any concern about the EU citizens who are going to die.
But then those links seem more about reassuring officialdom, corporates and the markets.

The third link points to a paywall.