European Union take 2

[Cole]

Since we aren't doing it in the style of political-politician debate style in those forums..let's try it again in a more Political Correct way. Unlike other, that went the way of political war.

Vote only for Europeans, and would like to know people opinion on this, not required, just preferable. I promise, I will not be a System Lord this time!

**EDIT** removed Universe quoted post spoilered here, from other topic.

Corran different view
[spoiler]

oh.. there's a vote! just noticed that.

i voted pro eu with different eu system:

1. every citizen of an eu country can freely travel, move to, work, do business etc. in any other eu country
2. no custom duty/ import/export taxes etc. on goods shipped and traded within the eu
3. no restrictions on money transfers between eu countries (regardles whether it's a bank transfer or you're transfering it in cash in your briefcase)
4. seperation of economy and state for all eu countries:
- no central banks controlled by govts or such
- no 'state' currencies
- no fiscal policy: no govt shall be allowed to tax some ppl more than the others (with some differences in 3 groups: individuals/businesses/property owners), no govt shall be allowed to give grants/benefits etc. to anybody
- no services provided by any of the eu states (no public education/health etc.)
5. no 'common eu policies', no standardisation etc. on the eu level (other than standards developed and somehow imposed by private enterprises like windoze, photoshop etc)
6. competition between legal systems of the eu states
7. competition between tax rates of the eu states (they cannot tax one more than the others but one state can have tax rate 10%, other 50%, or maybe a poll tax)
8. no laws treating unequally citizens/businesses/organisations from different eu states

this is just from the top of my head. the general idea is to decentralise everything as much as possible and make govts as small as possible giving more power and freedom to ppl (like for examle a pub owner shall be able to put a notice no asians allowed without worring about somebody suing him for racism) thus allowing for more competition between ideas and solutions to problems which makes the entire economy and society work way more effciently than it does now (and yes. there'll still be recesions from time to time. that's just how the world works.)

actually, there should be "world" instead of "eu" but we have to start somewhere.

ahh.. btw: with this system bix would be able to not give a damn about the eu without any worries about his health/wealth/life.

[/spoiler]

Considering it's EU stuff topic, could it be possible that an European misc mod takes care of this topic (happens that only Universe is european from misc mods list o_o)? To delete anything that doesn't contribute to the topic (I don't want spam here), edit/delete posts that might tend to be flaming towards another person (myself included for posts author) and anything requiring modding.

ADDITIONAL EDIT: SINCE IT HAS NOT BEEN CLEAR FOR FEW PEOPLE, POSTING A POST SOLELY TO SPAM, DERAIL OR FLAME WILL BE REPORTED. THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING.

ALREADY ONE REPORTED POST AS OF NOW FOR NOT CONTRIBUTING AT ALL TO THE TOPIC AND JUST SPAMMING IT.

-----------------

http://www.euprofiler.eu/

How it works: Choose your country, then answer questions, state your opinion on importance, parties you would vote for (be careful with it, can make bug with result of poll), then check where you are (pro/anti UE, left/right wing), what parties you are closest to (by % can be chosen with different countries parties).

Only for Europeans test, of course

Interesting thing (results from the test of above linked site) to talk about in this topic also, your positions in it, compare with others etc...

[Juliette]

Please illustrate the differences between Corran and my system.. at first glance, we are quite of one mind. He says EU should allow freedom for individual states, and I say individual states/provinces/county rules weigh heavier as federal rules.
Our systems seem to be able co-exist, neither excluding the other.


Also, if you're serious about this, you should at least allow me to complete my system, instead of just picking a superficial list from another thread.

[Cole]

Please illustrate the differences between Corran and my system.. at first glance, we are quite of one mind. He says EU should allow freedom for individual states, and I say individual states/provinces/county rules weigh heavier as federal rules.
Our systems seem to be able co-exist, neither excluding the other.


Also, if you're serious about this, you should at least allow me to complete my system, instead of just picking a superficial list from another thread.

So, you are for EU or more likely, for another kind of EU? (I don't see such votes in the poll, so I'm curious, and your view sounds much more like different view than a no)

(ooc: made sure to make revoting possible, I'm sure several people tend to third option but instead for some reasons would pick last one.)

And if I quoted your post and his, it's because I was expecting the "we won't post what we said again" thing. I quoted it here, to make sure interesting things from other topic wouldn't be lost. I did so to try to help...no need to be conflictual..

I deleted quote/spoiler so now you can explain your stance fully.

[~Sokar~]

After I read the posts I agreed with almost every points of Corran, except the fifth one (no 'common eu policies'), if I understood it well. My opinion is that the EU is on it's way to become another global power, just like China. The european nations would be too weak without each other, and couldn't step up for their interests against the USA or Russia in future (just like now). The EU could do that but only if it has a common foreign policy backed with all member nations. The EU has already reached very much and gained respect mostly in diplomatic missions in africa and maybe in some other parts of the world, and I think the next step should be the setup of a common EU military force. Sarkozy wanted something like that instead of NATO, but I don't know what happened with the idea. Also, I think they should make the decision making of the EU a little easier, maybe with more simple majority votings (50%+1).

[RepliMagni]

(ooc: made sure to make revoting possible, I'm sure several people tend to third option but instead for some reasons would pick last one.)

Sorry pops but that just made me laugh so much....you really can't understand why people would disagree with you, do you?

Now personally, I would want something like the EU, but I would want it for all countries - I hate national boundaries, which, in my opinion, increase the divisions of the world and reinforce protectionist, self-interested ideas and policies.

However, I can perfectly understand why some people, say from England, wouldn't want to join the EU - for example, the French maintaining a longer ban than was necessary on British beef after the mad cow incident and their flagrant disregard for disruptions caused by blocking the Chunnel, or for example, the racist abuse English footballers and F1 drivers have received at the hands of Spanish fans - these kinds of incidents don't endear a country to its neighbours - especially not to devolve its legislative powers over to a joint council.

EDIT: I didn't even know who the MEPs were for my area - East Midlands, England, so I googled them....probably shouldn't have:

2004 - present

Derek Clark UKIP
Chris Heaton-Harris Conservative
Roger Helmer Conservative
Robert Kilroy-Silk UKIP (2004) Veritas (2004 - 2005) Independent (since 2005)
Bill Newton Dunn Liberal Democrats
Phillip Whitehead Labour (2004 - 2005)

[Cole]

(ooc: made sure to make revoting possible, I'm sure several people tend to third option but instead for some reasons would pick last one.)

Sorry pops but that just made me laugh so much....you really can't understand why people would disagree with you, do you?

As I said earlie, such kind of comments don't belong in this topic, and aren't welcomed either.
This doesn't add anything to the topic, please refrain in the future (you and others) to make such statements. Thank you.

Now personally, I would want something like the EU, but I would want it for all countries - I hate national boundaries, which, in my opinion, increase the divisions of the world and reinforce protectionist, self-interested ideas and policies.

However, I can perfectly understand why some people, say from England, wouldn't want to join the EU - for example, the French maintaining a longer ban than was necessary on British beef after the mad cow incident and their flagrant disregard for disruptions caused by blocking the Chunnel, or for example, the racist abuse English footballers and F1 drivers have received at the hands of Spanish fans - these kinds of incidents don't endear a country to its neighbours - especially not to devolve its legislative powers over to a joint council.

I agree totally with first paragraph. For second, well, I don't know for beef issues, not informed, so I'll not comment this. For last part regarding racism, I don't support such kind of disgusting behaviour (spanish fans should be punished, in France, racism towards players gets you a mention on tv and a free ticket to court). In France we suffer from same little groups, and pro-european people are usually very hostile to them. As I am.
European Union should set anti racism laws, towards all countries. Not able to be outweighted by any local/national laws (this one isn't concerning local stuff but beyond that). I don't mean positive discrimination (I'm not in favour of that), I mean laws against racism acts. To show that racism isn't accepted not only by several countries, but by EU as a whole.

[RepliMagni]

(ooc: made sure to make revoting possible, I'm sure several people tend to third option but instead for some reasons would pick last one.)

Sorry pops but that just made me laugh so much....you really can't understand why people would disagree with you, do you?

As I said earlie, such kind of comments don't belong in this topic, and aren't welcomed either.
This doesn't add anything to the topic, please refrain in the future (you and others) to make such statements. Thank you.

Ah. So you can't take someone disagreeing with you, or a joke? I'm not breaking any rules, and each of my posts are constructively adding to the debate, so keep on bouncing big boy

I agree totally with first paragraph. For second, well, I don't know for beef issues, not informed, so I'll not comment this. For last part regarding racism, I don't support such kind of disgusting behaviour (spanish fans should be punished, in France, racism towards players gets you a mention on tv and a free ticket to court). In France we suffer from same little groups, and pro-european people are usually very hostile to them. As I am.
European Union should set anti racism laws, towards all countries. Not able to be outweighted by any local/national laws (this one isn't concerning local stuff but beyond that). I don't mean positive discrimination (I'm not in favour of that), I mean laws against racism acts. To show that racism isn't accepted not only by several countries, but by EU as a whole.

From March 2002:

France will not end its boycott of British beef in the next three months despite a European ruling that the ban is illegal.

Mr Patriat said the government did not plan to address the ban between now and a general election, scheduled for June.

British beef was banned for three and a half years
The European Commission ended a three-and-a-half-year ban on British beef exports in the summer of 1999, imposed because of fears of the presence of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) - or mad cow disease.

But France continued to block access to imports.

The European Union's highest court, the European Court of Justice, ruled in December that France was acting illegally by continuing to ban the meat.

Just one example of the many reasons people might not want to join in the EU if the other countries don't want to play nice

[Cole]

Just one thing, the ban only concerned France towards GB, right?
Then, why would an UK out of Europe have a better outcome with beef selling than if it was in EU?
Since it was in EU, it was able to voice their position towards France and vice-versa in EU institutions. An out-of-EU UK wouldn't have those possibilities, and a ban from France would surely not have been solved faster.

[RepliMagni]

Just one thing, the ban only concerned France towards GB, right?
Then, why would an UK out of Europe have a better outcome with beef selling than if it was in EU?
Since it was in EU, it was able to voice their position towards France and vice-versa in EU institutions. An out-of-EU UK wouldn't have those possibilities, and a ban from France would surely not have been solved faster.

a) it wasn't an argument, in and of itself, for withdrawing from the EU. It was merely one example of why British people feel agrieved towards Europe and might not want to join fully.
b) as you can see, France took no notice of the EU institution. So we have the restrictions of being in the EU with none of the benefits - France simply ignored it.

[Cole]

Just one thing, the ban only concerned France towards GB, right?
Then, why would an UK out of Europe have a better outcome with beef selling than if it was in EU?
Since it was in EU, it was able to voice their position towards France and vice-versa in EU institutions. An out-of-EU UK wouldn't have those possibilities, and a ban from France would surely not have been solved faster.

a) it wasn't an argument, in and of itself, for withdrawing from the EU. It was merely one example of why British people feel agrieved towards Europe and might not want to join fully.
b) as you can see, France took no notice of the EU institution. So we have the restrictions of being in the EU with none of the benefits - France simply ignored it.

You just pointed out a MAJOR issue still going on, in EU. Nation(s) position versus European Union position. Which position outrules the other? etc...(one question in euprofiler site questions is about this)
One of major issues diving parties and people.

[Fear Of The Duck]

LOL!! take 2....

thx pops for puting my post in there. saves me work.

and i think you should change the poll a bit:

Yes, I'm pro EU (preferably state why)
Neutral to EU (preferably state why)
Yes, I'm pro EU, but only if it's the Corran's way.
No to EU (in favour of withdrawing from EU etc..) (preferably state which)

Please illustrate the differences between Corran and my system.. at first glance, we are quite of one mind.

if only we could be of one body....

[Kit-Fox]

Hahahahahaha, you force it to go around again & your still losing, give it up LA

[Cole]

Hahahahahaha, you force it to go aroudn again & your still losing, give it up LA

Can a mod delete the above useless post?
(and mine as well as it's just related to useless spam post from above)
Reported above post, by the way.

[Kit-Fox]

Its hardly spam, you didnt like the result provided by the first poll & so you have forced us to once again take part. Once again you are losing the poll.

You throwing your toys out of the pram.

The EU shouldnt exist, its a bad idea from start to finish & one that isnt needed. If you cant stand on your own then you shouldnt be able too.

EDIT: you dont want a discussion on the EU or where to go with it or what should happen from this point on. You want to bully and shout at us till we accept that a fully integrate Eu is the only way forwards.

If you wanted a discussion/debate on it then you'd have left the old thread open.

[Cole]

The EU shouldnt exist, its a bad idea from start to finish & one that isnt needed. If you cant stand on your own then you shouldnt be able too.

-Divided we are small, united we are grand. EU is first in exportations in the world. Your scheme of things would have countries totally outpassed by USA and Japan.
-By saying this, you are in favour of Europe being dominated by stronger political/economical forces. But if you cared about it, you wouldn't be against EU.
-If EU didn't exist, chances of wars between Europe countries would have been much higher. One of reasons to build EU. Stop wars and instead collaborate to rise. But well, you don't like to see EU united, but rather, divided. God knows how much USSR would have taken profit from this.
-If EU didn't exist, countries like East Germany would have suffered ALOT from USSR downfall.
-Last part implies a relation of unchanging dominating/dominated nations. I really like your view of things, really..

EDIT: you dont want a discussion on the EU or where to go with it or what should happen from this point on. You want to bully and shout at us till we accept that a fully integrate Eu is the only way forwards.

If you wanted a discussion/debate on it then you'd have left the old thread open.

More attempts of derailing the thread. You are really good at it!
You are the only one causing troubles here in this topic. Don't you realize it?
All complains about former topic DO NOT BELONG HERE!