Two days ago, I took the train home from work, checked the news, and found out that people in France and Germany are starting to talk sense about the EU.
To the uninitiated this sounds like a group of powerful countries dictating to the less powerful ones and introducing escalating punishments for the minnows if they fail to comply. More stick than carrot? Perhaps a recipe for a future civil war?
Definitely more stick than before. And no, this is not a recipe for civil war because countries that don't like it are free to leave, just like the UK did. No need to do it by force. To be honest, the EU would probably be glad if countries like Hungary or Poland left the EU...
I haven't read the document yet, but your summary of it does not mention parliamentary reform. Perhaps it must be a consequence of tighter integration rather than an accompaniment or precedent to it. But it seems vital: people feel too distant from European decision-making, European democracy feels too abstract. The European Parliament must matter, the people need to know that their parliamentary vote matters.
There is some stuff about parliamentary reform in the doc (increased say of European Parliament in budget matters and election of European Commission) but I didn't mention it in this post because I wanted to restrict my comments to economics. But I agree, parliamentary reform is important for increased political acceptance.
I share your enthousiasm. On the balance of probability, I think it will finally come down to option 6: a supplementary treaty. The most willing to join the coalition will probably be Germany, France and the BeNeLux countries but who knows?
Interesting. So ... a large country that is a net contributor to the budget would have much less power?? And would underwrite the debts of other members?
How would this proposal work, when/if a member of the inner circle decides to leave the inner circle?
From a UK perspective, such changes would give the pro Brexit lobby some grounds to say "looks like we were right to come out, unless UK taxpayers want to subsidise early retirement, big deficits, and large state pensions in other member states."
The pro-Brexit lobby doesn't need help justifying its position: a love of wishful thinking is a prerequisite for membership in that particular club.
They have been plundering the state for years at the expense of taxpayers, so accusing the EU of same is a bit rich.
Solidarity is a founding principle of the EU. Solidarity means the better off subsidize the less well-off, and everybody benefits (which is how any currency union works by design - they depend on equalization to function). If Germans were British, they might complain about paying more into the EU than they get out. But they know better: The Common Market is the biggest buyer of German exports. The returns are there, but they are indirect.
The EU is already a "usine à gaz" or a white elephant, i don't dare imagine the result with all these circles. The EU bureaucracy will most probably turn it into a spaghetti plate.
nice summary and fully agreed (maybe i'm a "real" EU dreamer!).
To certain extend with the inner and other circles, seems we are going back to the foundations. At first, if I remember correctly there were only 6 Countries. Now the same or others or even a smaller number, might create the inner circle as the new founder of the Unstated States of Europe, allowing the others, newly in the external circle/s, to observe and eventually adhere.
A simple understandable summary of the proposal. As before start of EEC, France & Germany lead.
The main proposal is very sensible. QMV is essential to make changes. If it existed in 2016 UK would almost certainly still be in the EU. The fiscal union of the central tier solves a lot of the deficiencies of the Euro.
The debatable bits include punishments for breach of EU law. Hungary et al may object.
There remains the difference of attitudes of EU members, and their respective internal politics. AfD to veto it in Germany?
To the uninitiated this sounds like a group of powerful countries dictating to the less powerful ones and introducing escalating punishments for the minnows if they fail to comply. More stick than carrot? Perhaps a recipe for a future civil war?
Definitely more stick than before. And no, this is not a recipe for civil war because countries that don't like it are free to leave, just like the UK did. No need to do it by force. To be honest, the EU would probably be glad if countries like Hungary or Poland left the EU...
I haven't read the document yet, but your summary of it does not mention parliamentary reform. Perhaps it must be a consequence of tighter integration rather than an accompaniment or precedent to it. But it seems vital: people feel too distant from European decision-making, European democracy feels too abstract. The European Parliament must matter, the people need to know that their parliamentary vote matters.
There is some stuff about parliamentary reform in the doc (increased say of European Parliament in budget matters and election of European Commission) but I didn't mention it in this post because I wanted to restrict my comments to economics. But I agree, parliamentary reform is important for increased political acceptance.
I share your enthousiasm. On the balance of probability, I think it will finally come down to option 6: a supplementary treaty. The most willing to join the coalition will probably be Germany, France and the BeNeLux countries but who knows?
Agree. Ironically, Germany, France and the Benelux countries were the original founding members of the EU...
true, plus Italy
Interesting. So ... a large country that is a net contributor to the budget would have much less power?? And would underwrite the debts of other members?
How would this proposal work, when/if a member of the inner circle decides to leave the inner circle?
From a UK perspective, such changes would give the pro Brexit lobby some grounds to say "looks like we were right to come out, unless UK taxpayers want to subsidise early retirement, big deficits, and large state pensions in other member states."
The pro-Brexit lobby doesn't need help justifying its position: a love of wishful thinking is a prerequisite for membership in that particular club.
They have been plundering the state for years at the expense of taxpayers, so accusing the EU of same is a bit rich.
Solidarity is a founding principle of the EU. Solidarity means the better off subsidize the less well-off, and everybody benefits (which is how any currency union works by design - they depend on equalization to function). If Germans were British, they might complain about paying more into the EU than they get out. But they know better: The Common Market is the biggest buyer of German exports. The returns are there, but they are indirect.
The EU is already a "usine à gaz" or a white elephant, i don't dare imagine the result with all these circles. The EU bureaucracy will most probably turn it into a spaghetti plate.
nice summary and fully agreed (maybe i'm a "real" EU dreamer!).
To certain extend with the inner and other circles, seems we are going back to the foundations. At first, if I remember correctly there were only 6 Countries. Now the same or others or even a smaller number, might create the inner circle as the new founder of the Unstated States of Europe, allowing the others, newly in the external circle/s, to observe and eventually adhere.
A simple understandable summary of the proposal. As before start of EEC, France & Germany lead.
The main proposal is very sensible. QMV is essential to make changes. If it existed in 2016 UK would almost certainly still be in the EU. The fiscal union of the central tier solves a lot of the deficiencies of the Euro.
The debatable bits include punishments for breach of EU law. Hungary et al may object.
There remains the difference of attitudes of EU members, and their respective internal politics. AfD to veto it in Germany?