European union expansion

Frank the tank

What with all the turmoil in the "Eurozone" and what clearly can happen when you have such big differentials in countries' ecconomies; it seem barmy to me that the EU should be considering expanding in order to take on a load of deadbeat sh1te eastern european nations. Barmy. Unless of course the poweres that be just look on it as being an easier way to import another pool of cheap labour?

Gizmodo

Frank the tank wrote:

What with all the turmoil in the "Eurozone" and what clearly can happen when you have such big differentials in countries' ecconomies; it seem barmy to me that the EU should be considering expanding in order to take on a load of deadbeat sh1te eastern european nations. Barmy. Unless of course the poweres that be just look on it as being an easier way to import another pool of cheap labour?

Personally I'm sick of the waste of money that is the EU, if it were up to me the UK would get out!

RideOnTime

Yes, some interesting carefully thought out points there...

Frank the tank

RideOnTime wrote:

Yes, some interesting carefully thought out points there...

I detect sarcasm in your comment, do you think EU expension is a good thing then?

MaxwellBygraves

Semi-relevant: many in (and out) of the Labour party are saying it's increasingly likely the party will offer EU referendum in next manifesto.

See here - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/maryr ... eferendum/

Frank the tank

I can see the tories getting on that one aswell, come the next GE.

verylonglegs

I doubt it's anything to do with cheap labour, there aren't enough jobs as it is. More an ego thing I suspect, they are obsessed with empire building and more control. We all have MEP don't we? Does anyone know the name of theirs and what he does with his day?! Given how clearly a failed political project it currently is, that is screwing up the lives of millions, it makes you wonder how bad it has to be in these potential new member countries for the EU to seem appealing.

Frank the tank

verylonglegs wrote:

I doubt it's anything to do with cheap labour, there aren't enough jobs as it is. More an ego thing I suspect, they are obsessed with empire building and more control. We all have MEP don't we? Does anyone know the name of theirs and what he does with his day?! Given how clearly a failed political project it currently is, that is screwing up the lives of millions, it makes you wonder how bad it has to be in these potential new member countries for the EU to seem appealing.

Plenty of handouts from mug nations like us for a start.

Jez mon

Meh,

Generally, the original core idea behind the EU is OK, imo. Free(ish) trade between nations is generally a good thing.

However, the EU project seems to have become an all consuming beast and a single currency amongst independent nations who want to set their own economic policies is just an accident waiting to happen.

Free trade good, slow amalgamation of nations, bad...

EKIMIKE

People forget the founding purpose of (what is now) the EU.

Started off as the European Steel and Coal Community. Why? In the words of the creator, Robert Schuman: "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible." This is because you need coal (hydrocarbons - predominantly oil nowadays) and steel for war. Without those things you have no army, or a least no equipment.

So let's look at why the Balkan nations are being encouraged to strive for EU membership... > Recent war > Fair chance the ethnic frictions will arise again > Poverty/economic strife generally doesn't help ease those frictions > encourage nations to become economically strong > No war.

Fairly legitimate and noble reasons for these nations being encouraged towards and given EU Member Status. That is of course unless you are fond of Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic, Srebrenica, The Siege of Sarajevo or Cold War anachronisms (you can mix and match if you want )

alihisgreat

Frank the tank wrote:

What with all the turmoil in the "Eurozone" and what clearly can happen when you have such big differentials in countries' ecconomies; it seem barmy to me that the EU should be considering expanding in order to take on a load of deadbeat sh1te eastern european nations. Barmy. Unless of course the poweres that be just look on it as being an easier way to import another pool of cheap labour?

I'm starting to think of the EU as a portfolio of financial assets, and as such I propose that the EU should definitely expand... arguably to include every economy.

To put it quite simply you should be able to eliminate all the risk in the individual countries by adding other countries whose economies' move in opposite directions into the EU portfolio.

eg. Germany may be in the growth stage of it's economic cycle... and this is offset by Greece in a depression. Transfer payments can be made to average out the performance -> eg. bailouts.

Ultimately if you want to eliminate all the individual risk in finance, and therefore only take on the unavoidable risk that effects the whole market, you should hold a portfolio of the entire market as the risk of a portfolio including the whole market, is the market risk by definition.

My conclusion is therefore that the EU should expand indefinitely, taking in as many countries as possible to eliminate all the individual risk, and take on only unavoidable risk.




although of course this wouldn't work as i'm assuming under this that countries function independently, and the EU is merely a mechanism for transferring money.

In practice you're right... the EU was pretty much doomed to fail from the beginning as monetary policy set by the ECB isn't tailored to individual countries... and unless the economies all joined at the same stage of the economic cycle and maintain the same patterns of growth and recession its just not going to work.

verylonglegs

EKIMIKE wrote:

People forget the founding purpose of (what is now) the EU.

Started off as the European Steel and Coal Community. Why? In the words of the creator, Robert Schuman: "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible." This is because you need coal (hydrocarbons - predominantly oil nowadays) and steel for war. Without those things you have no army, or a least no equipment.

So let's look at why the Balkan nations are being encouraged to strive for EU membership... > Recent war > Fair chance the ethnic frictions will arise again > Poverty/economic strife generally doesn't help ease those frictions > encourage nations to become economically strong > No war.

Fairly legitimate and noble reasons for these nations being encouraged towards and given EU Member Status. That is of course unless you are fond of Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic, Srebrenica, The Siege of Sarajevo or Cold War anachronisms (you can mix and match if you want )

So they should steer clear of EU membership then?!

I'm aware and appreciate the initial aims but quite frankly it's got to the point where the problems going on now make UKIP sound sane, rational and entirely measured. If that isn't an indication of how bad it is then I don't know what is.

daviesee

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Semi-relevant: many in (and out) of the Labour party are saying it's increasingly likely the party will offer EU referendum in next manifesto.

See here - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/maryr ... eferendum/

Er, they had it in their manifesto 2 elections ago, or was it 3?
Once elected......................

EKIMIKE

verylonglegs wrote:

I'm aware and appreciate the initial aims but quite frankly it's got to the point where the problems going on now make UKIP sound sane, rational and entirely measured. If that isn't an indication of how bad it is then I don't know what is.

Surely you are reasonable enough to separate the economic issues which lets not forget is one of a global scale, initiated mainly in the U.S.A. from a regional/ethnic conflict?

It's a bit like our approach to development/aid. We persist with short term strategies such as aid handouts > the people stay poor. We send in NATO > there will still be war. However if we ever took a long term, constructive approach that got right to the heart of the issue, we might actually get somewhere.

However if you're suggesting that the raison d'etre is now entirely different from the original then i'd tend to agree. An economic Union is a sound idea. A political Union, which is ever more the raison d'etre, is foolish and not realistic. However, ultimately we can't lose sight of the original reasoning - to prevent another European war. If the whole house of cards comes tumbling down, that's where we'll be. Without doubt. It's easy for the younger of us to forget - particularly having not witnessed the horrors.

The EU (like so many supra-national initiatives) needs reform, not discrediting or destruction.

ElLawro

This is being protrayed as an 'international crisis', when in fact it's just another banking bail out!! It's not the people of Greece and Spain who should be paying, but the Banks of UK, France and Germany who made the loans in the 1st place!!! :idea: