Being mad at your stupidity is not trolling. You helped get the country in this mess. Enjoy it.

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 11:16

I'm not trolling. You said it was undemocratic. So let's unravel it. How do members of the European council get on the council?

Oh, I know how this goes.

I say that the representative heads of each member state are members of the council, who are elected by the people of their countries, and you say 'Gotcha!'

But just because our Prime Minister has a seat on the council and can fight for our interests, doesn't make it democratic. All that is is an insular layer between the Commission and actual democracy.

I'll take the commission and people like Juncker seriously as soon as they give us a direct opportunity to vote them in or out of office.

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 11:17

And yes, a united states of the world should be the ultimate goal

So, Globalism at any cost then?

I think Gloablism is inevitable in the long run, but that doesn't mean we should give our freedom away for the 'greater good'.

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 11:19

Also, way to blame the brown people for crippling the NHS rather than the government. You are just regurgitating the national front and UKIP.

lmao, I didn't mention brown people once. It doesn't matter one jot what their skin colour is, but for what it's worth, most Europeans are WHITE, and it was specifically free movement I was referring to. The NHS has many strains on it, including the ageing population, and perhaps lack of funding. Generally I think the NHS is in dire need of reform, given that is has barely changed since it's inception in the 40s, yet the country has dramatically.

But to deny that a conversation is even worth having on the effect unrestricted migration could be having is damn right lazy, and the instant accusation of racism childish. How old are you Darkus?

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 11:21

And here we see the biggest issue with brexiteers: "I'll be honest, if we're gonna talk economics, I'm not exactly well informed in that department..."

The moment I wrote that I thought to myself 'Darkus is just gonna quote that single line and that will be his argument.'

Bravo you, for being so predictable ;)

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 11:22

Being mad at your stupidity is not trolling. You helped get the country in this mess. Enjoy it.

Yes, us vile working class people ruined everything as usual!

You've yet to explain exactly why it is in a mess. We seem to be doing just fine at the moment. And I asked you earlier, but you ignored it like all my other questions; when are you planning on leaving? After all, you did say people are getting on the life rafts (:

Is yours ready yet?

Darkus Black @ 12/3/2018 17:17

And yes, a united states of the world should be the ultimate goal

But not economically or culturally, but I would like the idea of the world becoming more united eventually.

Ok. So we established that a sweeping generalisation of it being undemocratic is false. Democracy as we have it is a sham anyway. In the case of the EU we have the representatives that each country put in charge electing a leader. It's no different to how the prime minister is made.

We haven't established that it's false to call it undemocratic at all! I said quite clearly that simply having your elected leader have a position on the council isn't even slightly the same as having direct capabilities to remove the overall leadership of the EU via voting.

Also, saying that our democracy is a sham anyway is just fatalistic. Even if such a claim had validity, it's not an argument for staying in the EU.

Mike @ 12/3/2018 11:15

vladykins @ 12/3/2018 9:49 Mike @ 11/3/2018 20:27 You've yet to respond to the questions I posed to you. Darkus, it's not about the individuals who happen to be in charge now, it's about the system itself. Why should we forgo our current system of government, in which we can elect our leaders, for one in which we can't? The mistakes the EU leadership has made over the past few decades are: - The single currency - Free movement - Common Agricultural Policy - Accepting Greece into the EU - Their complete failure during the migrant crisis - Imposition of austerity on Greek people - Their complete lack of respect for the desires of the people of the member states You seem to be missing my point. Even if the current leadership of the EU had done nothing wrong at all, what assurances does that give us for the future? Who knows who will be running things 20, 30 years down the line? And again, I ask the question, how will we hold those people to account? There is no system in place to do so. Frankly, it's set up not all that different from how our Senate used to be, but if you want it to be more democratic, leaving is not a great solution; it's very hard to fix an organization from outside. The common currency is actually a huge benefit. Yes, it means individual countries have to cede central bank control, which means they can't play with the money supply as individual nations, but the UK never ceded to this anyway so this missed the benefits. Hell- there was nothing more frustrating than driving from Ireland into Northern Ireland and having to hit a cash machine; the only people getting an advantage with different currencies are the banks and money changers who charge a fee on top of it. The people who argue losing central bank control of the money supply also tend to be the people who say that the central bank shouldn't be manipulating the money supply, so I've never been able to understand why they consider this a bad thing. Free movement? That shit is fantastic. Used to be I could head into Canada or Mexico with a state ID, but September 11 forced us to get passports for that shit. I've also never understood the people who want free markets for goods but not for human capital. I'll pop into some of the other arguments later, but will leave you with this because I thought it was funny as hell: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/features/things-brexiters-are-nostalgic-for-that-were-actually-bollocks-20180312145776 I'm entirely ignorant of the history of the US political system, but would you argue that it was ever less democratic than the EU in its current state? It's worth stating that I have no interest in seeing the EU reform at this point. It's had every opportunity to do so and just continues on the same path. Euroscepticism is on the rise everywhere, but the leadership still seem entirely uninterested in reform. We've tried fixing it from the inside. I honestly think it's time for the EU to go. I'm all for a free trade area, but that's all. I'll be honest, if we're gonna talk economics, I'm not exactly well informed in that department...but here we go regardless. From what I've seen, common currency has been nothing but a disaster. The countries that were already rich before common currency got richer, like Germany, and those who were poorer became worse off. Countries like Spain and Greece, which rely on tourism for a lot of income, suddenly couldn't sell their goods cheaper to other Europeans, because their currency suddenly had the same value. And I think the crisis in Greece, whatever blame could fairly be attached to the leadership for the crisis in the first place, was amplified by the fact that they couldn't debase their currency to try and inject some life into their economy. And I think there is a world of difference between goods and people when it comes to free movement. How could there not be? Unrestricted movement of people raises all sorts of compilations, especially within something like the EU, where the member states are so dramatically uneven in terms of prosperity. People come with all sorts of baggage. They need to be housed, they need healthcare, they need jobs etc. And you can only build so many houses and hospitals at once, so if you've got more people coming in than you can provide for, surely their has to be restrictions in place. For everyone's benefit. I think free movement has played a part in crippling the NHS, as it encourages health tourism. Don't get me wrong, the prospect of going anywhere within the EU hassle free is nice, but all the problems associated with free movement outweigh it dramatically. I speak so much of the problems with the EU, but I've never got around to asking what benefits it actually brings. Does anybody here want to see a United states of Europe. I mean, that isn't a conspiracy theory, that has been the end goal of the EU from its inception.

The Senate used to be elected by the individual state legislators. So basically the people elected a local person to their state legislator and those folks determined who would sit in the US Senate for six years. We didn't get direct popular vote of US Senators until 1913 when the 17th Amendment passed. A big part of the reason that the EU isn't very democratic is because the EU *isn't* a political association as much as an economic one- and this is part of what makes it less effective than it could be. It's hard to argue for the benefits of the EU when the UK only went half-in as it was; it's impossible to enjoy much of a benefit when the UK always was one step out of the EU in the first place.

The common currency doesn't change how Spain or any other country could sell it's goods- if anything, it makes any differences in costs much easier for people to understand and therefore transparent. If SPain's goods are cheaper, they'll be less Euros than a similar good. That's how it is in the US- homes in Duluth are waaaaay cheaper than the equivalent home in Washington DC and it becomes obvious because we're using USD to calculate both. It also means I can easily see how much I can buy with a dollar I earn in DC but spend in NYC.

What it did take away was the ability of individual governments to control their own money supply and thus value or debase their own currency. This sounds like a bad thing, but those who are truly looking to invest in other countries actually want more security from their investments, which a single currency can do. For example, say I have my own country which has units of Vladias and right now, 100 Vladias = 1 GBP. You decide to invest in my country, but you want security, so you actually end up writing your contracts to say "I'll lend you $1,000,000 GBP and you'll pay me $1,100,000 GBP in return. Why? Why not ask for 110,000,000 Vladias? Because my country can essentially print more Vladias, devalue my currency, and owe you less than your initial investment. So investment is going to be totally unaffected by my changing the money supply here. Temporary purchase changes are possible, but there is always a price to pay, whether it means increasing unemployment or killing internal consumption.

A single currency makes decisions easier for people and thus makes for a better marketplace. If the only way Spain can convince people to come to Spain is by fooling them into it being "cheaper" rather than actually being cheaper, then that's not a competitive advantage to be touting.

In terms of human capital- when you think about jobs outside of hard manufacturing and personal services, most labor is flexible. If a company is going to save money and move to Poland to save on labor, why not be able to move to Poland easily to get those jobs? Companies can relocate, products can move around, but people should just be fucked wherever they are at?

More so (and here we start getting towards concepts like universal basic income) why are we valuing people based upon their cost versus output for some company? If I create an awesome video game and give it out free on the internet and never monetize it, would you then say I shouldn't have a house and health care? JK Rowling wrote a book that entertains millions but she also was a single mom on the dole while writing the first. Shouldn't we move beyond this at some point?

I have to disagree with you when you say the EU isn't a political association. Whilst it has it's roots in an economic union, it was planned from the get go to gradually bring in the means to unite it as a political entity.

And fair enough, I understand your point about single currency and not debasing your currency in theory, but just to take the latter, is it not objectively a bad thing when a country can't debase its currency in a time of economic crisis ala Greece?

Europe has a ton of problems right now, and there is a widespread sentiment that the EU has been a major contribution to them. I find it hard to disagree with people who make that claim.

Btw, please make Vladias a real thing

Good read btw. I do like hashing these things out sometimes. Always good to get out the echo chamber now and then!

This thread has been pretty Britain Centric thus far.

Herm, what is troubling you in Sweden?

Merc, what is the hot button issue of the day in Iceland? Do you even care anymore, now that you're living it up in the USA?

Tell me again which democratic system you want? The one where we ended up with a prime minister that the people didn't elect that time. Or the one where the US ended up with the unpopular voted president?

We had a chance in the UK a few years back to change the system and the people fucked that up too. Brexit is what happens when you put it in the hands of the people. And yes I will address the other points raised once we get past this one.

You are a sucker for the daily mail rhetoric so not much chance we are going to agree. I bet you fell for the old £350 million NHS bus as well.

Wikey

Herm, what is troubling you in Sweden?

Nothing in particular atm, but the housing issue has become an issue these last couple of years, but the government has been building relentlessly these last couple of years too, so it's possible it's going to balance out shortly.

As far as other problems go, we have problems with the health care system. Health care services are generally becoming better, but wait lines for certain services could be a bitch, and smaller hospitals up north can't afford to be around, so everything's becoming more centralized, which sucks for people living in small towns.

There's immigrant related gang violence in the suburbs of the major three cities that's becoming a problem lately, so the people seek to the government to finally do something about it. There's been suggestions that we need to hire more police officers etc.

We have some difficulties with the integration process for immigrants.

Immigrants from Iran are doing a pretty good job of integrating and I'm only hearing good things about Syrians.

Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan have a harder time, though.

Mike @ 12/3/2018 12:19

I have to disagree with you when you say the EU isn't a political association. Whilst it has it's roots in an economic union, it was planned from the get go to gradually bring in the means to unite it as a political entity. And fair enough, I understand your point about single currency and not debasing your currency in theory, but just to take the latter, is it not objectively a bad thing when a country can't debase its currency in a time of economic crisis ala Greece? Europe has a ton of problems right now, and there is a widespread sentiment that the EU has been a major contribution to them. I find it hard to disagree with people who make that claim.

I think they wanted to eventually make the EU a political organization, it's not happening very much. And to democratize they need to actually push for more political power, so Brexit actually takes this the opposite direction. And it does come to "do we want to become the United States of Europe?" IN that case, you'll need political bodies, which is where the democratization comes from. Right now you have political stuff mostly thrown up between the European Commission, The Council, and Parliament, but enforcement of that is still iffy (but at least the Parliament is direct-elected). Political power is still mostly residing in the individual countries, which makes things harder to really get going.