• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EU-US trade agreemetn

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,966
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So I posted about the EU-Moldavia trade agreement, and that's nice, but now for something bad.

http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/busting-myths-transparency-around-eu-us-trade-deal

Busting the myths of transparency around the EU-US trade deal
On 7 October, the second round of negotiations for a far-reaching transatlantic trade deal will begin in Brussels. Amidst calls for greater openness and public participation, the European Commission has gone into propaganda mode, promoting myths about the transparency and accountability of the talks. See through its feel-good rhetoric with Corporate Europe Observatory’s myth-busting guide to secrecy, corporate influence and lack of accountability in the transatlantic trade negotiations.
digital rights activists have warned the European Commission that secrecy “could kill TTIP just as effectively as it killed ACTA”.
In response, the Commission has gone on a PR offensive. In a series of Q&A, briefing papers about transparency in EU trade negotiations and leaflets explaining why TTIP is not ACTA, the Commission’s trade department (DG Trade) is portraying itself as the model of transparency. “There is more interest in this potential deal than any we have worked on before,” they say, “We realise that this requires new initiatives to shed more light on what is going on throughout the negotiations.”

However these “new initiatives” of theirs cast more shadow than light. Let us guide you through some of the key myths about openness and accountability in DG Trade.

So read the whole page if you're interested in the top link.
This link however is a to website that will provide some other information, mainly, how the trade agreement between the EU and the USA should be done:
Alternative Trade Mandate | Trade isn
http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ATM-Document-Final-EN.pdf

The pdf provides an easy read.

Now of course, the document is made in order to better benefit the EU and it's people according to the views of the NGOs that worked on it. Now I don't subscribe to all the things listed there, especially when it comes to labor rights and business. For instance, this is crap in their proposal:
stop the practice of using differential tariffs to discourage imports of processed goods, while encouraging raw materials and thereby protecting European manufacturing.
Of course we should have different trariffs, morons.
or this:
reverse its focus on privatising public services, and the aggressive pursuit of opportunities for European companies to run public services elsewhere.
I think privatization to a point is good. So is competition. not only should some services be privatized, but privatized in a way that creates competition between the companies. Having the state fully own public services without any chance of private companies emerging in those fields is stupid.

Almost everything written here is idiotic and hippie: Issue #9: Intellectual Property Rights are rights for all – not just a few
So yeah

There are a lot of things I disagree with in the alternative view. But they do raise a good point in regards to transparency. So they are correct in what they want as an end result, but their proposals are at times stupid, silly and rather hippie-like. And hippies don't get to make public policies.
 
Last edited:
I'd just like to say. This EU-USA trade agreement has the seeds in it to be a greatly beneficial arrangement for both the EU and the USA. So that's why extra care needs to be put in place on how people handle these affairs because if this agreements ends up poorly or disadvantageous for one side, it's going to create resentment and spoil the chance for future agreements to be made.

So I like the fact that there are people who are publicly warning officials that they are keeping an eye on them and they better be on their best behavior. And I'd like to think that I'm one of them.

Contrary to what some people think, I'm not an euroskeptic in the sense that I'd like to see the EU to fail. I am quite fond of the idea of an European union, just not the way the current EU works. Bureaucrats and unelected pencil-pushers call the shots, Brussels is the 2nd largest lobby hotspot in the world after washington DC... constant propaganda and wishful thinking, talking to us, the public, like we're idiots that can be manipulated, etc.

But I do think that the EU can reform itself. I do believe that with enough public input, the EU can adjust.
Programs like these:
http://ec.europa.eu/debate-future-europe/ongoing-debate/index_en.htm
And others that I posted around here are good initiatives.
 
So I posted about the EU-Moldavia trade agreement, and that's nice, but now for something bad.

http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/busting-myths-transparency-around-eu-us-trade-deal






So read the whole page if you're interested in the top link.
This link however is a to website that will provide some other information, mainly, how the trade agreement between the EU and the USA should be done:
Alternative Trade Mandate | Trade isn
http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ATM-Document-Final-EN.pdf

The pdf provides an easy read.

Now of course, the document is made in order to better benefit the EU and it's people according to the views of the NGOs that worked on it. Now I don't subscribe to all the things listed there, especially when it comes to labor rights and business. For instance, this is crap in their proposal:

Of course we should have different trariffs, morons.
or this:
I think privatization to a point is good. So is competition. not only should some services be privatized, but privatized in a way that creates competition between the companies. Having the state fully own public services without any chance of private companies emerging in those fields is stupid.

Almost everything written here is idiotic and hippie: Issue #9: Intellectual Property Rights are rights for all – not just a few
So yeah

There are a lot of things I disagree with in the alternative view. But they do raise a good point in regards to transparency. So they are correct in what they want as an end result, but their proposals are at times stupid, silly and rather hippie-like. And hippies don't get to make public policies.

The EU is based in myth and nobody would want it, if the lore had not been sold instead of the facts. Why would they want to be open and honest now?
 
I'd just like to say. This EU-USA trade agreement has the seeds in it to be a greatly beneficial arrangement for both the EU and the USA. So that's why extra care needs to be put in place on how people handle these affairs because if this agreements ends up poorly or disadvantageous for one side, it's going to create resentment and spoil the chance for future agreements to be made.

So I like the fact that there are people who are publicly warning officials that they are keeping an eye on them and they better be on their best behavior. And I'd like to think that I'm one of them.

Contrary to what some people think, I'm not an euroskeptic in the sense that I'd like to see the EU to fail. I am quite fond of the idea of an European union, just not the way the current EU works. Bureaucrats and unelected pencil-pushers call the shots, Brussels is the 2nd largest lobby hotspot in the world after washington DC... constant propaganda and wishful thinking, talking to us, the public, like we're idiots that can be manipulated, etc.

But I do think that the EU can reform itself. I do believe that with enough public input, the EU can adjust.
Programs like these:
Ongoing debate - European Commission
And others that I posted around here are good initiatives.

Of course the open trade agreement has massive positive potential. And yes. It is very good that people keep an eye on the negotiations. We need those opportunity cost gains badly.
 
I'd just like to say. This EU-USA trade agreement has the seeds in it to be a greatly beneficial arrangement for both the EU and the USA. So that's why extra care needs to be put in place on how people handle these affairs because if this agreements ends up poorly or disadvantageous for one side, it's going to create resentment and spoil the chance for future agreements to be made.

I agree, but the problem with these agreements are not the commission since they are nothing but administrators working for someone, but in fact the member nations governments. For example, the agreements done after 9/11 with the US on anti-terror and such, were pushed through by the member states governments with the UK at the front without much public scrutiny and well we know how that ended up.

But saying that, when this happened we did not have the EU system we have today, where such an agreement would be impossible to ram through. because it would have to go through the EU parliament who received considerable amount of power after 2001.

A good example is ACTA.. defeated in the EU Parliament big time and it even had the Commission some what against parts of it, but the member nation states governments were for it (and hence the Commission was officially for it also) and promoted it. Had this been before the changes, then it would have been rammed through.. no doubt about that.

Fact is time and time again the Commission is in between a rock and hard place. Member governments are often much more dictatorial on things like online piracy or privacy (or lack of it), where as the Commission and the EU Parliament wants to protect people. Right now on digital rights and such... the only thing standing between a dead internet full of censorship and what we have today... the EU commission and the EU Parliament.. because the member governments want tighter control with the Internet.

Look at the key member nations. The UK Prime Minister wants to force search engines to censor their searches to "protect children" from porn and illegal stuff. Even today the media are promoting a story about free wifi spots not filtering out porn sites.. wtf? How is it the ISP, search engine or someone giving free access to the net's job to censor it any way? The former French right wing government has put in draconian 3 strikes legislation which is slowly being picked apart by the new government and legal system, but it is still in place. In Italy, the Internet is strictly controlled by government agencies and companies thanks to Berloscoloony and in Spain the right wing government is slowly bowing to US pressure and implementing new rules and laws, often rather draconian.. to curb piracy.

All of these actions have for now been highly criticized by the EU commission and EU Parliament and legal actions are on the way to curb the actions.

So I like the fact that there are people who are publicly warning officials that they are keeping an eye on them and they better be on their best behavior. And I'd like to think that I'm one of them.

There are plenty of those .. they are called the EU Parliament.

Contrary to what some people think, I'm not an euroskeptic in the sense that I'd like to see the EU to fail. I am quite fond of the idea of an European union, just not the way the current EU works.

No offence but that is because you dont understand how the EU works in many cases. You are not the only one.. even I dont understand the EU fully on everything, but I do understand enough to see much of the "anti-EU" feeling is based on false information and that leads me to ask.. why are there people pushing such BS?

They come in 2 groups..

Power hungry politicians who cant hack it in normal politics and use hatred and miss-information to gain political power.

Politicians and people who are being hurt somehow financial because of the EU. It is especially this group that can be dangerous since they are mainstream vs those people above.

Bureaucrats and unelected pencil-pushers call the shots,

False. Those "bureaucrats and unelected pencil-pushers" get their orders from the member nations. They jump based on what Cameron, Merkel and so on say. Blaming them is nothing but a cop-out by anti-EU morons who use lack of knowledge to brainwash the populace to think that it is the commission and the EU President that actually is the power house in the EU.

Fact is the Commission can not implement any legislation or rules without the consent and vote of the member nations and parliament. Now in my book that is an office manager with no power other than to determine what type of coffee that is bought for the office coffee maker. All orders come ultimately from the Council of Ministers and hence from each capital in the EU.

Brussels is the 2nd largest lobby hotspot in the world after washington DC.
..

Yes, but they have no where near the influence as in Washington. For example. The US automotive industry had successfully blocked higher emission standards and better mileage standards for decades in the US, where as in the EU the car industry has had no such luck. Now you can maybe claim that they were successful in not letting the standards increase even higher, but the fact is, that in the 40 years from the 1970s Europe went from similar standards as the US to having over double the mileage standard and emission standards... until Obama thanks to the manipulation of the oil markets and rising prices, managed to ram through new standards a few years ago... standards the US car industry were against.

The only major cases of where lobbyist power has prevented something is in pharmaceuticals and even here they never managed to influence the EU commission but had to go through the courts to block a liberalization of the pharma market. The other major one is farming subsidies, with France leading the charge against changes.. as in France the government. So the lobbyists are not lobbying the EU, but the individual countries to prevent reforms.

In fact if you look at the EU over the last 50 years, many key legislative moments has been done against massive industries with big lobby groups... telecommunications, steel, cars, and so on.

No the problem is often not the EU but the local member nations governments inability to push through the needed legislation to follow the rules and treaties agreed to by the EU member nations. Italy and Greece have been especially bad in doing this and opening up its markets, which is one of the real reasons why they have been treated so "bad" in the Euro crisis.

Oh and I am not saying lobbyists dont have influence.. just not as much as most people think.

constant propaganda and wishful thinking, talking to us, the public, like we're idiots that can be manipulated, etc.

Well to be fair, you are.. by the anti-EU propaganda. One of the issues I have with the EU, is their lazzie-fair attitude towards the public information. The information available to the EU citizen is massive, but the information debunking much of the lies and propaganda coming from the anti-EU people is often lacking. The EU has had the attitude of saying.. if you want information, come get it.. it is all here, but we want you to seek it out. That is the wrong way to do it when the opposition to you is well funded and well connected to certain media that a hell of a lot of people use.. The UK comes to mind on this point. The best the EU often do, after lots of pressure is to release a freaking press release that no one reads because the media likes the made up story over the actual facts.

But I do think that the EU can reform itself. I do believe that with enough public input, the EU can adjust.
Programs like these:
Ongoing debate - European Commission
And others that I posted around here are good initiatives.

I agree the EU needs reform in many areas, but much of the "reform" that people want, is actually reform that is needed in the national states and not the EU because the EU has nothing to do with the situation. For example.. reforming the whole legislative branch... as in not moving them every 6 months from Brussels to Strasbourg. But this is not an EU issue, it is in fact the French who demand it.

The EU also needs to tackle the miss-information campaign coming from especially the UK anti-EU crowd. They need to hit back at people like Nigel Ferage with the facts, because that would kill him off politically.
 
The EU is based in myth and nobody would want it, if the lore had not been sold instead of the facts. Why would they want to be open and honest now?

Eh.. the myth has been created by the anti-EU crowd and their media outlets. The EU is very open and the information is freely available, but it is you that has to seek it out.. it does not come to you.
 
As for the EU-US trade agreement. One simple rule.. what we give the US, we also receive as a minimum back. I am so tried of being the one giving and giving while the US gives us nothing in return.
 
Eh.. the myth has been created by the anti-EU crowd and their media outlets. The EU is very open and the information is freely available, but it is you that has to seek it out.. it does not come to you.

That is not my experience.
 
As for the EU-US trade agreement. One simple rule.. what we give the US, we also receive as a minimum back. I am so tried of being the one giving and giving while the US gives us nothing in return.

That is a myth, they like to tell each other and their peoples over here. When I have checked these stories out (and no, I am not going to do your homework for you) or asked friends at the WTO or in German industry, what they could say about this or that matter, the stories have regularly been false.
 
I agree, but the problem with these agreements are not the commission since they are nothing but administrators working for someone, but in fact the member nations governments. For example, the agreements done after 9/11 with the US on anti-terror and such, were pushed through by the member states governments with the UK at the front without much public scrutiny and well we know how that ended up. .....

Not really. What are you talking about?
 
That is a myth, they like to tell each other and their peoples over here. When I have checked these stories out (and no, I am not going to do your homework for you) or asked friends at the WTO or in German industry, what they could say about this or that matter, the stories have regularly been false.

No it is not a myth. Historically we have opened up our markets to the US far more than the US has opened up to Europe. That has to do a lack of balls from the EU and its member nations.
 
Not really. What are you talking about?

So you are saying that when we in Europe want bank records, personal information and so on, about US citizens, then we get them on request? Because the US gets our information pretty much on request... By the time you go to the US, the US not only knows that you are coming because you are required to inform them that you are, but they have automatically gotten your financial information and a lot of other information and when you arrive they fingerprint you.

Now tell me.. do we do that to Americans when they want to come to Europe? Of course not, because that would be illegal both according to local law, but also the US would be pissed at us.
 
Open and transparent?

When talks are open they result in the battle of Seattle..............

That is why they hide in totalitarian places ..................Doha, Dubai etc.

And its just another trade deal to SCREW AMERICA. That is 100% sure, secret or not, the result is the same.
 
I agree[...]with[...] people like Nigel Ferage with the facts.

Shortened your comments for spacial purposes. And no, I did read everything and I know your comment is completely the opposite with what is left in the comment bracket. And the truth is, both the pro-EU and the anti-EU side is guilty of such tactics. This is just a demonstration. It's not just 1 sided.

On your comment in particular.
The comission is made up of member state leaders and they were anti-ACTA when the people of their respective countries went into the streets to protest. The EU parliament became anti-ACTA when the people in the countries where each europarliamentar activated went in the streets to protest. So ACTA got defeated by the people because the politicians feared losing their fat-ass paychecks from a really good job if they wouldn't repeal ACTA.

It is the people who are standing in the way of letting the internet become a censored dead-space, not the politicians. the politicians are the idiots who want to turn the internet in a dead-space. It is the fact that they love their political careers too much that they keep on the straight and narrow. So the EU parliament is not the "watchdog". The people are.

The pencil-pushers and Merkel and Cameron and the lot of them are all in the same boat. It's not like one doesn't want to do something but Merkel and Cameron threatens them with an anal probing if they don't comply. They all love their little plans because all of them were there when they made the god damn plans so that there's something for everyone. They're all on the same god damn side.

I understand the EU sufficiently well to know what I'm dealing with. I don't appreciate you attacking my knowledge on the fact that you don't like what I'm saying.

On the notion of lobbyists. Well the "big lobby groups" in DC are bigger than the lobby groups in the EU. This is because big oil, big pharma and big everything else in the USA have US-wide unrestricted reach... or less restricted. So they are bigger corporations with deeper pockets and who worked the system for a longer time. If the EU becomes more like the USA, we will eventually have the same problems. The big lobby groups in the EU will become bigger and bigger, they'll work the system and manipulated the process and end up having the same power as their counterparts in the US have now.
So we should be grateful that the "federalization" with the focus on centralization of power in Brussels hasn't happened aggressively. It's what saves us from the big corporations owning the politicians... and it is a defense.

The pro-EU propaganda is just as bad as the anti-EU propaganda. I am just not partisan. I listen to both sides, and judge for myself and give credit where credit is due. You have decided to put your fingers in the ears and go: NANANANANNA whenever an anti-EU point is brought up by the anti-EU people. Now you are just one person, but when leaders in the EU do this, they create disharmony and dissent and reinforce the anti-EU people.

The EU needs reform buddy. national states need reform too, but not in order to grant more powers to the EU. I don't care much for the strassbourg to brussels business. I think those fatsos in Parliament should move their fat asses and start running or going on a bike every 6 months for the trip. It's just 430km. Politician survival race. whoever doesn't reach there in 2 days or ends up in the bottom 10% gets the boot. Bike only!
 
Open and transparent?

When talks are open they result in the battle of Seattle..............

That is why they hide in totalitarian places ..................Doha, Dubai etc.

And its just another trade deal to SCREW AMERICA. That is 100% sure, secret or not, the result is the same.

If you do not understand what is happening, don't comment.
 
If you do not understand what is happening, don't comment.

So after screwing millions out of a life, you want us to SHUT UP?

WRONG ******* ANSWER!!!!

Oh and for details on your EU trade deal, and what the end result will be, read the book in my Sig.
 
Shortened your comments for spacial purposes. And no, I did read everything and I know your comment is completely the opposite with what is left in the comment bracket. And the truth is, both the pro-EU and the anti-EU side is guilty of such tactics. This is just a demonstration. It's not just 1 sided.

Never said it was one sided, but I do state that the anti-EU crowd actively uses it a lot. Only place I see "pro-EU" propaganda is on Euronews, and that is mostly just factual information.

On your comment in particular.
The comission is made up of member state leaders

And it is a comment like this that torpedo's your whole argumentation because it shows a basic lack of knowledge about the EU. No, the Commission is not made up of member state leaders. The Commission is appointed by the Council of Ministers and each country submits a candidate and they are usually present or former politicians of the sitting party of the member nation in question.

and they were anti-ACTA when the people of their respective countries went into the streets to protest.The EU parliament became anti-ACTA when the people in the countries where each europarliamentar activated went in the streets to protest. So ACTA got defeated by the people because the politicians feared losing their fat-ass paychecks from a really good job if they wouldn't repeal ACTA.

That is not accurate. The commission always had its doubts about parts of ACTA which is why the parts up for review by the court system, but their bosses in the council of Ministers was pushing for ACTA. Now the redacted minutes and papers of the ACTA negotiations by the Commission on behalf of the EU, show that the Commission basically did not do their job well. Now one can claim that it was incompetence or one can claim it was will-full protest over the whole ACTA process that was being pushed by member states national governments. The end result was that the EU was badly disadvantaged vs the rest, and that was the first red flag that got the ball rolling among the anti-ACTA people in Europe. But that is just a theory that some people have floated.. it could be incompetence, but considering how eager and quickly the EU commission pushed aspects onto the EU court system for evaluation.. then well.

Now protests did happen and were lead by parties like the Pirate Party of Germany and Sweden, who also have representation in the EU Parliament. These protests grew and the more information that came out about ACTA, the more doubts were put in the minds of members of the largest political blocks in the EU Parliament. In the end the tide against ACTA was huge and a large portion voted against ACTA.

It is the people who are standing in the way of letting the internet become a censored dead-space, not the politicians. the politicians are the idiots who want to turn the internet in a dead-space. It is the fact that they love their political careers too much that they keep on the straight and narrow. So the EU parliament is not the "watchdog". The people are.

And the EU parliament is with the people and the people's voice in European politics. Dont think for a second that national politicians give a damn about us.. they are only out to screw us as much as they can.. actions speak far more than words, and the actions of the EU to prevent national governments in restricting everything from movement of people and goods to censorship is far louder than the anything else. Had it not been for the EU, then we would still have one phone company per country, all electronics between France and Germany would go through 2 to 3 border crossings that only are opened 4 hours a day, and so on and so on. The EU aint perfect, but at the moment it is the only stop gap for national government overreach and it has worked in many countries, and not so well in others.

The pencil-pushers and Merkel and Cameron and the lot of them are all in the same boat. It's not like one doesn't want to do something but Merkel and Cameron threatens them with an anal probing if they don't comply. They all love their little plans because all of them were there when they made the god damn plans so that there's something for everyone. They're all on the same god damn side.

The "pencil pushers" are employees of Merkel and Cameron.. so yea duh!

I understand the EU sufficiently well to know what I'm dealing with. I don't appreciate you attacking my knowledge on the fact that you don't like what I'm saying.

I refer to your mistake above. And dont take it as an offence please, it is not meant as that at all. It is quite common issue sadly.

On the notion of lobbyists. Well the "big lobby groups" in DC are bigger than the lobby groups in the EU. This is because big oil, big pharma and big everything else in the USA have US-wide unrestricted reach... or less restricted. So they are bigger corporations with deeper pockets and who worked the system for a longer time. If the EU becomes more like the USA, we will eventually have the same problems. The big lobby groups in the EU will become bigger and bigger, they'll work the system and manipulated the process and end up having the same power as their counterparts in the US have now.

I agree.. and the only way we avoid such things is by transparency and rules/regulations that prevent lobby action. I have yet to see a pro lobby legislation coming out of the EU commission .. have you seen any?

So we should be grateful that the "federalization" with the focus on centralization of power in Brussels hasn't happened aggressively. It's what saves us from the big corporations owning the politicians... and it is a defense.

No.. the lobbying is going on big time .. in the individual countries which if done right means that it is transplanted to the EU via the council of Ministers. It is here, the EU has time and time again blocked lobby efforts to not open up markets or restrict them even more. It is lobby groups in Italy and Greece that have lead those countries down the hole..

The pro-EU propaganda is just as bad as the anti-EU propaganda.

Show me some pro-EU propaganda then. Show me positive stores not based on facts that are being promoted... I dare you.

I am just not partisan. I listen to both sides, and judge for myself and give credit where credit is due. You have decided to put your fingers in the ears and go: NANANANANNA whenever an anti-EU point is brought up by the anti-EU people. Now you are just one person, but when leaders in the EU do this, they create disharmony and dissent and reinforce the anti-EU people.

No I have not. I am fully willing to debate the EU based on FACTS and it is here more than often the anti-EU crowd falls flat on its face. Lets discuss the EU on facts... no problem. I have many problems with many aspects of the EU ranging from legal, promotional, personnel to accepting new members. Lets discuss them, bet we could agree on many.

The EU needs reform buddy. national states need reform too, but not in order to grant more powers to the EU.

And what powers have been granted to the EU over the last few years.. name them. And please note that when you say granted, then remember it is granted by every single member nations government and parliament... so why do you blame the EU and not your own parliament/government?

The EU needs internal reform yes, but the whole "power" crap is mostly anti-EU propaganda not based on facts. I laugh at people like Nigel Ferage when wants power back from the EU, and for the most part never mentions what power and when he does, he often forgets that those "powers" were given long ago by in many cases... Thatcher... but hey!

I don't care much for the strassbourg to brussels business. I think those fatsos in Parliament should move their fat asses and start running or going on a bike every 6 months for the trip. It's just 430km. Politician survival race. whoever doesn't reach there in 2 days or ends up in the bottom 10% gets the boot. Bike only!

Again you show your lack of knowledge. The "fatso's" in the Parliament dont want to move. In fact many have pleaded to end this stupidity. But that is not up to them, since it is enshrined in EU law on behalf of... De Gaulle and France.. and no one wants to force the issue.
 
Open and transparent?

When talks are open they result in the battle of Seattle..............

That is why they hide in totalitarian places ..................Doha, Dubai etc.

And its just another trade deal to SCREW AMERICA. That is 100% sure, secret or not, the result is the same.

err sorry to burst your bubble, but American companies have full access to European markets.... European companies do NOT have full access to the American market. So how is that screwing over America?

Let me give you a good example.. Rupert Murdoch. He wanted to start a news channel in the US, but US law that limits non-US ownership of communications companies in the US to... 25%. So Rupert could only do Fox News and buy up other companies if he became an American.. which he did.

When it comes to Europe, Europe is often highly disadvantaged vs the US in these deals... the US is quite protective of certain industries.
 

the European comission is indeeed formed by the people appointed by each members state but who appoints them? Their are the mouthpieces of each member state.
It's like saying that the foreign minister doesn't represent the country because he's the foreign minister and not the head of state. It's technically true but in truth, they work with the same agenda in mind.

As to ACTA. Whatever reservations were in the EU legislature and executive branch, they weren't the ones that started the popular protests. It was people influencing people. Common people, not the politicians who rallied the protesters and energized the movement.

And I know national politicians are corrupt assholes who only care about themselves. I'm RO dammit, I know this too well. But the EU politicians are just as bad.

I just said that they haven't been as efficient in lobbying in the EU because the EU is not the USA. They aren't as big and don't have as big pockets... nor is their influence so far reaching. Also, there are over 700 people in the EU parliament as opposed to the US Congress.
I'll tell you one legislation that got passed and it sure as hell looks like something coming out of a bankers' wet dream:
ESA-European Stability Mechanism.

One Bank to rule them all, One Bank to find them,
One Bank to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
That's the ESA. And what they will rule over is nation states.

I made a whole god damn topic about it. Maybe 2 topics, I don't recall. I'll gladly link you them if you want to know. So while I don't know if it was lobbied by the banks, is sure as hell looks like it. No sound mind that wants to preserve national sovereignty would ever draft such a legislation.

I don't deny the fact that the smoking lobbyists are not as efficient in the EU... or that the auto lobbyists are not as efficient. But they're small fry.

The EU has been increasing it's powers time and time again with every treaty. I know that people say the treaty of Lisbon, which empowers the EU Parliament further, is a measure to enhance democracy. And it may true, under auspicious circumstances but as it stands, it just empowered an institution that is indeed democratically elected... but the electorate also contains idiots.

I didn't say that the fatsos want to move. What fatso did you ever see that wanted to run? But I'm not joking. Let the bastards sweat! Get their fat asses on bikes and in 2days, go from Brussels to Strassbourg, meeting people along the way that will tell them what a ****ty job their are doing and how they are ruining the economy.
 
the European comission is indeeed formed by the people appointed by each members state but who appoints them? Their are the mouthpieces of each member state.
It's like saying that the foreign minister doesn't represent the country because he's the foreign minister and not the head of state. It's technically true but in truth, they work with the same agenda in mind.

Sorry but again you dont understand how the Commission works. Yes they are appointed by each individual country, and once accepted by the EU parliament, they become "neutrals" and I have yet to see an EU commissioner promote his/her nations ahead of everyone else. Maybe you have an example of this..

As to ACTA. Whatever reservations were in the EU legislature and executive branch, they weren't the ones that started the popular protests. It was people influencing people. Common people, not the politicians who rallied the protesters and energized the movement.

And how did these people know what was in ACTA? Oh yea, leaks and information coming out of the EU legislature and executive branch.. very selective information. Listen we can debate on and on, who did what, and when, but the fact is that the EU parliament could easily have voted for ACTA because their seats are all but ensured in most cases and the fact that there was at the time years to the next election (people forget things fast).. but they did not. Pirate Party people in the EU parliament and others fed their local parties information who then organized protests. These protests hardly erupted on their own.

And I know national politicians are corrupt assholes who only care about themselves. I'm RO dammit, I know this too well. But the EU politicians are just as bad.

Not all of them, and because of the transparency of the EU it is harder and harder to act like a corrupt bastard. Cant say that in national arenas..

I just said that they haven't been as efficient in lobbying in the EU because the EU is not the USA. They aren't as big and don't have as big pockets... nor is their influence so far reaching. Also, there are over 700 people in the EU parliament as opposed to the US Congress.

The EU is bigger than the US as an economy last I looked. The EU has just as large pockets as the US, but choose to use them differently. As for their influence, yes it is not as great because the EU does not have 1000+ nukes and a massive military complex that will kill you if you dont follow the US way.

And of course the EU parliament is bigger than the US congress.. US population 315 million, EU population 500+.

I'll tell you one legislation that got passed and it sure as hell looks like something coming out of a bankers' wet dream:
ESA-European Stability Mechanism.

One Bank to rule them all, One Bank to find them,
One Bank to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
That's the ESA. And what they will rule over is nation states.

I made a whole god damn topic about it. Maybe 2 topics, I don't recall. I'll gladly link you them if you want to know. So while I don't know if it was lobbied by the banks, is sure as hell looks like it. No sound mind that wants to preserve national sovereignty would ever draft such a legislation.

No.. they will "rule" over Eurozone member states banking system and economies some what, because that is how it should have been from the start. You cant have a common currency with multiple national banks, who cant do what national banks normally do. And that is the root problem with the Eurozone.

You have an European Central Bank that cant do what normal central banks do when a bank or country gets into trouble. That was still left up to the individual member countries, which mean to save a bank they would have to borrow money on the international market, which is unsustainable. That is why the ESM was put in place since most of the problems in the Eurozone is related to a banking system that either heavily lent for real estate or to certain sovereign nations.

Listen I dont like bailing out banks any more than you do (I suspect) but I understand that there are certain situations where it is unavoidable. For example Bankia in Spain. Sure the easy way would have been to let the newish bank go belly up, but that would have caused a massive problem... You see all countries have a deposit guarantee scheme, it is the only thing that really makes banks trusted places to put your money... and if Bankia had gone belly up, then the guarantee on a certain amount of the deposits would have kicked in. This would mean that the Spanish state would have to pay that out, and the amount would be massive since Bankia was at the time the biggest holder of deposit clients in Spain. Why? Because Bankia was a merger of 8 smaller Caja's and it is Caja's most local people have their deposits.

So the Eurozone stood in front of a no win situation. Either they bailed out Bankia and saved the bank, or they bailed out Spain. Which would be cheaper? Well look at this way. Bankia needed 50 billion, and bailing out Spain with a collapsing banking system would have cost far far more than 50 billion.

Like it or not many provisions in the ESA were needed if we were to continue with the Euro and should have been part of the Euro from the start. There are still certain things that are missing.. like the ability to print money.. something the Germans hate, but can be useful to do at times.... like this crisis.

I don't deny the fact that the smoking lobbyists are not as efficient in the EU... or that the auto lobbyists are not as efficient. But they're small fry.

The auto industry is small fry? LOL This small fry industry employees millions across Europe and is a multi billion dollar industry... small fry ha!

The EU has been increasing it's powers time and time again with every treaty.

So the EU as an organisation has forced the national governments to agree to the new treaties? Hardly. Plus it all comes down to a definition. I dont see us cooperating on standards as a "giving of power" to the EU. Now if the EU starts to dictate laws on social issues, criminal law and taxes and such that dont involve the basic founding principles of the founding of the community (read the Treaty of Rome).. then we can talk.

I know that people say the treaty of Lisbon, which empowers the EU Parliament further, is a measure to enhance democracy. And it may true, under auspicious circumstances but as it stands, it just empowered an institution that is indeed democratically elected... but the electorate also contains idiots.

So now you are saying that the electorate are idiots but it is still EUs fault?

I didn't say that the fatsos want to move. What fatso did you ever see that wanted to run? But I'm not joking. Let the bastards sweat! Get their fat asses on bikes and in 2days, go from Brussels to Strassbourg, meeting people along the way that will tell them what a ****ty job their are doing and how they are ruining the economy.

So you are going to punish the elected officials and employees who cant do anything what so ever about the situation and let the governments of the individual states get off free? Classy..
 
No it is not a myth. Historically we have opened up our markets to the US far more than the US has opened up to Europe. That has to do a lack of balls from the EU and its member nations.

Sure. Just look at the deficit. I guess you do not follow these things very closely. No sweat. Most people don't.
 
So you are saying that when we in Europe want bank records, personal information and so on, about US citizens, then we get them on request? Because the US gets our information pretty much on request... By the time you go to the US, the US not only knows that you are coming because you are required to inform them that you are, but they have automatically gotten your financial information and a lot of other information and when you arrive they fingerprint you.

Now tell me.. do we do that to Americans when they want to come to Europe? Of course not, because that would be illegal both according to local law, but also the US would be pissed at us.

I do not really know exactly, what you are saying. It is true, that no one in his right mind would think of figures like Martin Schulz, Junckers or Barroso trustworthy enough to give them more than need to know information. But the security services seem to have worked together quite well, even though at least in Germany it would appear the German service was doing and allowing things, that were probably illegal.

And you want to know, if European services spy on each other, the EU and the US? Don't be naive. That is what they are paid to do.
 
Back
Top Bottom