 |
| |
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
But wouldnt you have to do that even if you werent in the EU, to compete in the global marketplace? It may be the policy of your party not to compete in the global marketplace, but isnt it likely that the rest of France would try to, EU or no EU? |
Many don't want the opening to every market to competition. The telecom sector wasn't too difficult a pill to swallow, but the energy sector (currently in the works) is far more tricky. The crap will hit the fan when the rail sector will be opened to competition, because nobody in France wants the nightmare from Britain.
During these elections, most pro-European parties, including the right-wing ones, used the examples of Airbus and Ariane as propaganda means to bring sympathy toward Europe. These industrial policies are something we are strongly attached to, and they're unrelated to the EU (Airbus and Ariane are intergovernmental projects), and they are made impossible by EU principles of competition.
Right waing parties in these elections unanimously said they were against the outsourcing to Eastern Europe. However, with the current principles, any company that wishes to outsource and put many workers on the dole, can. Outsourcing is indeed something the French in their huge majority disagree with.
These are only the current issues dealing with the competition aspect of the EU. And this is something where the French are completely and utterly sodomized, mostly by the English, who are by far the most free-market ones.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
1. Assume no EU. In that case Britain and Germany can outsource. US can. French companies cant. This will put them at a competitive disadvantage. Wont the pressure to allow them to be EXTREME, given that in this situation they compete with US, Germany, Britain in all world markets? |
I am not in this thread to discuss how justified these policies are* What I meant in my post, is that the French people are losing something dear in the EU, that our leaders could not afford to defend..
quote:
2. Would not the new Eastern European members have issues if companies were not allowed to outsource to Eastern Europe? How is this UK's fault? |
Outsourcing in Eastern Europe is not UK's fault. It belongs to the core of the European construction, with the free flow of capital, goods, and people. However, it is also one circumstance where France loses something to the EU.
If we ruled with an iron first like Pekka and most of our non-French anti Europeans seem to believe, you bet outsourcing to Eastern Europe wouldn't be easy.
Point is: Even we, the iron fisted French, are making concessions, and very difficult ones, to the EU. Even we have to suffer from decisions that don't match our values.
There are many other bones of contention:
- we can't lower our sales taxes on restaurants, the Germans oppose it adamantly
- some of our traditional diaries and cheeses are threatened by EU health regulations
- at this very moment, there is a power struggle about the future president of the EU Commission (who'll replace Prodi). France-Germany's candidate is out, as is UK-EPP's candidate. They are currently looking for a consensual fifth or sixth choice
- We are still suffering from this fricking stability pact we all hate.
Of course this kind of things could have been sorted out if we had picked the right battles at the council, and if we didn't lose our bargaining power to things as useful as this:
- we obtained to keep the CAP. The most important reforms to the CAP concern mediterranean agriculture, and not us. In order to keep the cash flow steady for French farmers, Eastern Europe farmers (far poorer and more numerous) will have 4 times less money from the CAP.
- we obtained to put former pres Giscard d'Estaing at the helm of the constitutional convention. Giscard wanted his name in history books, and Chirac wanted to get rid of a potential annoyer in the tight presidential election of 2002.
- we obtained to put Jean Claude Trichet at the head of the ECB (after a spectacular bargaining when first ECB boss Wim Duisenberg was first chosen: Duisenberg was to retire at mid-term for "health reasons" to leave room for Trichet   ).
I still wonder what France derived from this, given that the ECB must strictly follow aims, that were never changed, and Trichet is a zeamlot. I guess Chirac derived a good stroke on his ego, and probably placed a friend in a high place.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
At least the big ones get treated with respect. Come again when they don't send you the memo, then we talk more about the atmosphere in EU. |
This is indeed a problem, and I am very surprised such blunder happened with Ireland at the presidence of the EU. Normally, the Irish make a point of treating every country with respect.
quote:
Of course France doesn't get everything going in their way. I just hoped we could get at least something going on our way, at least something. |
You mean, like Nokia selling its products across all Europe, without fearing any protectionism, or any favoritism toward a local brand?
I don't know much about Finland, but I would hardly be surprised if you have kept some hunting traditions that are completely opposed to EU ecological policies. This is on top of my head, I'm sure you Pekka could come up with more exmaples of things going your way.
And the Nokia one is a really, really big one. Never would have Finland benefited from so much wealth if it wasn't for the EU.
quote:
So I guess we should just bite our tongues because there are more people living in Paris than our whole country? |
No, you should express yourselves, just like the Parisians should.
And I'm the first to agree there shouldn't be a given number of Parisian seats at the EP, but a (greater) number of French seats instead. Unfortunately, both our major parties support this crap, because it overrepresents them over small parties.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
I am not in this thread to discuss how justified these policies are* What I meant in my post, is that the French people are losing something dear in the EU, that our leaders could not afford to defend..
|
My point is, if the free market policies you dislike are ones France would have had to adopt anyway, EU or no EU, then they ARE NOT concessions to the EU. Now it may be that France hasnt managed to get an EU that enables it to escape from ALL the free market policies that global competition would have imposed on her, but that neither proves that France sacrificed for the EU, nor that France doesnt dominate the EU.
and i fail to see how in a common market with free movement across borders, such the EU was even back when it was the EEC, you could stop outsourcing. Again to imagine an EU that had free labor flows across borders, but no outsourcing, is imagining a French fantasy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
My point is, if the free market policies you dislike are ones France would have had to adopt anyway, EU or no EU, then they ARE NOT concessions to the EU. |
There was absolutely no reason to break our State monopolies and to open their markets, bar the EU. There would have been no market pressure in markets such as the telecoms, energy, railroads, simply there would be no competition if it wasn't for the EU.
There would be no market pressure in order to stop us from subsiding our companies if it wasn't for the EU (political pressure is another matter, but it's definitely not "natural" as the market pressure). Today, it is extremelky tricky to bail out companies.
quote:
and i fail to see how in a common market with free movement across borders, such the EU was even back when it was the EEC, you could stop outsourcing. Again to imagine an EU that had free labor flows across borders, but no outsourcing, is imagining a French fantasy. |
Very simply: give a special status to new members, meaning they don't have full rights of the old members. This is already happening on matters such as migration, CAP, and probably plenty of other things I don't know about. It's not nice, it's contrary to the principles the EU is built upon, but a "iron first" ruler would get it away pretty easily.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
Spiffor, Nokia has sold well with or without EU. Inside Europe, what local brands?  |
Ericsson, Sagem, Alcatel, Mannesmann... And this is on top of my head, I had never any interest in cell phones. At the beginning of the cell phone market, only a few years ago, the market was pretty open, and Nokia won in the end. Nokia wouldn't have won if there had been tarriffs in large countries, or if these countries had sponsored their own companies.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
There was absolutely no reason to break our State monopolies and to open their markets, bar the EU. There would have been no market pressure in markets such as the telecoms, energy, railroads, simply there would be no competition if it wasn't for the EU.
There would be no market pressure in order to stop us from subsiding our companies if it wasn't for the EU (political pressure is another matter, but it's definitely not "natural" as the market pressure). Today, it is extremelky tricky to bail out companies.
Very simply: give a special status to new members, meaning they don't have full rights of the old members. This is already happening on matters such as migration, CAP, and probably plenty of other things I don't know about. It's not nice, it's contrary to the principles the EU is built upon, but a "iron first" ruler would get it away pretty easily. |
Excluded middle. France doesnt rule the EU with an iron fist != France doesnt rule the EU.
The US stepped back in Fallujah due to pressure from Iraqi politicians. The US never did conduct planned privatizations, especially oil. The US accepted a choice it didnt want for Iraqi president. The US is already squabbling with the Iraqi Interim Govt about several other issues. All this BEFORE June 30.
Would you therefore state the US does not rule Iraq?
Rulership isnt always total. It often - usually - involves compromise. My right wing friends tend to forget that. Im surprised you would.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
However, there are few things that are simple IMO. For example ALL the unnecessary bureocracy should be bombed to destruction everywhere we see it. There's is absolutely no need for people who push around papers one hour and then look busy the rest of the day. |
Actually, the EU bureaucrats are most often among the best, and are generally hardworking people. The EU considerably lacks civil servants, because it has too many competences for not enough "functioning" budget (this is BTW a reason why the lobbies are so efficient with EU institutions: they do the work - in their skewed way- that the bureaucracy can't do).
The main reason why the bureacuracy is hellish is not because the people there are slackers. It's because things are horribly complicated, and REQUIRE a hellish bureaucracy to go with.
Say, the German people brought an issue to Schröder's attention, by signing a wide petition. This is an issue that gets decided by the EU. Here is what could happen:
1. Schröder will ask other countries to consider making a policy about it
2. (some weeks later) Some other countries agree with the idea, some oppose it, and some ask cookies to be convinced either way. A cycle of haggling ensues, where Schröder gives concessions to these "swaying" countries. This assumes Schröder wants to please his population THAT much, which is pure fiction already
3. (A few months later) Schröder has gathered a coalition that agrees with the idea, on principle. They now ask the Commission to prepare an actual EU law about, that is technically spotless.
4. (three months later) The Commission has finished the project. The original idea was watered down already by the concessions made by Schröder, it is now even more watered down by all the legal notes and the role of the lobbies. The project gets transferred to the European Parliament and to the Council of Ministers.
5. The Parliament's specialized committee studies the project. It elaborates amendments, that are first voted on in the committee, then in plenum. This takes several weeks.
6. The Council of Ministers is now confronted to a technical project, and not on a question of principle. It gives an opinion on the issue. If the commission project strongly displeases some countries, to the point no majority can be found, the Council can either reject the project, or they can try to be unanimous to make amendments. This will
take at least several weeks.
7. The Commission will try to implement the suggested amendments in the technical text. This will take a few weeks.
8. The amended text is presented to the Parliament again. It can accept it, reject it, or amend it again. Same with the Council.
9. If the Parliament and the Council don't completely agree, a middleman is designated to find a consensus. This will take a few weeks.
10. If no consensus is found, the whole idea is shot down. The whole process has probably taken a year, it has demanded much time to legal and technical experts, to a bunch of translators, it has required ministers or envoys to travel to Brussels, etc. In the best case, it leads to a decision. In the worst case, it leads to naught.
THIS is the true face of EU bureaucracy. In that example, even if the bureacrats had worked like crazy (which happens quite frequently in the EU), the whole thing would have costed a fortune because it is so fricking complicated.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002
time: 06:36
|
|
I was a convinced pro-EU. The politicians in that institution achieved what seemed impossible, that I ended hating it.
The idea is great. An economic and political union that puts end to the differences between the countries in the continent and give higher prosperity and wellbeing for all its citizen.
The practice: The EU has been converted in something like "let´s gather together to face the USA". Even worst (even worst from an European point of view I mean) lot of "idealists" and politicians that din´t found a place at other place are comfortably installed in Brussels and impose their silly laws, like the one about subsiding formers for producing the food in a more expensive way. Submiting everything to the electoralism is bad, but never consulting the people (or ignoring them like in the recent elections because the result don´t really represent anything) is even worst.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002
time: 06:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
France and Germany are clearly at the helm of the EU. They force themselves to agree on everything, to have a rock-solid coalition, so that their leadership gets as littly scathed as possible by ambitious other countries. |
Are we talking about the same EU? Like they forced themselves to reach and agreement this week when 22 countries where against them? Only Spain defended them. Its not strange that in just a month our new government has achieved that 22 countries in the EU hate us.
Precisely all this discussion about the Niza agreement is about preventing France and Germany from having the power to block any decission unilaterally. It would be needed just two "big" countries (France, Germany, UK and Italy) for it. That´s completely unfair for everyone else.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
The constiution was agreed upon, thats good i think.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-06-2004 01:10
|