The Undemocratic European Union

autonomy

This thread was closed from the politics forum, and asked to be replaced in the conspiracy theory forum!

The European Union enterprise, from it's very inception was the work of Nazi's, business monopolists, royalty and other rich eugenics-obsessed social engineers in this world. The Nazi's plan for a fourth reich was based around a European common market.

Fact is, European Central Government is dictatorial and undemocratic. Remarkably, the Europeans made the Irish vote on the exact same treaty again, after voting down the Lisbon Treaty/European Constitution, as France and the Netherlands did previously.

Certainly, the political awakening of the European citizens is interfering with plans for global dictatorship, totalitarian police states and non-democratic world government!

Please discuss your views on this political awakening

Monty Burnz

autonomy wrote: »

This thread was closed from the politics forum, and asked to be replaced in the conspiracy theory forum!

The European Union enterprise, from it's very inception was the work of Nazi's, business monopolists, royalty and other rich eugenics-obsessed social engineers in this world. The Nazi's plan for a fourth reich was based around a European common market.

Why are 'business monopolists' so determined to create a more competitive market?

humanji

Well firstly, the European Constitution and Lisbon Treaty are not the same. The Constitution was voted down, but there were sections of it that were deemed important and so those parts were cannibalised and added to the Lisbon Treaty.

Secondly, Europe didn't force us to vote again, our government did. And the treaty wasn't exactly the same. The "No" campaigners had reservations over parts of the treaty. The government went to the rest of Europe and got guarantees to reassure the "No" campaigners that their fears were unfounded. A second democratic vote was taken and the government did something unprecedented and actually bother telling the people what they were voting on. The result was that the treaty was accepted.

As for the rest, is there anything you've based this on, or is it all theory?

With regards to the "Nazi" comments, as a result of the growth of the EU, there seems to have been an explosion of ultra-nationalists in Europe who want the EU ended. So who's side are they on? They're Nazis campaigning against a Nazi plan?

And I don't really see what any monarchy has to do with it either. As for business monopolists, isn't that why the EU was created? To make it easier for big businesses to expand their borders? It's not like it was ever a secret. The whole EU project was to make life easier to everyone in Europe, and for the most part it has.

It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but only a fool would believe it ever could be. There will be those in the EU, like in every government, like in every gatehring of people, who will want to further their own agenda. There will also be those trying to make things better for others.

Is there any particular part which you think is more undemocratic and/or totalitarian?

MY feelings on it is that people are watching too many movies. They see the likes of V For Vendetta and start wearing masks and campaigning about things they don't actually understand. There's an assumption that anyone successful could only have gotten there through evil means when in reality if these people get off their backsides and actually strive to succeed they could be running the EU by now and then they can see how the EU is run.

studiorat

Lost me as soon as I read the work awakening.

autonomy

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Why are 'business monopolists' so determined to create a more competitive market?

These business monopolists are more multinational companies which can eliminate domestic firms in Europe in order to exploit their monopoly powers.

Monty Burnz

autonomy wrote: »

These business monopolists are more multinational companies which can eliminate domestic firms in Europe in order to exploit their monopoly powers.

Like Microsoft?

autonomy

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Like Microsoft?

Certainly these days the likes of Cisco, Google, Baxter and Microsoft! I think it was announced recently that Microsoft are buying out Skype! No big surprise there

Monty Burnz

autonomy wrote: »

Certainly these days the likes of Cisco, Google, Baxter and Microsoft! I think it was announced recently that Microsoft are buying out Skype! No big surprise there

This Microsoft?

Citing ongoing abuse by Microsoft, the EU reached a preliminary decision in the case in 2003 and ordered the company to offer both a version of Windows without Windows Media Player and the information necessary for competing networking software to interact fully with Windows desktops and servers.[3] In March 2004, the EU ordered Microsoft to pay €497 million ($794 million or £381 million), the largest fine ever handed out by the EU at the time, in addition to the previous penalties, which included 120 days to divulge the server information and 90 days to produce a version of Windows without Windows Media Player.[4][5][6]

One of the key points of the EU was to facilitate competition between companies - cutting costs for consumers. The EU is totally anti-monopoly - you will have noticed for example the deregulation of telecoms and electricity industries in recent years, so you no longer have to rely on Eircom for you phone - even in a tiny market like Ireland, there must be a dozen alternatives. This is thanks to the EU.

So I think you can cross 'monopolistic businesses' off your list of prime movers behind the evil EU.

Setanta1974

"The "No" campaigners had reservations over parts of the treaty. The government went to the rest of Europe and got guarantees to reassure the "No" campaigners that their fears were unfounded."

humanji, do you really believe those guarentees are worth the paper they are written on? Then how do explain the commotion over trying to force us to increase our corporate tax rate in exchange for lower interest rates?

They are trying to bully us (sounds like a dictatorship to me) like they did when they gave our government no alternative but to call a second referendum by threatening not to give us any more funds. Choposing to ignore our first referendum and not even giving a vote to the majority of the other member states sounds very undemoratic to me

Monty Burnz

Setanta1974 wrote: »

humanji, do you really believe those guarentees are worth the paper they are written on? Then how do explain the commotion over trying to force us to increase our corporate tax rate in exchange for lower interest rates?

They are trying to bully us (sounds like a dictatorship to me) like they did when they gave our government no alternative but to call a second referendum by threatening not to give us any more funds. Choposing to ignore our first referendum and not even giving a vote to the majority of the other member states sounds very undemoratic to me

They can't make us change the rates. But they can say that if we want to avail of their massive charity (it's not really charity, but that's a whole other discussion) we have to give something back. If our government chooses to cave in, that's not the fault of the EU treaty. It may be worth pointing out we'd already have defaulted Argentina-style if we didn't take the bailout money.

nobody3

Monty Burnz wrote: »

One of the key points of the EU was to facilitate competition between companies - cutting costs for consumers. The EU is totally anti-monopoly - you will have noticed for example the deregulation of telecoms and electricity industries in recent years, so you no longer have to rely on Eircom for you phone - even in a tiny market like Ireland, there must be a dozen alternatives. This is thanks to the EU.

So I think you can cross 'monopolistic businesses' off your list of prime movers behind the evil EU.

If it was truly to facilitate competition there would have been an equalisation of taxes before anything else. There is competition between the member states to attract multi-national companies to locate within the various countries that are part of the EU. Hence the French and German efforts to have Ireland increase its corporation tax rate to make these two nations look more competitive.

The whole set up suits the multi-nationals as they can play member states against each other. The fact that the EU fines these multi-nationals from time to time is merely the price they pay to keep the lucrative status quo in place. Have any of these companies actually changed their way of doing business after being fined?

The politicians and bureaucrats of the EU are answerable to no one. We get to vote merely give us something to do, none of the people we vote for actually do anything to improve the lives of the majority of the citizens of the EU.

Its all just a club for the political elite, paid for by 22% VAT.

humanji

Setanta1974 wrote: »

"The "No" campaigners had reservations over parts of the treaty. The government went to the rest of Europe and got guarantees to reassure the "No" campaigners that their fears were unfounded."

humanji, do you really believe those guarentees are worth the paper they are written on? Then how do explain the commotion over trying to force us to increase our corporate tax rate in exchange for lower interest rates?

Those guarantees were worth the paper they were printed on and more. If they reneged on them the EU would have fallen apart. But that's besides the point anyway. The guarantees simply pointed out that the No campaign were talking bollox and using scare tactics to confuse the electorate (don't hear you complaining about that one).

And as said by Monty Burnz, they can demand what they like. We don't have to do it.

Setanta1974 wrote: »

They are trying to bully us (sounds like a dictatorship to me) like they did when they gave our government no alternative but to call a second referendum by threatening not to give us any more funds. Choposing to ignore our first referendum and not even giving a vote to the majority of the other member states sounds very undemoratic to me

Firstly, in LA-LA land everything is perfect and everyone looks out for other peoples interests. In the real world, however, countries look after the wellfare of their own first. That is why the bigger EU countries want Ireland to match their corporate tax rate. But they can say and threaten what they want. It means nothing, (oh, and that's not a dictatorship. That's politics. In a dictatorship we'd have had our tax rate changed for us ages ago).

Also, they didn't threaten to cut our funding if we voted no for a second time on Lisbon. They didn't ignore the results of the first referendum. Most other countries didn't have a referendum because they didn't need to. The governments didn't feel the need to ask the people because the people gave them a mandate to pass Lisbon, which in reality isn't as scary as you're being led to believe. The EU is democractic. I know many don't want to hear that, but it really is. It's just the same as the Dáil, but on a larger scale.

Setanta1974

So basically, you are agreeing with me Monty that they are bullying us. The only difference is you seem to think this is acceptable behaviour where as I don't.

If Europe was all one land mass, I would agree, an equal corporation tax across the boards would be fair. But Ireland is an island and on the periphery of Europe so it is important for us to hold on to our lower corporate tax as an added incentive to attract foreign companies and to counterbalance the added expense these companies might face with transport etc.

Setanta1974

wow, can believe what you just wrote humanji. We have a total difference of opinion so will just have to agree to disagree

humanji

Well what did I write that's incorrect?

Setanta1974

Pay attention bud. No one said you were correct or incorrect. I just said we have a total difference of opinion on the matter. And there is no way we will ever see eye to eye on it so instead of talking in circles with you, I will just move on

humanji

Well it's a discussion forum. That's why I'm wondering what your opinion is. There's always the possibility that progress will be made in one direction or the other. Simply walking away because you can't be bothered is a bit of a waste of everyone's time.

Setanta1974

As you would put it, in a perfect world it would be a discussion forum where everyone discussed their opinions. They wouldn’t be trying to force their ideas on to others like you seem to be doing. Trying to prove who is right and who is wrong.

How do you or I for that matter, really know what goes on over there. All we have are opinions. You believe your opinions, I believe mine. In my experience trying to talk to someone like you is a waste of time and progress will never be made. If you think I not being bothered to enter a debate with you is a waste of time. Whatever. I on the other hand think it would be a waste of time trying to open your eyes because you obviously have your mind made up and want to be right all the time.

You are a moderator so start acting like one and stop trying to make this a personal thing between you and me and stop trying to derail the OP’s original statement that Europe is undemocratic. I submitted my opinion on this and if you can’t accept it, well….that’s not my problem. End of discussion.

Monty Burnz

nobody3 wrote: »

If it was truly to facilitate competition there would have been an equalisation of taxes before anything else.

I disagree. Can you back this up? Do you understand the impossibility of fiscal harmonisation as a first step towards a European union?

nobody3 wrote: »

The whole set up suits the multi-nationals as they can play member states against each other.

I suits them for business reasons. Less red tape (they don't have to obey 20 odd different sets of legislation), less exchange risk, no import duties etc. - it's much, much cheaper to do business. Can you imagine trying to do business in the US if each state was a different country with a different currency and different legal systems?

And cheaper to do business is good for us as it means either lower prices or higher profits for businesses. Higher business profits means that we will have pensions in our old age and more wealth generally. Remember, profits are good. They are a market signal that something useful is being done in an efficient way.

nobody3 wrote: »

The fact that the EU fines these multi-nationals from time to time is merely the price they pay to keep the lucrative status quo in place. Have any of these companies actually changed their way of doing business after being fined?

Yes. Microsoft for one. I'm sure there are dozens of other cases - there will be lots of folks on Boards who have studied competition law. They will name loads of cases for you if you are genuinely interested.

nobody3 wrote: »

The politicians and bureaucrats of the EU are answerable to no one. We get to vote merely give us something to do, none of the people we vote for actually do anything to improve the lives of the majority of the citizens of the EU.

I've some sympathy with your view here. There is clearly a 'democratic deficit' in terms of how the EU is run. The problem seems to be this; the EU is run by the EU Commission, the EU Parliament and the Council of Ministers. The Parliament (the only bit that we can vote for) makes the laws, the EU Commission is the executive (and is made up of nominees by the national governments). We don't directly vote for the executive, and that does seem undemocratic. The problem is that, if we did, the executive would be entirely composed of politicians from the big countries - would you be happy with that? I think most people from the many smaller nations would not.

nobody3 wrote: »

Its all just a club for the political elite, paid for by 22% VAT.

But the top politicians in any system are by definition the political elite, no? Who would you expect to see at the top of such an organisation? Pat the Picket from Cork?

And I'm not sure what you mean by the "paid for by 22% VAT" comment - although that may just reflect my own ignorance...

humanji

Setanta1974 wrote: »

As you would put it, in a perfect world it would be a discussion forum where everyone discussed their opinions. They wouldn’t be trying to force their ideas on to others like you seem to be doing. Trying to prove who is right and who is wrong.

How do you or I for that matter, really know what goes on over there. All we have are opinions. You believe your opinions, I believe mine. In my experience trying to talk to someone like you is a waste of time and progress will never be made. If you think I not being bothered to enter a debate with you is a waste of time. Whatever. I on the other hand think it would be a waste of time trying to open your eyes because you obviously have your mind made up and want to be right all the time.

You are a moderator so start acting like one and stop trying to make this a personal thing between you and me and stop trying to derail the OP’s original statement that Europe is undemocratic. I submitted my opinion on this and if you can’t accept it, well….that’s not my problem. End of discussion.

I'm trying to keep a discussion going. Something you seem desperate to avoid.

You asked me questions, I answered and you got in a strop, making disparaging remarks about me. All I'm asking is that you either add to the discussion, or don't post.

constance tench

Interesting statements from Mr Barroso...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Ralocq9uE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq2Wv9rp4ZQ