poland and the eu

[wu_trax]

im just wondering, does anyone know if its still possible not to let them join?
i mean, whats wrong with them? they cant expect to get almost as many votes as a country with 60 or 80 million people, can they? they are only 40 million, thats a fact.. either they accept that or they should stay the **** out of the EU and see how well they will do with their new US-friends.

and its not only the constitution, they have become increasingly annoying, even more than you brits

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

im just wondering, does anyone know if its still possible not to let them join?

No.

[ChubbyChecker]

If I had it my way none of the 10 new entrants would be joining. Not until they become richer than the rest of us at least.

[Marilyn Manson]

If I had my way, then we'd say that unless Russia joins we'll send John Prescott over to The Kremlin to break a few windows.

We need Lebensraum, ffs.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker

If I had it my way none of the 10 new entrants would be joining. Not until they become richer than the rest of us at least.

the others are fine with me. there economies are growing fast . just look how well latvia is doing. strong growth, very little burocracy and a very transparent goverment.
but poland? wtf? how muc hextra-money did they already get for their farmers? and still they want more

[Marilyn Manson]

There's no point having the Poles in if you aren't going to bring in The Russians to control them as well.

[Apothos]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

im just wondering, does anyone know if its still possible not to let them join?
i mean, whats wrong with them? they cant expect to get almost as many votes as a country with 60 or 80 million people, can they? they are only 40 million, thats a fact.. either they accept that or they should stay the **** out of the EU and see how well they will do with their new US-friends.

and its not only the constitution, they have become increasingly annoying, even more than you brits

Perhaps Poland feels it deserves atleast as many votes as Spain, and Spain hardly wants to give up any of theirs.

Anyway, i wouldn't stand a chance in a politcal 'discusion' here, but i'm all for the likes of Poland and Spain having almost as many votes as Germany, France, the UK and Italy. It would go some way to stopping our countries gaining larger heads than they already have, and give smaller countries more of bargaining tool when people need them to vote their way. Is there a flaw in my thinking?

[Raging.Retard]

I can empathise why 'they have become increasingly annoying'. Its not just the votes issue at all, it runs far deeper than that.

For example, current EU member states receive huge aggricultural subsidies. All of the 'new' members (which obviously includes Poland) joining the EU will only be getting 25% of this subsidy compared with everyone else's 100%. This hardly leads to a good impression of equal treatment to all member states.

I find it slightly amusing that Germany and France are at the forefront of the complainers. Its not like they themselves pay much attention to European wide rules is it? The European Stability Pact being a classic example from last week. Nearly all of the smaller Euro nations kept their inflation within the assigned 3% limit, except ... yup.. France and Germany. So they just decided to aboloish the pact. Like I said... who cares about votes when you dont live in a democracy.

[Weeks]

I'm game for a weighting system for the smaller countries.
I'd give Poland the same number of votes as the UK has. If that what it takes to stop the EU being hijacked by an alliance of the bigger states.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Apothos

Perhaps Poland feels it deserves atleast as many votes as Spain, and Spain hardly wants to give up any of theirs.

Anyway, i wouldn't stand a chance in a politcal 'discusion' here, but i'm all for the likes of Poland and Spain having almost as many votes as Germany, France, the UK and Italy. It would go some way to stopping our countries gaining larger heads than they already have, and give smaller countries more of bargaining tool when people need them to vote their way. Is there a flaw in my thinking?

why should a country with 40 million people have as much influence as one with 80? that doesnt make sence to me and is definitly not democratic.
and its not only what they ask for but also how they do ask. they dont negotiate, they demand.
for all i care they can either accept the changes or go to hell. i can think of a lot of better ways to spend EU-money than to spend it on the agricultrual sector in poland.

[pablissimo]

I've always questioned the economic 'need' for Poland to be part of the EU, I don't see how it enhances it for any of its existing members by introducing an unstable, low/negative growth economy whose priority at the moment seems to be 'CAP ME CAP ME!'

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Raging.Retard

I can empathise why 'they have become increasingly annoying'. Its not just the votes issue at all, it runs far deeper than that.

For example, current EU member states receive huge aggricultural subsidies. All of the 'new' members (which obviously includes Poland) joining the EU will only be getting 25% of this subsidy compared with everyone else's 100%. This hardly leads to a good impression of equal treatment to all member states.

I find it slightly amusing that Germany and France are at the forefront of the complainers. Its not like they themselves pay much attention to European wide rules is it? The European Stability Pact being a classic example from last week. Nearly all of the smaller Euro nations kept their inflation within the assigned 3% limit, except ... yup.. France and Germany. So they just decided to aboloish the pact. Like I said... who cares about votes when you dont live in a democracy.

the pact is crap and so is the CAP in general. yes giving only 25% to the farmers in eastern europe is somewaht unfiar, especially if you consider that they are somewhat backward in terms of technology compared to farms in western europe so that theyd rather need MORE money instead of less. but on the other hand, where should those missing 75% come from? you cant just cut the subsideries for the existing members from one year to the other.
as fro the pact. sure we could reach those 3%, but would you really want germany and france to run into a rezession now? that would be bad for everyone. (edit: inflationrate france: 2.2%, germany: 2.6%, netherland: 5.2%)

[Apothos]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

why should a country with 40 million people have as much influence as one with 80? that doesnt make sence to me and is definitly not democratic.

What exactly isnt democratic about it? As far as i know, the number of votes Poland gets doesnt restrict the number of votes another country gets, does it?
Does Polands measley population of 38 million people make it some how a second-class country in the EU?
Are you saying that Germany should have more votes than Italy, France and the UK too, just because there are more Germans?

Restricting the number of votes a country gets (in this way) makes little sense to me. Wouldnt it make more sense to have one vote per country? China doesnt get more votes in the UN just because it has over billion people. If that's the way things worked everywhere, the West would be screwed, wouldnt it?

and its not only what they ask for but also how they do ask. they dont negotiate, they demand.
for all i care they can either accept the changes or go to hell. i can think of a lot of better ways to spend EU-money than to spend it on the agricultrual sector in poland.

I see, fair enough.

I'm genuinely interested here, btw,

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

you cant just cut the subsideries for the existing members from one year to the other.

Why not? Didn't you advocate cutting the American steel tarriffs (/subsidies) overnight?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Apothos

What exactly isnt democratic about it? As far as i know, the number of votes Poland gets doesnt restrict the number of votes another country gets, does it?
Does Polands measley population of 38 million people make it some how a second-class country in the EU?
Are you saying that Germany should have more votes than Italy, France and the UK too, just because there are more Germans?

Restricting the number of votes a country gets (in this way) makes little sense to me. Wouldnt it make more sense to have one vote per country? China doesnt get more votes in the UN just because it has over billion people. If that's the way things worked everywhere, the West would be screwed, wouldnt it?

yes, thats exactly the idea. more people = more influence. what else would you expect? this isnt the un after all.
we are moving forward to an even closer economical and political union, so that one should expect some form of democracy. and there still is the 2nd half of that double majority-idea which says that 50% of the countries have to agree to a decission, no matter how large these countries are. that means that in theory the 13 smallest countries could stop a decision supported by the 12 largest countries.
it doesnt mean that poland is a 2nd class country, they are simply not as large as italy france, germany or uk, so please give me one good reason why they should have as much influence as these countries have?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Why not? Didn't you advocate cutting the American steel tarriffs (/subsidies) overnight?

imagine a farmer invests a few million today and tomorrow all the calculations he made are wrong, because the subsideries are gone. he would be ruined. a state should always try to gurantee some stability. they should tell the farmers now that in x years the subsidereis will be reduced to zero, so that they can prepare for it.
the steel tarrifs were only meant to be in place for a few years, so that i doubt that there is much damage done by reducing them a little earlier. if they would have been in place for decades im sure bush would have tryed another approach.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

im just wondering, does anyone know if its still possible not to let them join?
i mean, whats wrong with them? they cant expect to get almost as many votes as a country with 60 or 80 million people, can they? they are only 40 million, thats a fact.. either they accept that or they should stay the **** out of the EU and see how well they will do with their new US-friends.

Well if you hadnt ruined their economy in WW2 then maybe they'd be a better entrant and not bitter! (I think this is Polands main reason for being accepted.....)

Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker

If I had it my way none of the 10 new entrants would be joining. Not until they become richer than the rest of us at least.

40-60 yrs at current rates! Your missing the benefits of cheaper goods for us and skilled labour migration, but dont let the benefits get in the way of the "they're crap,lets not let them in" argument!

Originally Posted by wu_trax

the others are fine with me. there economies are growing fast . just look how well latvia is doing. strong growth, very little burocracy and a very transparent goverment.
but poland? wtf? how muc hextra-money did they already get for their farmers? and still they want more

Oh yeah Latvia with its GDP/capita just 31% that of the EU 15.
The same Latvia with unemployment rate of 13.1%?
The same Latvia thats GDP is only 69% that of what it was in 1989?
Well it has got low inflation I'll give yout that.

Originally Posted by Raging.Retard

I find it slightly amusing that Germany and France are at the forefront of the complainers. Its not like they themselves pay much attention to European wide rules is it? The European Stability Pact being a classic example from last week. Nearly all of the smaller Euro nations kept their inflation within the assigned 3% limit, except ... yup.. France and Germany. So they just decided to aboloish the pact. Like I said... who cares about votes when you dont live in a democracy.

Erm... its not about inflation, its about govt borrowing, keeping inflation in the desired range (0-2%) is the job of the ECB. Not that theres any1 to punish them if/when it goes tits up!!

Well theres my views/comments! The CAP thing is goin to be phased up over 10yrs and at current rates would cripple the budget so what else are they menat to do? Personally I'd abolish all of CAP anyway!!!
Another downside though of "letting" these countries in is the regional policy thing - for example Sheffield where I am qualifies for aid cos of average income/head less than 75% of EU average but when they join EU, it will lose this overnight as average drops.

Stew
PS - guess what my lectures/tutorials were on in my module of Economics of the European Union were this week....
PPS - sorry for the borin factual reply!

[laputa]

The EU sucks, we should abolish it asap.

[Apothos]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

yes, thats exactly the idea. more people = more influence. what else would you expect? this isnt the un after all. we are moving forward to an even closer economical and political union, so that one should expect some form of democracy.

You have yet to explain to me how it would be undemocratic for Poland to be as influential as Germany. That sounds more democratic to me.

By the sounds of what you say, countries like Poland and smaller, will have meaningless votes in issues unless, as you say below, they all get together in an attempt to block it, and even then, how many will fold over when they are offered concessions or backing in an unrelated issue from one of the countries with a great deal more influence.

and there still is the 2nd half of that double majority-idea which says that 50% of the countries have to agree to a decission, no matter how large these countries are. that means that in theory the 13 smallest countries could stop a decision supported by the 12 largest countries.

I like the sound of that, but that should be the norm anyway, shouldnt it?

it doesnt mean that poland is a 2nd class country, they are simply not as large as italy france, germany or uk,

It certainly seems that way. Its Elitism based on populace.

so please give me one good reason why they should have as much influence as these countries have?

An equal and fair democratic system?

Can i ask your opinion on Turkey. They have a population around 70million, i believe. When/if they join, should they be allowed the influence France, Germany, Italy or the UK have, or should they and Germany then have greater influence at that time than the UK, France and Italy?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Stew

Well if you hadnt ruined their economy in WW2 then maybe they'd be a better entrant and not bitter! (I think this is Polands main reason for being accepted.....)

yes, always play the ww2-card. it has been so horrible for poland, so they have every right on earth to black mail the EU today, 60 years later.

Oh yeah Latvia with its GDP/capita just 31% that of the EU 15.
The same Latvia with unemployment rate of 13.1%?
The same Latvia thats GDP is only 69% that of what it was in 1989?
Well it has got low inflation I'll give yout that.

i read something about the country just a while ago. unfortunatly i cant find it right now, but it sounded VERY optimistic.

Erm... its not about inflation, its about govt borrowing, keeping inflation in the desired range (0-2%) is the job of the ECB. Not that theres any1 to punish them if/when it goes tits up!!

and why do you think someone came up with that 3% limit? for the fun of it? if the goverment spends too much money that probably causes inflation (which isnt always such a bad thing, especially if there is a danger that you get deflation because of the whole economical situation)

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

he would be ruined. a state should always try to gurantee some stability.

I don't remember you caring as much for American steel-workers, but whatever . I guess farmers are more important than industrial workers.

[Weeks]

If we just go on population in terms of how much say one country has in the EU the smaller ones are going to get ****ed.
Which is not fair. As we will have a Franco-German dictorship of the EU.
I do not believe the number of votes should just depend on population.

But i can see why you're annoyed at Poland their negotiation skills are not upto scratch, they are new to this whole business though. They need to take a leaf out of Spain's book.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Weeks

If we just go on population in terms of how much say one country has in the EU the smaller ones are going to get ****ed.
Which is not fair. As we will have a Franco-German dictorship of the EU.
I do not believe the number of votes should just depend on population.

But i can see why you're annoyed at Poland their negotiation skills are not upto scratch, they are new to this whole business though. They need to take a leaf out of Spain's book.

its not like everything will be decided by majority vote, is it? besides, as i already explained its planned to have a double majority vote. and with that the smaller countries will aswell get their influence. its not like 60 million + 80 million is a majority now, is it?
but i do think that if the goverments representing the majority of the population take a decision then they should get through with it. it wont be possible to always find a consens between 25 members. what better solution is there (besides handing over all power to the european parilament which obviously noone is willing to do.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Apothos

You have yet to explain to me how it would be undemocratic for Poland to be as influential as Germany.

Because QMV weighting is, for all other members, based on population, and Poland only got it's exaggerated weighting as a special 'deal' at Nice along with Spain?

[Apothos]

Righty... ok. :)

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Weeks

If we just go on population in terms of how much say one country has in the EU the smaller ones are going to get ****ed.

That's assuming that they are going to hate practically everything that comes out of The EU, which is manifestly not the case - in fact, a lot of them, such as The Low Countries, Denmark, etc, are often pushing for more radical policies, in the field of the Environment, for example.

Nobody is ever without a friend on a policy issue. (And remember, there will be lots of 'small' countries coming in, in fact, practically all of tehm are 'small')

Originally Posted by Weeks

As we will have a Franco-German dictorship of the EU.

We already have too much of this. Which was sort of one of the arguments in favour of expansion in the first place.

Originally Posted by Weeks

I do not believe the number of votes should just depend on population.

Then what? Whichever Head of Government has the biggest ****, or something?


P.S, I have no mouth and I must scream.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Because QMV weighting is, for all other members, based on population, and Poland only got it's exaggerated weighting as a special 'deal' at Nice along with Spain?

I don't know a lot about this particular issue - I saw it on the news last night, thats all but I remember saying that Germany voted for this ages ago and is only now raising opposition? Is it a case of agreeing a huge load of stuff cos only want a little bit taken out?

You'll never get a situation where everyone is happy - do it on population small countries will say they are unrepresented, GDP then poor countries will moan etc

[Intrepid00]

Can someone direct me to a reliable, non-bias arctile on the EU stucture. I know the basics from when it was 'in process' and some countries being pissed about the Euro being handled by German banks and crap but I can't say I know of how its setup now.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Stew

I don't know a lot about this particular issue - I saw it on the news last night, thats all but I remember saying that Germany voted for this ages ago and is only now raising opposition? Is it a case of agreeing a huge load of stuff cos only want a little bit taken out?

You'll never get a situation where everyone is happy - do it on population small countries will say they are unrepresented, GDP then poor countries will moan etc

yes, we agreed to the nice-treaty, but that was before the expansion, wasnt it? you cant expect us to be underrepresented in about everything, only because everyone gets paranoid about the masterrace.
weve got 29 votes, poland and spain together, (which represents about the same population) gets 54. why the hell should we accept such a thing?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Intrepid00

and some countries being pissed about the Euro being handled by German banks and crap

the euro isnt handeled by german banks, but by the european central bank (ECB), which is located in Frankfurt a.M. (which is in germany), but thats all about it. every country that joined the euro is represented in that central bank

[Weeks]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Then what? Whichever Head of Government has the biggest ****, or something?

The EU should work for the good of europe as a whole. If it works mearly for countries with the biggest populations it's a bit silly if you ask me.

You're right in the sense that the influx of the smaller countries will stop a Franco-German take-over of the EU. I'm just not sure, hence why im not that bothered Poland are asking for around the same amount of votes as the bigger countries.

As for wu_trax point, majority vote will not decide everything, but quite a few things.

Anyway i reckon Poland are going for the tactic that Spain has. Ask for the moon on a stick, back down a little, then everyone says ok have that as they are so relieved they are not going for what they orginally said. A common bargaining pratice.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Weeks

The EU should work for the good of europe as a whole. If it works mearly for countries with the biggest populations it's a bit silly if you ask me.

why would it work only for the biggest countries? its not like there usually is much of a conflict when decisions are taken, except for those annoying poles now.

You're right in the sense that the influx of the smaller countries will stop a Franco-German take-over of the EU. I'm just not sure, hence why im not that bothered Poland are asking for around the same amount of votes as the bigger countries.

how the hell should the franco-german axis of evil that wants total world domination run the EU if it only represents 140 million people? 140 million isnt the majority of more than 400 milllion people now, is it?
the whole constitution will fail and we will go one with france, italy and benelux alone.

[Weeks]

It's 1/4 though. Which is alot in my book.
If france and germany work as one, and get a couple of other countries (say the UK and Spain) you'd easily have over 60%.
I've not put you in an axis of evil, yet.
I don't have anything against france and germany, no really.
I just don't want the bigger countries, yes that includes mine, having most of the say.

And there's no conflict when decisions are taken? Do we all hold hands and brade daisy's in each others hair? Sounds cool, can i join in?

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Weeks

It's 1/4 though. Which is alot in my book.
If france and germany work as one, and get a couple of other countries (say the UK and Spain) you'd easily have over 60%.
I've not put you in an axis of evil, yet.
I don't have anything against france and germany, no really.
I just don't want the bigger countries, yes that includes mine, having most of the say.

And there's no conflict when decisions are taken? Do we all hold hands and brade daisy's in each others hair? Sounds cool, can i join in?

i dont get it. why should a small country have as much influence as a larger one? how the hell do you want to make decisions? that consens idea doesnt work with an EU-25, at least not on the every-day level.. why should less than 40% of the population tell the remaining 60% what not to do? doesnt sound really fair to me.
and no, there usually arent that many conflicts, and least none that cant be dealt with.

edit: anyway, poland doesnt seem to have a problem with the big countries running the EU. it just wants to be one of them. (and it isnt, thats a fact)

(besides: when would uk and france be ever of the same opinion and spain and poland reject it? thats not very likely scenario.)

[queball]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

why should less than 40% of the population tell the remaining 60% what not to do? doesnt sound really fair to me.

But the 60% shouldn't "tell" the 40% what to do, either. It's not about the majority being right but about countries being able to get along with each other. Ideally the system should compensate for the effect of large countries like Germany using all their votes the same way. If Germany split in two, and the two halves disagreed 10% of the time, making each German's vote 20% less powerful, is that fair?

[inf]

yo the eu is a tool for the bigger countries to exploit the world yo

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by queball

But the 60% shouldn't "tell" the 40% what to do, either. It's not about the majority being right but about countries being able to get along with each other. Ideally the system should compensate for the effect of large countries like Germany using all their votes the same way. If Germany split in two, and the two halves disagreed 10% of the time, making each German's vote 20% less powerful, is that fair?

maybe the easiest approach to archive that would be to hand over the power to the parilament, which seems to be truely european.
sure we could split up germany aswell. we are already a federal country so i dont see much of a problem with that, but would that be possible with uk and (especially) france? i dont think so.

but thats all pretty much utiopian, i dont think anyone would want that. what we need now is a way to make sure that decisions can be made within the EU-25.or we can forget about the whole idea, because the whole thing will collapse sooner or later.

[Weeks]

The population argument is shit anyway.
It should not be about my 80million outweights your 40million.
It should be out what is best for our combined 120million.
WE'RE ONE BIG HAPPY FAMILY, REMEMBER?

[Apothos]

Originally Posted by Weeks

what is best for our combined 120million.

Communism?

[Weeks]

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

TThen what? Whichever Head of Government has the biggest ****, or something?

Intra-europe counterstrike tournament every 4 years. Winning country gets 100 votes, second place gets 50, third place gets 20 and the rest get 10 each.

[wu_trax]

sure it should be about whats best for everyone, thats what the whole institution is there for, but what would you do if a compromise cant be found?
please explain how you want to make decisions within a union of 25 states?
what do you think would happen if everyone would take polands approach?
surely malta can complain now aswell, maybe they should also get 27 votes, so that you can make sure they dont get overvoted by the evil people who live in poland?

[Apothos]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

surely malta can complain now aswell, maybe they should also get 27 votes, so that you can make sure they dont get overvoted by the evil people who live in poland?

Good point, i second that motion.

[Weeks]

Well if a compromise cant be found what gives the majority the right to tell the minority what to do?
If some countries have drastically different views to how shit should happen why should they have to reform to the norm?
If malta think they're being ****ed they should demand more votes. I'm game.

Basically, the EU needs to make sure everyone is on the same wave-length to work for the good of the EU. Now, it's possible that this could not happen if we just do the 'my country is bigger than your' thing, as smaller countries could be ignored. So we can't do this just on population alone.

Like France tried to tell Poland to shut up over Iraq. France and Germany agreed on Iraq. So they could say, look 140 million outweighs 40 million. It even outwieghs 100 million with the UK onboard.

This is not the way to unite europe.

What is needed is to say
"Well Poland are in the EU and we are all equal. So we have to take your view point on board and make a decision that accounts for the whole of europe."
At first there will be alot of arugments, this is needed and healthy. But after a while, probably after our lifetimes, a common pool of thinking that will be truely European will come about, as we have been talking and taking into account each others viewpoints.

If it sounds a bit hippy to you in the 1940s the idea of the whole of europe working as one sounded a bit hippy also.

Btw im not arguing for Poland, im just arguing that votes based on population alone is shit.

[wu_trax]

if we are all equal, then why does a pole supposed to count more than a french, british or german? it certainly wont work that way, because people here will get really annoyed with how things develop.
the majority should decide on things were the single member states gave up their souvereinity. of course you can never force a memberstate to increase the power of the EU institutions against its wishes, but thats not what we are talking about.
it will be impossible to find a compromise between all members on everything. its simply impratical, it will be impossible to do anything at all.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

if we are all equal, then why does a pole supposed to count more than a french, british or german?

He meant equal on a national level rather than a personal level and you know it.

[Bunga]

It interesting to note that MrL is always telling people what they know.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

He meant equal on a national level rather than a personal level and you know it.

i do know that, im just saying that it doesnt make any sence whatsoever.
maybe we could split up germany. we have old historical borders, this country only exists for about 120 years, it did consist only as a very lose union for centuries before. weve got 16 states right now, so we would get 16 times as many votes as poland, we win !!! we are all 'equal' after all

[Weeks]

I was trying to get away from the population thing.
And more towards a consensus of thought.

I'm not saying a polish vote is more important, but their viewpoint is as equal and shit needs to be sorted so there, AND OTHER SMALLER COUNTRIES, viewpoints are thrust onto the EU and cannot be ignored.

Poland is a bad example, i am now changing the the topic to 'Malta and the EU'.

I vote we scrap the EU and re-start the killing of each other. It worked for this continent for well over 2000 years. If it aint broke...

[Radical Edward]

I had a strange dream last night that the UK and Poland were going to become one country.