EU Internal Trouble?

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

The EU has a specific problem with more authoritarian / nationalistic governments. They want to ignore the pesky democracy rules with EU membership but know that leaving the EU will be a disaster. So they will dance along the line to see how far they can push.

That's exactly what you call over yourself if you are bendy with the rules, and the EU has been that in the past and i don't hold my breathe for the future, but the problem is also the so far as i known the elected EU Parliament has little to no powers to callback/stop the eu commision, which was painfully clear when i believe it was Borroso appointed one of his friends to a position, all the parliament could do and did was a motion/statement saying they really didn't like it.

Those things get noticed, and abused, if you leave children playing without supervision in a kindergarten for example you get the same thing(not with laws and such but you will see they will start testing boundaries and go over them when they notice it has little or no consequences.)

The Euro rules are a bit different. Firstly, the debt mountain doesn't reside with the EU, but EU members. The Debt / GDP ratios are a good rule, but every country has been busting them for years in and out of the EU (first financial crash and then COVID).

That's again a result of no enforcement being taken on countries who didn't follow the rules, and then the future brought weak excuses to leave the rules or i believe they called it meganism altogether, and the eu's answer is always we need more power, a bit the like to police always say when they missed a other terrorist that was on their watchlist. Which always makes me wonder is it the correct answer, in this cae in both case the answer should be: No!

The EU AAA rating is for EU debt - not EU member debt which is different. That is, the borrowing that the EU does itself. The EU borrowing is relatively modest and the EU rules for repayment are stringent so the debt is classed as low risk. On the other hand, EU member debt ranges hugely from AAA to around BB. This is the debt that each member state has via borrowing. Germany has a far better credit rating than Greece. The picture is complicated by the common currency in the Eurozone in that investors in Greece pre-crash were rating their credit-worthiness higher than they should have because they believed the Euro was being implicitly backed by more stable economies by virtue that they also were using the currency.

That is exactly what caused the 2008 crash, ok the eu can be replaced by one of the big banks be it ABN-Amro, Royal bank of Scotland, Deutsche bank it does'nt really matter, what does matter that it is a system that conceals real numbers, i understand the eu on itself has a good rating, but if the foundation it's also a false representation because the eu directly relies on it's member states, even tough it are big economies, if Germany's economy crashes EU's credit rating will help very little.

The financial crisis was generated by the private sector. Governments may not have helped by their lax oversight, but make no mistake - the people who crashed the economy were those having a party with sub prime derivatives. And the massive mis-valuation of these "assets" by ratings agencies who were in the pocket of the very people asking for the ratings. Government borrowing ballooned because governments bailed out these idiots to stop the whole financial system collapsing. And then the government debt was paid back by raising taxes and reducing spending on pretty much everyone except those who caused it in the first place.

Yes indeed, it was gambling with packed debts, where some parties made a lot of money with and other like Lehman brothers, Deutshe bank, Ung, Royal bank of scotland, Rabobank, and many more where on the losing end. But the system is very comparable take Rabobank (Raffeisenbank in german, Co-operative in uk are the same type of banks) for example they had a very good AAA+ something rating right before the 2008 crash, the bankt was running very well in Europe but their exposure in the sub-prime affair lead them to be demoted to AA- in no time, the only reason why they haven't been demoted more it that they ofloaded a lot of assets to cover for all the losses. But the EU does the same with something called quantative easing that on paper has stopped, but actually has changed name, wording it is a bit more hidden away but it is still go.. Where have we heard that before? Sub-prime's also had 3000 different names configuration however you want to call it.
Other thing you mention about the bail-outs, yes it was expensive for the western goverments but what have countries like greece learned from it? i think very little. I think the idea of the EU is amazing, but the executions fails on many fronts.

 

[stowie]

Are there now measures in place, or measures being mooted to prevent a reoccurance of this bolded bit, such as better oversight of the ratings agencies ??

The rating agencies were paid for by the people requesting the ratings. I am not sure too much has changed in terms of this conflict of interest, but I suspect they are a bit more wary about what gets AAA at the very least. AAA is a big thing as it allows many "low-risk" professional investors to put their money in it.

 

[mjr]

That's exactly what you call over yourself if you are bendy with the rules, and the EU has been that in the past and i don't hold my breathe for the future, but the problem is also the so far as i known the elected EU Parliament has little to no powers to callback/stop the eu commision,

Yes, that power currently rests in the upper chamber, the EU Council, aka the member states. It'll be interesting to see if that changes now the UK has gone, as the UK noisily rattled its sabre and threatened to veto any change of that. Allowing either chamber, or requiring both chambers, to recall the Commission seems like a good idea to me.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Yes, that power currently rests in the upper chamber, the EU Council, aka the member states. It'll be interesting to see if that changes now the UK has gone, as the UK noisily rattled its sabre and threatened to veto any change of that. Allowing either chamber, or requiring both chambers, to recall the Commission seems like a good idea to me.

I think it's a bad idea to have the unelected or better worded not directly elected level make all decisions in most systems it's the other way around,(uk and the netherlands for example) people already feel they don't have much to say in the eu, the least they can do is make a simple change so that the results or the eu elections are also reflected in the decision makers. yes i think it's strange they can't do that, don't really hold my breathe for change tough, everytime there is a call for more eu democracy they respond the opposite direction, see for example how Ursula von der Leyen was appointed.

 

[Cirrus]

The EU is annoyed with Hungary and withholding pandemic funds and Hungary are annoyed with the EU for interfering with their immigration laws...

It all seems to be getting a tad fractious.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59748173

 

[mjr]

I think it's a bad idea to have the unelected or better worded not directly elected level make all decisions in most systems it's the other way around,(uk and the netherlands for example)

It's not the other way around in the UK at all: the unelected chamber normally approves all decisions. There is a relatively recent process for the elected Commons to overrule the appointed Lords, the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, but it's been used only 7 times in 110 years.

people already feel they don't have much to say in the eu, the least they can do is make a simple change so that the results or the eu elections are also reflected in the decision makers. [...] everytime there is a call for more eu democracy they respond the opposite direction, see for example how Ursula von der Leyen was appointed.

It's not exactly unheard of in other elections for a party list leader who wins but performs much worse than expected (as the people's party Manfred Weber did, losing 34 seats and 3% share of vote) to be thrown overboard during administration formation, in favour of another member of the largest party group who can secure a parliamentary majority (as vdL narrowly did, getting 383 votes out of 747, by promising to make the social-democrat and renewal group list leaders vice-presidents).

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

It's not the other way around in the UK at all: the unelected chamber normally approves all decisions. There is a relatively recent process for the elected Commons to overrule the appointed Lords, the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, but it's been used only 7 times in 110 years.

Yes what i meant was that it is first discussed, in the chamber, by currently Johnson and friends(and foos) who are democratically elected, it then goes finally i goes to the house of lords in the uk, so the laws presented to the unelected chamber are first discussued in the elected goverment. Alltough in an ideal democracy both would be democratically chosen or better said all layers would be democratically chosen and all decision should be able to be democratically discussed/overthrown etc.

It's not exactly unheard of in other elections for a party list leader who wins but performs much worse than expected (as the people's party Manfred Weber did, losing 34 seats and 3% share of vote) to be thrown overboard during administration formation, in favour of another member of the largest party group who can secure a parliamentary majority (as vdL narrowly did, getting 383 votes out of 747, by promising to make the social-democrat and renewal group list leaders vice-presidents).

Yes, well it might not be unheard off, in this case the EU went as far putting preferred candidate's on the list, creating the suggestion it was between these candidates only to finally come up with Mrs von der Leyen instead.
Now i really don't care about the political powerplay that went with it, but the fact it is due to Brexit and the doomsday like reporting in europe about it, there was more interest than ever, it was the golden opportunity for the EU to show they listen to the poeple they ask to vote from them, but they showed quite the opposite instead. Hope there not surprised if voter turnout for the next eu elections is down the drain again, like all years before that.

 

[mjr]

Yes what i meant was that it is first discussed, in the chamber, by currently Johnson and friends(and foos) who are democratically elected, it then goes finally i goes to the house of lords in the uk, so the laws presented to the unelected chamber are first discussued in the elected goverment.

1. No, the UK government is not elected. MPs are elected. They then effectively elect a PM who appoints the government. There's not even an equivalent of the European Parliament examinations of proposed commissioners.

2. No, bills can start in the unelected Lords and go "finally" to the Commons. See How does a bill become a law? - UK Parliament – https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/

Please, the UK system is less democratic than the EU one, which is reasonable when you realise that the UK system has evolved into a democracy, but is theoretically still an all-powerful inherited autocracy, with base rules not written down and a load of incomplete reforms scattered through centuries of laws. It's nearly miraculous it functions at all!

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

1. No, the UK government is not elected. MPs are elected. They then effectively elect a PM who appoints the government. There's not even an equivalent of the European Parliament examinations of proposed commissioners.

2. No, bills can start in the unelected Lords and go "finally" to the Commons. See How does a bill become a law? - UK Parliament – https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/

1. yes that's right but you can choose an mp related to a particular party

2. did'nt knew that that is actually quite silly(that the lords also can pass a law)

Please, the UK system is less democratic than the EU one, which is reasonable when you realise that the UK system has evolved into a democracy, but is theoretically still an all-powerful inherited autocracy, with base rules not written down and a load of incomplete reforms scattered through centuries of laws. It's nearly miraculous it functions at all!

Could be/may be/possibly but it would be a real clusterfark if the EU would be more undemocratic as an adopted ''all-powerfull inheriter autocracy'' you see like you point out the UK exist a ''bit'' longer, so you might be right that it is an wonder it still functions.
Still the feeling that there is less control over what happens in the EU prevails, now i have made that point clear many times on this new forum and the old one, but it's a bit the same like comparing an 1960'' bike to a new one, where in case of the EU in my opinion is like a sub £200 pound argos one in terms of transparency accountability and listening to the people and the 60'' one is an expensive one that did have a lot of updates and maintenance trough the time, surely it's an old system but especially in terms of transparency better than most Eu sites. The best example is the gov.uk site, while the eu has the same, the uk one is much better in terms of simply putting down what you need to do for example, the eu does often have the same information but hidden away in a hunderds plus pages pdf.

 

[FishFright]

1. yes that's right but you can choose an mp related to a particular party

2. did'nt knew that that is actually quite silly(that the lords also can pass a law)

Could be/may be/possibly but it would be a real clusterfark if the EU would be more undemocratic as an adopted ''all-powerfull inheriter autocracy'' you see like you point out the UK exist a ''bit'' longer, so you might be right that it is an wonder it still functions.
Still the feeling that there is less control over what happens in the EU prevails, now i have made that point clear many times on this new forum and the old one, but it's a bit the same like comparing an 1960'' bike to a new one, where in case of the EU in my opinion is like a sub £200 pound argos one in terms of transparency accountability and listening to the people and the 60'' one is an expensive one that did have a lot of updates and maintenance trough the time, surely it's an old system but especially in terms of transparency better than most Eu sites. The best example is the gov.uk site, while the eu has the same, the uk one is much better in terms of simply putting down what you need to do for example, the eu does often have the same information but hidden away in a hunderds plus pages pdf.

Could be/may be/possibly making things up in a vain attempt at bolstering and empty argument?

You keep repeating the same 'facts' which have mostly been debunked multiple times on here and over there. I get it that you don't like anything you don't really understand but the solution to this is learning and not repetition of falsehoods. Keep this up and I think I'll start making things up about you and your home country (it'll be nice to see how it feels from that side of thinking)

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Could be/may be/possibly making things up in a vain attempt at bolstering and empty argument?

You keep repeating the same 'facts' which have mostly been debunked multiple times on here and over there. I get it that you don't like anything you don't really understand but the solution to this is learning and not repetition of falsehoods. Keep this up and I think I'll start making things up about you and your home country (it'll be nice to see how it feels from that side of thinking)

''mostly been debunked?'' something is debunked or it is not, nothing in between.
Gotta credit you for writing a few words instead of sad-smiling my post, it is kind of creepy how you virtually stalking me just to add sad smilies, don't you got a life or something? Apparently not, explains the sad smilie.
And making things up about me? and my country.. wow just wow... Did you raise the white power flag well thinking that out? Probably singling one person out because his her their opinion does'nt suit you is your specialty, sad really, does explain the smilies again.

 

[FishFright]

''mostly been debunked?'' something is debunked or it is not, nothing in between.
Gotta credit you for writing a few words instead of sad-smiling my post, it is kind of creepy how you virtually stalking me just to add sad smilies, don't you got a life or something? Apparently not, explains the sad smilie.
And making things up about me? and my country.. wow just wow... Did you raise the white power flag well thinking that out? Probably singling one person out because his her their opinion does'nt suit you is your specialty, sad really, does explain the smilies again.

No I'm showing what YOU look like to an observer and it ain't pretty.

It is funny how you fail to learn though

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

No I'm showing what YOU look like to an observer and it ain't pretty.

It is funny how you fail to learn though

So your assuming the observer is so stupid you need show them something? Talking about ain't pretty...

 

[FishFright]

So your assuming the observer is so stupid you need show them something? Talking about ain't pretty...

Well posting the same old debunked twaddle about the EU day after day and not expecting to be laughed at is rather silly. And infuriating too as you never take on board any corrections.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Well posting the same old debunked twaddle about the EU day after day and not expecting to be laughed at is rather silly.

Going by what by what i wrote in this topic, nothing that i said about the EU is wrong, you might not like it but that there was somekind of unofficial by election the last european election where the candidates where on the voting form but where those same candidates where ignored in favor of Ms. von der Leyen, which in my opinion if very bad for the impression of european democracy. You can agree or disagree with me on that, but it surely isn't debunked.

And infuriating too as you never take on board any corrections.

That's also simply not true, i have corrected my post if i'm wrong or clarified my position if that is needed. However i don't do that if it's simply a other opinion, somebody else already made the point, of if i'm able to respond much later and the discussion is going about something else.
And you should know that because last time i clarified my position, after you basically made it look like i was the new ukip/pvv/front national frontperson.
Which after my clarification was clearly no longer the case(it was never the case but i did clarify it with a new post for a reason) but i assume you still didn't like my point because you started sad-smilie and tracking my post. I hope for you you found a better hobby i couldn't care less if you continue i just feel it's a waste of your time and virtually stalking someone is a bit creepy. But other than that, if sad-smilie-ing my post makes your day go for it.

Also one more important point, there is a difference between not correcting and simply don't agreeing with you. I am entitled to feel red wheels are great, just as you are entitled to feel any other color is better, that doesn't mean you have debunked that i feel red wheels are great it just means we have an different opinion.