Europe

[Adrian II]

The European Union is not necessary to ensure a greater influence on the world for the European nations. We once exercised great influence and power internationally, many of us still do, and we can do it again without unification.

Soooo, we once dominated the seas, sciences and economy, we owned North America, large swaths of Asia and Africa, and we can do it again?

Teheee

Just on the off-chance that it's contageous, I'm out of this thread.

[Beskar]

I can't think of hardly any con's to a European Federation as an idea itself, however, I can think of plenty about the way we are doing it at the moment.

So I am not opposed to the idea itself, just the way it is being done.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Soooo, we once dominated the seas, sciences and economy, we owned North America, large swaths of Asia and Africa, and we can do it again?

We can once again dominate the seas, sciences, and economy. We already have fairly strong economies and sciences at least.

I can't think of hardly any con's to a European Federation as an idea itself, however, I can think of plenty about the way we are doing it at the moment.

There are plenty.

[Beskar]

There are plenty.

Like what? Anything I can think of, the pro's outweigh the con's, if it is done correctly.

[Kagemusha]

Like what? Anything I can think of, the pro's outweigh the con's, if it is done correctly.

Like big government < small government. In this case colossal government replacing governments ranging from large to tiny.

[Beskar]

Like big government < small government. In this case colossal government replacing governments ranging from large to tiny.

Depends on definition of "Big Government". The term is very wishywashy, you could say, just having one government in Brussels is far smaller than 20 odd different governments at once.

If you are talking about centralisation, then how much is centralised and what powers occur there? Usually, it would just be general foreign policy, etc.

Hypothetically speaking, is everyone having the same currency, the same plug sockets, the same road laws and various regularisation and standardisation a bad thing? If anything, it brings far more unity between the nations, the ability to walk into the country next door and knowing that there are pretty much the same exact laws and that you don't need to convert money, or needing to re-train or relearn things. Knowing that your plug for your laptop works without fiddling with millions of different changers just to load up totalwar.org. These are just the general populace benefits, there are masses of economical benefits to this as well.

There is another way of thinking about it as well. We can either join America, join Russia, join China, etc, or we can forge our own European Superpower, and when America tries to force us into pointless wars, we can just stick up our middle finger at them, instead of some nations (like Britain) being slave states to the American Empire.

[Kagemusha]

Depends on definition of "Big Government". The term is very wishywashy, you could say, just having one government in Brussels is far smaller than 20 odd different governments at once.

If you are talking about centralisation, then how much is centralised and what powers occur there? Usually, it would just be general foreign policy, etc.

Hypothetically speaking, is everyone having the same currency, the same plug sockets, the same road laws and various regularisation and standardisation a bad thing? If anything, it brings far more unity between the nations, the ability to walk into the country next door and knowing that there are pretty much the same exact laws and that you don't need to convert money, or needing to re-train or relearn things. Knowing that your plug for your laptop works without fiddling with millions of different changers just to load up totalwar.org. These are just the general populace benefits, there are masses of economical benefits to this as well.

There is another way of thinking about it as well. We can either join America, join Russia, join China, etc, or we can forge our own European Superpower, and when America tries to force us into pointless wars, we can just stick up our middle finger at them, instead of some nations (like Britain) being slave states to the American Empire.

The problem is that for example how would you set up taxes for the central government, when the average incomes are dramatically different from country to country? Also how some central government could be aware of the special circumstances which can be found from all over Europe. The thing is that in Federal State we would only be creating another layer of government in the center, while the former National and regional governments would have to remain as the central government could not fill in to their role because lack of understanding of the regional conditions. We can create as many European standards we want without turning into a federal state. In matter of fact its happening right now.

Why exactly we have to forge our own superpower? In our current state we can defend ourselves and also project force and help outside the Europe. Why exactly we need to become a superpower? So instead of fighting each other like it was in the past, we could be able to enter or create global conflicts? Id rather live in peace then be a part of powerful superstate that has the need to project its power on the global scale, thank you.

[Beskar]

The problem is that for example how would you set up taxes for the central government, when the average incomes are dramatically different from country to country?

Edit: Haha! I found this question, i kept looking for it as I remembered reading it.

Basically, a unification would actually equalize all the incomes over Europe. If there was a European minimum wage with European tax laws it would mean on average, people would roughly be paid and taxed the same, this would cause areas to rapidly start charging the same sort of prices for things and it would increase the incomes from the worse-off in Europe to better and with them having more money, they also would be spending this in their areas, bringing economical growth and interest into areas. Other countries also wouldn't have problems selling stock in these poorer areas either, as they don't have to sell them at a loss in comparison to if they did in the far West of Europe.

Also how some central government could be aware of the special circumstances which can be found from all over Europe. The thing is that in Federal State we would only be creating another layer of government in the center, while the former National and regional governments would have to remain as the central government could not fill in to their role because lack of understanding of the regional conditions. We can create as many European standards we want without turning into a federal state. In matter of fact its happening right now.

Special Circumstances would simply be based on case-by-case basis. However, a federal government has different layers which handles issues on different stages, so majority of the bottom stage stuff doesn't even reach the top, unless it is really important as it is handled on that level.

Also, we wouldn't be creating another layer, if anything, that layer is already there as it is, and it would actually become far more streamlined, especially when each of the European areas are reconstructed to fit ideally into this system instead of the current piece-meal style system.

Regional conditions again are handled on a regional basis and if they are very important, the "top" will know.

Why exactly we have to forge our own superpower? In our current state we can defend ourselves and also project force and help outside the Europe. Why exactly we need to become a superpower? So instead of fighting each other like it was in the past, we could be able to enter or create global conflicts? Id rather live in peace then be a part of powerful superstate that has the need to project its power on the global scale, thank you.

Not really, none of the European nations are as powerful as they think they are. It is an arrogance that somehow all the European nations seem to think they are really all powerful. They are strong yes, but you imply that nations such as the Netherlands can go toe-on-toe against Russia or America or China or other real major powers. On the otherhand, the combined might of all the nations such as France, Britain, Germany, (the other european nations) all together would be a really powerful military force that would rival the likes of America. Also, "part of a powerful superstate that has the need to project its power" why are we members of NATO then, which is the powerful American Superstates need to project its power? Just saying.

Con #1.

Why is it? Europe would forge its own foreign policy, which stops slave states or states being pressured by the grander states into doing their will. As far as I am aware, it is only Britain which is the most warlike in Europe and that is only because of the "Special Relationship" with America.

That is a con in the long term and certainly not a "general populace benefit."

Why is it? You given no argument to support such a conclusion.

Economic benefits should be free trade and no more. There are also the economic drawbacks to European unification to consider.

What drawbacks? The benefits would be the free-trade zone, also free expansion into other areas of Europe which would increase business due to it being over a larger area. With standardisation, there would be more compatiability with technology. Also, it would be far easier to use the vast lands and resources of other nations for your business, so further economic expansion and technological advancement. What are the drawbacks compared to the situation now? If anything, the situation actually improves, not get worse.

No offence, but that is leftist hogwash.

Actually, it is not left or right, it is simply counter-balance. Military tactics 101.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

If you are talking about centralisation, then how much is centralised and what powers occur there? Usually, it would just be general foreign policy, etc.

Con #1.

Hypothetically speaking, is everyone having the same currency, the same plug sockets, the same road laws and various regularisation and standardisation a bad thing? If anything, it brings far more unity between the nations, the ability to walk into the country next door and knowing that there are pretty much the same exact laws and that you don't need to convert money, or needing to re-train or relearn things. Knowing that your plug for your laptop works without fiddling with millions of different changers just to load up totalwar.org.

That is a con in the long term and certainly not a "general populace benefit."

These are just the general populace benefits, there are masses of economical benefits to this as well.

Economic benefits should be free trade and no more. There are also the economic drawbacks to European unification to consider.

There is another way of thinking about it as well. We can either join America, join Russia, join China, etc, or we can forge our own European Superpower, and when America tries to force us into pointless wars, we can just stick up our middle finger at them, instead of some nations (like Britain) being slave states to the American Empire.

No offence, but that is leftist hogwash.

[Meneldil]

That is a con in the long term and certainly not a "general populace benefit."

No offence, but that is irrational anti-EU righteous hogwash.

Edit: As I am curious, how is that a con in the long term ?

Edit2: As I am trully a curious person, I'm also wondering. How is that every anti-EU person keeps repeating that an european con/federation would lead to WWIII or to a bloodbath, knowing that WWI & II were caused by nationalistic feelings and century old-hatreds? For all I know, the EU is one of the best ways to fight nationalism (which has in any case disappeared from most of western Europe), and to create friendship between countries who usually cannot stand eachothers.
As examples, I'd show France and Germany (who were main/important protagonists during the 2 WW's), Bulgaria and Romania, the UK and Ireland.
Now, give me one good reason as to why the EU is going to cause WWIII.

For all I know, given historical examples, you, dear anti-EU crowd, are the main opponent to a lasting peace in Europe. YOU are underlining your supposed differences and specific cultures (lol), and thus promoting an outdated nationalism that caused more harm than good so far. YOU are teaming up with far-right nutjobs from all over the place to fight teh Evil European Empire of Death and protect an sovereignty that never existed in the first place.

See, I can make stupid arguments too.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Like what? Anything I can think of, the pro's outweigh the con's, if it is done correctly.

This shows why we need more debate on the issue of European integration itself rather than just on the Treaties, I suppose.

[Furunculus]

we tried that in the "why britain needs the EU" thread, and look where that got us!