Way to go France!

[JAG]

So is the advantage from quantity or quality?

With the Euro in theory there should be more trade and and better trade between countries.

PJ - you show your lack of knowledge of the situation over here yet again.

And a 'tumbling' EU would be just as bad for the US.

[Papewaio]

Surely a common currency does not require a common consitution?

[JAG]

Surely a common currency does not require a common consitution?

Completely right and this constitution is nothing to do with the Euro, it was brought up by someone in this thread as a separate issue - but however the Euro is being used by the NO campaign to dilute the issue of the constitution and get more people voting their way.

The constitution is needed so the 25 countries can actually work together.

[Xiahou]

Well, I'm not sure the French did it for the 'right' reason- but I'm happy to hear they voted it down nonetheless.

I think it's interesting that had France decided to pass it via the legislature instead of referendum it would've won easily. It's sort of disturbing that there can be such a huge disconnect between the people and their elected leaders on an important issue like this. I wonder in how many of the countries where it has or will be passed by their legislatures it would've failed if left to a referendum?

[JAG]

Why are so many right wing Americans on this board so anti EU and cheerleading opposition to the constitution? It baffles me.

[InsaneApache]

I think it's worth repeating here some of the reasons that I believe the EU could be in real danger.

The whole premise of the 'EU' was to create a trading bloc, without tariffs and barriers. It was believed that this was a way to prevent the disasterous wars that had ravaged Europe over the previous 30 years or so. (This was in the '50s)

I still firmly believe that this is a good idea and worthy of respect. However in the last 25 years or so there have been, what has been described as the 'salami' effect. This mean that very, very small slices of national sovereignty are surrendered up to the supra-national organisation, known as the EU commision and Parliament.

Although there may well be people who are happy with this, there are many more who are not. The political elite have pushed this agenda for decades without bothering to ask the people in their countries if this is what they want. When they have and havnt got the result they wanted, they have either ignored the wishes of the voters or hold more plebiscites until they DO get the answer they want.

I find this utterly revolting. It has become a house of cards built by idealogues who havnt got a democratic bone in their bodies....Mandleson spring to mind....did anyone see this idiot on tv yesterday? Already he was paving the way to ignore this vote (and no doubt the Dutch one as well) by saying that the French dont hold a veto on Europe (tell the French that Mandy). This guy was never voted into office but appointed and then debases the democratic process...incredible arrogance and duplicity.

Ignore the electorate at your peril....truth will out.

[doc_bean]

Although there may well be people who are happy with this, there are many more who are not. The political elite have pushed this agenda for decades without bothering to ask the people in their countries if this is what they want. When they have and havnt got the result they wanted, they have either ignored the wishes of the voters or hold more plebiscites until they DO get the answer they want.

I'm pro-EU, and i agree with you completely on this. The EU has been forced on the people by ambitious politicians that never asked what was best for the people.

And yes, prices have gone way up since the Euro, especially things like food. But the people are mostly to blame for that, you can often find the exact same item (same brand even) much cheaper in one store than in another, we're just to lazy to look, so the price-setting theory of the free market doesn't work anymore.

I think the Euro is/was good, especially for smaller currencies, but I don't really see why a strong currency like the pound has to join, especially since your economy is very different from the rest of Europe and you're not likely to benefit from it.

[English assassin]

Why are so many right wing Americans on this board so anti EU and cheerleading opposition to the constitution? It baffles me.

I would have thought that was also obvious. Although to be fair the EU is also profoundly dirigiste, how could it be otherwise when you consider who gave birth to it, so there may be a philisophical as well as a self interested reason.

What is NOT obvious to me is why the French rejected this. No doubt dislike of chirac and turkophobia may have played their part. But can it be la France profound has suddenly noticed that they may be required to make some sacrifices in the name of integration, as well as stuffing their faces full of the CAP, and they don't like it? After all, if this really is about fear of the "polish plumber" (who, presumably in distinction to French plumbers, comes round when he says he will, does a good job at a fair price, and leaves without shagging your wife), free movement of labour and the right of establishment are hardly new concepts in the EU are they?

And what a sad little country if it is so afraid of getting good services at a fair price. No no, I WANT crappy services no choice and a waiting list, the plumber mustn't work too hard must he. nmever mind the customer, the worker must come first. How will their economy grow?

And why would I want to throw my currency in with theirs, it would be like giving a corpse a blood transfusion. (Euro-enthusiasts really are beginning to sound like fundamentalist christians in their denial of obvious truths. I remember when it was introduced we were warnmed the UK would surely go down the pan in a few years if we didn't join. Curiously the very same person who would be quick to tell us what a brilliant ecomony the UK has had ever since is also a cheerleader for the view that we must join the Euro immediately. Mmm, German unemployment, yes please.)

Of course I should say I have only the UK media to go on for the reason for the no vote so its probably complete bollocks as usual.

Anyway, the French won't vote for this, the UK won't ratify anything any less liberal, alors, et maintenant?

[Idaho]

The whole Europe issue confuses the hell out of me. I really haven't got a clue about the whole thing! For every arguement on one side, there seems to be a counter arguement on the other. I have no core issue that grabs my attention and alleigance.

For: The people who are against it are weird right-wing nationalists
Against: Why should I have any faith in an undemocractic beauracracy?

For: Reduces the power of national governments - UK government has had many poor decisions overturned by Europe - civil rights laws, labour rights laws.
Against: Big business loves it.

For: I like the idea of changing currency. I'm bored with pounds.
Against: Changes in money are inevitably used by companies to up prices.

For: I like the idea of being able to live, work, etc anywhere in Europe, and for all of Europe to do the same here - mixes things up and makes things interesting.
Against: Is it going to become an insular club? Can it even work?

For: I would like to live in a country with a formal constitution and outlined rights - like in the US - and the EU is one path to that.
Against: I can't imagine the beauraucrats producing a simple meaningful bill of rights.

[Ldvs]

What is NOT obvious to me is why the French rejected this.

Perhaps I will manage to make it clearer.
First off, Turkophobia hasn't played any part in it and people's dislike toward Chirac a minor one. Actually the problem is simpler than that. While I'm certainly not a liberal, I found the economic part of the text acceptable (except the last paragraph of the Art III-145). I know that a well-regularized market is better for the customer because it generally means lower prices. Unfortunately, some people in France suffer from a terrible phobia, which blinds them: globalization.
Liberalism is of course associated with it.

Now if you take a text where words such as "market" and "competition" appear so often, it inevitably causes hysteria. However hard you'll try to show them it can be positive it will fail.
On the other hand can we truly blame them for fearing the liberalism? When I see what has happened to the UK or the USA I don't think so.

Of course your GDP is growing faster than the rest of EU, of course your unemployment is low but the UK is such in a poor shape that I pity your country. If the phobia of the liberalism seems to blind people, excess of liberalism blatantly has the same ill-effects. If you're rich enough, it won't bother you at all, you may even come to despise the poor.
Do you know how many poor are there in the UK? Ten million (1/6 of your population)
Your healthcare system is only acceptable when compared to that of under developed countries.
Diseases due to overwork are plaguing the UK. Sooner or later the doc's bill will have to be paid.
Only the rich can access to the best schools, no matter how much you're skilled.

Nonetheless, I agree with you, it wasn't the purpose of the Constitution and the "No" supporters brandished it wrongly. Yet, some people have voted no, and not because of this propaganda. I voted "No" because despite the relative progress the Constitution would have brought, it's not enough. What lacks in the EU is democracy.

While the new majority system was better, a decision still needed the assent of 15 countries, no matter the percentage reached and all the crucial subjects would have required unanimity and the Parliament wouldn't have received enough power to oppose properly the Commission (whose members are NOT elected!). In short, the situation would have been as locked as it is today.

For a certainty criticism is easy and viable proposals rare. I voted "No" because I hope Joschka Fischer's (German Foreign Minister) project -see below- will finally get due consideration. It's a shame our half-witted former Foreign Minister Védrine didn't want to hear about this project, which is in my opinion the only one that could avoid the foreseeable crisis.

DISCLAIMER: the content of this speech may highly shock the "Tories". I cannot be blamed for heart-attacks or nausea consecutive to the reading of it.
http://www.free-europe.org/blog/english.php?itemid=273

[el_slapper]

(.../...) I wonder in how many of the countries where it has or will be passed by their legislatures it would've failed if left to a referendum?

Most of them. Referendum was a massive yes in Spain, but that's because Spain had a huge growth the las 30 years(after centuries of decline). Therefore Spain people feel confident in the future. France unfortunately does have economic problems since the same time. Confidence is not there. People fear the future - and say no to whatever(which make me sad).

But Holland will be the same Wednesday, for similar reasons(maybe more cultural, though). Germany's representants did vote yes, but a referendum would have been random. UK is more complex, people's choice will be a no, while representant's choice would be tough to anticipate.

That's the weakpoint of democracy : managing a state/local authority is a professional's work, & those professional are not standard citizens. They're specialists - as the job requires specialists. And this leads to distortions between representatives & commoners. This is also true in other forms of government(dictature, monarchy, theocracy, etc...), but is more a problem in democracy as it does not fit with democracy's own principles. But hell, I do like living in a democracy anyways, I can shout "hell to Chirac" & not risk being emprisoned.