Euro Area

[Adrian II]

Yeah? Did you not see the video I posted earlier, Farragw was the prophet of the Eurozone crisis.

I know. Furunculus just compared the EU to the USSR just like Farrage did.

Hence my remark that he was doing a Farrage.

AII

[Papewaio]

So if the ability to move around the EU zone both people and capital already exist... Why not evolve into a Federation with the ability to vote at local council, state and EU level?

What is lost if Joe Citizen can have the same mobility of self as C-level executives?

It seems to me that the most adaptable wins. At the moment corporations trump the nations in the EU because the corps and their key staff are already supranational.

You've gone from cities, to city states to nations. Why not create a federated model?

[Furunculus]

So if the ability to move around the EU zone both people and capital already exist... Why not evolve into a Federation with the ability to vote at local council, state and EU level?

What is lost if Joe Citizen can have the same mobility of self as C-level executives?

It seems to me that the most adaptable wins. At the moment corporations trump the nations in the EU because the corps and their key staff are already supranational.

You've gone from cities, to city states to nations. Why not create a federated model?

we already have a free movement of labour, which is great, but as noted previously:

because i don't recognise 'europe' to be a valid demos whereby i can have a reasonable amount of confidence that a broad majority view shares my aims and expectations, thus reassuring me that when bad things happen that the response will be predictable and conform to my desires.

for example, as a person that gets his kicks out of geopolitics i am quite content that my nation should retain nukes (and nuclear) alongside a (sensibly) interventionist foreign policy. i do not recognise as valid or legitimate german decisions to dodge afghanistan and libya or to reject nuclear and nukes, but that is fine because they are a different demos that is free to do their own thing, so the idea that britain might constrain its ambitions to fit the consensus of our continental cousins is absurd.

the answer is obvious; the european economic area, or EEC, where sovereign nation states of europe cooperate and collaborate on shared interests.

why seek more when it will only lead to the very strife that our federasts believe they are helping us to avoid?

[Papewaio]

So can Britain then fully devolve into the UUK... The Un-United Kingdoms of England, Northern Island, Scotland, Wales & The Manx.

Surely given your argument it would be best if Leeds and Manchestor form their own city states to look after their own demo...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So can Britain then fully devolve into the UUK... The Un-United Kingdoms of England, Northern Island, Scotland, Wales & The Manx.

Surely given your argument it would be best if Leeds and Manchestor form their own city states to look after their own demo...

Well, no, because we would use force to restore order, the EU cannot do the same.

German Leopads will not roll into Athens to enforce austerityy.

[Furunculus]

those plucky finns are demonstrating the results of precisely that lack of shared familial sentiment:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f...t-support.html

it's all very well to put your time and effort into helping out the families persistently drunk uncle, but would you put the same time and effort into getting someone else's drunk uncle back on the wagon?

[Fragony]

Go Finland, how very populist of you to look after your own interests instead of the EUSSR's. Why is there doubt? In your heart

heh timberrrrr

[Furunculus]

So can Britain then fully devolve into the UUK... The Un-United Kingdoms of England, Northern Island, Scotland, Wales & The Manx.

Surely given your argument it would be best if Leeds and Manchestor form their own city states to look after their own demo...

a fine example of reductio-ad-absurdum.

think on this; indirect democracy only works because you have sufficient confidence that your peers will act in a sufficiently predictable and acceptable manner, that you are willing to be bound by their collective decisions and share in responsibility for acts taken in your name. if you are unwilling to give of your authority that others may act in your name it is because you do not perceive government as legitimate, most probably because it is neither accountable nor representative of your interests.

i have this confidence in britain; as Louis has on occasion noted we are a boisterous and warlike bunch still, with an apparent love of exactly the kind of adversarial politics, and the same hate of arbitrary interference in personal life.

it works for me, i am content.

as for scotland et-al, they are fee to do as they wish. if they want independence they can have it, i would believe them to be idiots as we have achieved our greatest acts united, but it would be evidence of precisely that lack of shared familial sentiment that is necessary for healthy majoritarian governance to exists. rather than compel them to adhere to the united kingdom, and invent torturous proportional systems of governance to ameliorate their ill-feeling i would rather let them walk away.

[Papewaio]

think on this; indirect democracy only works because you have sufficient confidence that your peers will act in a sufficiently predictable and acceptable manner, that you are willing to be bound by their collective decisions and share in responsibility for acts taken in your name. if you are unwilling to give of your authority that others may act in your name it is because you do not perceive government as legitimate, most probably because it is neither accountable nor representative of your interests.

I don't expect my fellow citizens to vote the same way as me, or to have the same desires. I do believe that democracy is a very good way to moderate a government and with the proper tools of transparency and checks and balances.

What I do think is that the EU got its economic game on before it got its political one. It should have allowed voting at the EU level by the people. I find it strange that the EU formed, made monetary policy yet left off the ability to vote for those who make such decisions.

To me it shows either lack of foresight or power mungering by the politicians... greed and stupidity is an attribute found throughout humanity.

[Louis VI the Fat]

What I do think is that the EU got its economic game on before it got its political one. It should have allowed voting at the EU level by the people. I find it strange that the EU formed, made monetary policy yet left off the ability to vote for those who make such decisions.

To me it shows either lack of foresight or power mungering by the politicians...

Ah...Internet is a bad place for info about the EU, Pape.

The EU would love love love to have directly elected EU politicians. The EU would love nothing more than to be directly accountable to the voters. It is the electorates which have always rejected it.

[Furunculus]

I don't expect my fellow citizens to vote the same way as me, or to have the same desires. I do believe that democracy is a very good way to moderate a government and with the proper tools of transparency and checks and balances.

What I do think is that the EU got its economic game on before it got its political one. It should have allowed voting at the EU level by the people. I find it strange that the EU formed, made monetary policy yet left off the ability to vote for those who make such decisions.

To me it shows either lack of foresight or power mungering by the politicians... greed and stupidity is an attribute found throughout humanity.

you keep missing the point; identity!

no-one gives a hoot about european elections, or their european identity.

Nor. Is. Necessary. To. Invent. One.

What is wrong with a return to a europe built on the principle of intergovernmental rule whereby sovereign nations beholden to their electorates via legitimate ties founded in representation and accountability?

I really fail to understand this continual push to ever deeper union when it is:
1. not needed
2. not wanted
3. positively antagonistic to the continued good relations between european nations?

why? tell me why? please make me understand............... WHY?