Ah, the "Presidential Debate" mentioned in the OP is available to watch on the Euronews website, divided in three parts: economy, future and foreign policy.
I suppose for all our talk about elections, the elections we should be really watching are May 25th in Ukraine.
Is it worth watching the foreign policy debate art Ukraine?
Freedom for the Northern Isles!
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
Missed a fair bit of that part. IIRC it was mostly about if the level of sanctions against Russia were an appropriate response, with people generally saying they were.
Well, at least this exercise is instructive. I now have a better feeling as to what the late 1920s were like so far as European foreign relations are concerned
Freedom for the Northern Isles!
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
The different universes that the EU orientated and traditional national media operate in seems to get more and more pronounced as time goes om.
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
First Eurovision semi final is tomorrow night. Both Ukraine and Russia competing...
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
edited May 2014
Was that put together by an automated political platform generator? Its like something from alternate history. I'm reminded of an unknown who ran for European Elections in Leinster in 2004 who bombarded the constituency with posters with the slogan:
I was born in East London in 1967 and later trained in Pakistan as a lawyer.
I hate to come over all Jeremy Clarkson, but there is definitely something iffy about someone who goes to Pakistan to study law. Note that he doesn't actually say he qualified.
I was born in East London in 1967 and later trained in Pakistan as a lawyer.
I hate to come over all Jeremy Clarkson, but there is definitely something iffy about someone who goes to Pakistan to study law. Note that he doesn't actually say he qualified.
Well yes and no. Britain has heaps of Pakistani migrants and their descendants. Pakistan's legal system is generally accepted to be in the British model and it is and was possible to convert legal qualifications.
Ive met a few Pakistani and Indian trained lawyers in London
The only thing to expect out of this election is how many far-right wingnuts/hardliners there'll be put in Brussels... The options range from "more than a few" to "a surprising bunch", I'd wager.
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
edited May 2014
Polling seems to show while Eurosceptic parties could get up to 30% of the vote, the status quo of an EPP-S&D (plus ALDE) grand coalition will remain the same. The only minor upset thing that might happen is if the S&D do better than the EPP. While the Parliament will certainly become more colourful, in practice little will change. What is interesting to me is the institutional struggle between the Parliament/Commission and Council.
wilting on
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
Ive met a few Pakistani and Indian trained lawyers in London
It probably depends where you work - I've met Asians who were lawyers and "Asian lawyers".
The latter were the Del Boys of the legal world who took advantage of the fact that many of their clients don't read English. I worked for the council when Labour changed the licensing laws and I got so many free meals from take-away owners who'd been told it would cost them £100s. Some had even been told they needed to hire architects to draw up building plans.
It only took me half an hour to show them it was something their teenage kid could do for them.
Ahh. Well that is typical minority community shyster behaviour. Abusing language and ethnic solidarity for gain etc. Probably get it in all communities to a certain extent.
I know clients who won't deal with lawyers who are not white Anglo males.
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Since voter percentage amongst young people is really low in Denmark, our parliament decided to sponsor an infomercial, so you remember to vote in the EU election.
Being the wacky Danes we are, we went ahead with something completely controversial
Since voter percentage amongst young people is really low in Denmark, our parliament decided to sponsor an infomercial, so you remember to vote in the EU election.
Being the wacky Danes we are, we went ahead with something completely controversial
Since voter percentage amongst young people is really low in Denmark, our parliament decided to sponsor an infomercial, so you remember to vote in the EU election.
Being the wacky Danes we are, we went ahead with something completely controversial
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Anyone who stayed outside would bitch and moan about the influence of federal europe and how federal europe was fucking up the common market.
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Anyone who stayed outside would bitch and moan about the influence of federal europe and how federal europe was fucking up the common market.
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
What? No, I'm talking about it being a regular Member State of the EU, no special relationship or status or whatsoever, how would it stop anyone who already uses the Euro from using it? Joining the Euro is a requirement for new EU members. There is no reason for that to change. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The Euro would remain the business of the independent ECB. The whole point of what I was saying is for deeper integration not to have undue influence over all Member States.
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Also had the added advantage of allowing some of the smaller European states to band together into a more powerful entity within the EU and offset some of the power held by the current heavyweights.
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
edited May 2014
Second TV debate is tonight. It will also feature the Party of the European Left Commission President Nominee - Alexis Tsipras. He's the sort of fellow who names his son after Che Guevara.
Second TV debate is tonight. It will also feature the Party of the European Left Commission President Nominee - Alexis Tsipras. He's the sort of fellow who names his son after Che Guevara.
I shall try and watch what I can. Maybe debate drinking games?
Freedom for the Northern Isles!
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Anyone who stayed outside would bitch and moan about the influence of federal europe and how federal europe was fucking up the common market.
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
What? No, I'm talking about it being a regular Member State of the EU, no special relationship or status or whatsoever, how would it stop anyone who already uses the Euro from using it? Joining the Euro is a requirement for new EU members. There is no reason for that to change. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The Euro would remain the business of the independent ECB. The whole point of what I was saying is for deeper integration not to have undue influence over all Member States.
So wait, how would the problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union be solved? That's really the biggest issue facing Europe I would think, because I doubt the next recession will go any smoother than the last one did. Especially for countries that aren't Germany.
So wait, how would the problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union be solved? That's really the biggest issue facing Europe I would think, because I doubt the next recession will go any smoother than the last one did. Especially for countries that aren't Germany.
You first need to ascribe to that particular theory as to what caused the problems before you can start thinking about a solution for it. Not to mention that those solutions come in different flavours. There's already a lot of options on the table, and which one wins out will have little to do with the elections.
Certainly it would be a godsend if the UK leaves the EU, and if predictions of a Tory victory marred only by UKIP support are true, that is a very likely outcome. Cameron cannot back down on the referendum.
France has an extremely unpopular socialist president who's just piled all his chips on a neo-liberal gamble which will make him even more unpopular, and is not far from getting trashed by the UKIP-like Front National. Anything Hollande can sell as a victory on the home front will be worth megabucks to him, but he might be unsaddled by a really bad performance. What happens then is unsure; Sarkozy is up for a comeback but has a lot of dealbreaking to do.
Germany has been much occupied with Ukraine but is expecting to remain first fiddle in the Council. Merkel will be under a lot of pressure to get the German ideas implemented, but given her coalition with socialists and the fact that there's somewhat of a breach between her and the ECB folks, what she actually goes for might be surprising.
Now these three remain the most important players. But more and more the other member states are weighing in. Not just in the Council but also via their parliaments. The chances of 'swinging' enough votes for their views to deal without having to deal with each other first become lesser. So in that sense any project regarding the Euro will be struck between the big players and then sold to the rest.
So any deal on the Euro will have to come with a deal to redistribute power- and it just happens that the ECB is about the least balanced player, both favouring Germany inordinately and at war with its government. Germany thinks they should have a bigger say in a revamped ECB. I doubt anyone will agree, so they'll have to pay up favors through the nose to get this.
If we step away from the EU for a moment, we have two capitalist powerhouses, the City with its oil money and the Bundesbank which is tied more to the EU economy, which have the interests of their investors more at heart than any citizens using the currencies they lord it over. The question that is not on the table, but should be according to many Europeans, is do you believe we should give these representants of the 1% whatever they ask for in the hopes it will humor them into taking care of the little man? Or do we curtail these basically private actors, regulate them, and force them to act for the common good.
There are other issues which might swing votes, but basically it goes between more Europe with more capitalism, more Europe with less capitalism, less Europe with more capitalism and less europe with less capitalism. As you can see it's easy to graph where everyone comes down. We're not going to get a communist revolution and then, indeed, a solution is needed for the fiscal union.
But if anyone on the national level will still be able, after the elections, to strike such a deal is the million euro question. If anything, a coalition of the willing will be unwieldy, and I think you'll be looking at a smaller group including the UK moving towards an economic compromise first, with that coalition of the willing abandoned as part of the deal.
Cornucopiist on
0
Options
wiltingI had fun once and it was awfulRegistered Userregular
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Anyone who stayed outside would bitch and moan about the influence of federal europe and how federal europe was fucking up the common market.
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
What? No, I'm talking about it being a regular Member State of the EU, no special relationship or status or whatsoever, how would it stop anyone who already uses the Euro from using it? Joining the Euro is a requirement for new EU members. There is no reason for that to change. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The Euro would remain the business of the independent ECB. The whole point of what I was saying is for deeper integration not to have undue influence over all Member States.
So wait, how would the problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union be solved? That's really the biggest issue facing Europe I would think, because I doubt the next recession will go any smoother than the last one did. Especially for countries that aren't Germany.
Indeed. The solution would be the new federal state being formed from the key Member States in the Euro (weakest and strongest links), thus giving them a common fiscal policy (not to mention social model, employment/retirement practices etc). Ideally every Eurozone member would join, especially the more prominent members, but this is not essential. Any Eurozone member could join at a later date, as circumstances require. Germany is obviously the essential anchor, and has a suitable federal structure that could serve as a foundation. I would put the capital in Greece, for both historical and contemporary reasons.
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Anyone who stayed outside would bitch and moan about the influence of federal europe and how federal europe was fucking up the common market.
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
What? No, I'm talking about it being a regular Member State of the EU, no special relationship or status or whatsoever, how would it stop anyone who already uses the Euro from using it? Joining the Euro is a requirement for new EU members. There is no reason for that to change. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The Euro would remain the business of the independent ECB. The whole point of what I was saying is for deeper integration not to have undue influence over all Member States.
So wait, how would the problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union be solved? That's really the biggest issue facing Europe I would think, because I doubt the next recession will go any smoother than the last one did. Especially for countries that aren't Germany.
Indeed. The solution would be the new federal state being formed from the key Member States in the Euro (weakest and strongest links), thus giving them a common fiscal policy (not to mention social model, employment/retirement practices etc). Ideally every Eurozone member would join, especially the more prominent members, but this is not essential. Any Eurozone member could join at a later date, as circumstances require. Germany is obviously the essential anchor, and has a suitable federal structure that could serve as a foundation. I would put the capital in Greece, for both historical and contemporary reasons.
But if the Euro remains the business of the independent ECB how are you not just recreating the same problems? It's early here, so maybe I need to just reread a couple times, but it seems like you're trying to fix a boat with a hole in it by adding more planks everywhere but over the hole.
Posts
Ah, the "Presidential Debate" mentioned in the OP is available to watch on the Euronews website, divided in three parts: economy, future and foreign policy.
I suppose for all our talk about elections, the elections we should be really watching are May 25th in Ukraine.
http://communitiesunitedparty.com
I hate to come over all Jeremy Clarkson, but there is definitely something iffy about someone who goes to Pakistan to study law. Note that he doesn't actually say he qualified.
Well yes and no. Britain has heaps of Pakistani migrants and their descendants. Pakistan's legal system is generally accepted to be in the British model and it is and was possible to convert legal qualifications.
Ive met a few Pakistani and Indian trained lawyers in London
Needs a theme song and a title for his show.
It probably depends where you work - I've met Asians who were lawyers and "Asian lawyers".
The latter were the Del Boys of the legal world who took advantage of the fact that many of their clients don't read English. I worked for the council when Labour changed the licensing laws and I got so many free meals from take-away owners who'd been told it would cost them £100s. Some had even been told they needed to hire architects to draw up building plans.
It only took me half an hour to show them it was something their teenage kid could do for them.
I know clients who won't deal with lawyers who are not white Anglo males.
E-Poo more like.
*sits back, satisfied*
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Italy adopts the rotating presidency on July 1st. Personally I think Member States that want to go fully federal should form a new state, which would itself be a Member State of the EU (and of NATO etc), neatly bypassing the headache of different states wanting different things from the EU, and allowing it to remain relatively streamlined and insulated from full on integration. Everybody wins.
Being the wacky Danes we are, we went ahead with something completely controversial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4iDnsS6wBY
Needless to say, it has raised quite a storm back home and the video is no longer on our parliament's website. :P
...
Denmark used to have Vikings.
We replaced them long ago with Biker gangs (though not on dolphins).
It's silly, but offensive?
Case in point; The UKs legal challenge to France and friends trying negotiating trying to implement a tax on financial transaction. It is also highly unlikely federal europe would allow non-members to use the Euro, for the same reason Westminster is telling Scotland to forget the pound if they vote to seccede.
We take our cinnamon buns very seriously here. I would know since I make the best ones according to my friends.
And that's only thanks to the ungodly amounts of cinnamon in them!
What? No, I'm talking about it being a regular Member State of the EU, no special relationship or status or whatsoever, how would it stop anyone who already uses the Euro from using it? Joining the Euro is a requirement for new EU members. There is no reason for that to change. I have no idea what you are trying to say. The Euro would remain the business of the independent ECB. The whole point of what I was saying is for deeper integration not to have undue influence over all Member States.
Also had the added advantage of allowing some of the smaller European states to band together into a more powerful entity within the EU and offset some of the power held by the current heavyweights.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
I shall try and watch what I can. Maybe debate drinking games?
So wait, how would the problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union be solved? That's really the biggest issue facing Europe I would think, because I doubt the next recession will go any smoother than the last one did. Especially for countries that aren't Germany.
Certainly it would be a godsend if the UK leaves the EU, and if predictions of a Tory victory marred only by UKIP support are true, that is a very likely outcome. Cameron cannot back down on the referendum.
France has an extremely unpopular socialist president who's just piled all his chips on a neo-liberal gamble which will make him even more unpopular, and is not far from getting trashed by the UKIP-like Front National. Anything Hollande can sell as a victory on the home front will be worth megabucks to him, but he might be unsaddled by a really bad performance. What happens then is unsure; Sarkozy is up for a comeback but has a lot of dealbreaking to do.
Germany has been much occupied with Ukraine but is expecting to remain first fiddle in the Council. Merkel will be under a lot of pressure to get the German ideas implemented, but given her coalition with socialists and the fact that there's somewhat of a breach between her and the ECB folks, what she actually goes for might be surprising.
Now these three remain the most important players. But more and more the other member states are weighing in. Not just in the Council but also via their parliaments. The chances of 'swinging' enough votes for their views to deal without having to deal with each other first become lesser. So in that sense any project regarding the Euro will be struck between the big players and then sold to the rest.
So any deal on the Euro will have to come with a deal to redistribute power- and it just happens that the ECB is about the least balanced player, both favouring Germany inordinately and at war with its government. Germany thinks they should have a bigger say in a revamped ECB. I doubt anyone will agree, so they'll have to pay up favors through the nose to get this.
If we step away from the EU for a moment, we have two capitalist powerhouses, the City with its oil money and the Bundesbank which is tied more to the EU economy, which have the interests of their investors more at heart than any citizens using the currencies they lord it over. The question that is not on the table, but should be according to many Europeans, is do you believe we should give these representants of the 1% whatever they ask for in the hopes it will humor them into taking care of the little man? Or do we curtail these basically private actors, regulate them, and force them to act for the common good.
There are other issues which might swing votes, but basically it goes between more Europe with more capitalism, more Europe with less capitalism, less Europe with more capitalism and less europe with less capitalism. As you can see it's easy to graph where everyone comes down. We're not going to get a communist revolution and then, indeed, a solution is needed for the fiscal union.
But if anyone on the national level will still be able, after the elections, to strike such a deal is the million euro question. If anything, a coalition of the willing will be unwieldy, and I think you'll be looking at a smaller group including the UK moving towards an economic compromise first, with that coalition of the willing abandoned as part of the deal.
Indeed. The solution would be the new federal state being formed from the key Member States in the Euro (weakest and strongest links), thus giving them a common fiscal policy (not to mention social model, employment/retirement practices etc). Ideally every Eurozone member would join, especially the more prominent members, but this is not essential. Any Eurozone member could join at a later date, as circumstances require. Germany is obviously the essential anchor, and has a suitable federal structure that could serve as a foundation. I would put the capital in Greece, for both historical and contemporary reasons.
But if the Euro remains the business of the independent ECB how are you not just recreating the same problems? It's early here, so maybe I need to just reread a couple times, but it seems like you're trying to fix a boat with a hole in it by adding more planks everywhere but over the hole.