EU - what's next?

Летећи Полип wrote:

Zuper wrote:
Pa sto se to nije desilo drugde npr. u Latinskoj Americi?
Tamo su isto prozapadne vlade drzane od strane SAD npr. u Argentini.

Eh, a što se to nije desilo u Burkini Faso? Što Kina nije tigar na svom zapadu, nego samo na istočnoj obali?


Daj Srbiji, u periodu od dvadeset godina, više investicija nego za celu Afriku. Daj nam džabe kredite sa negativnim kamatnim stopama. Daj nam da mi njima prodajemo šta hoćemo i koliko hoćemo, a da mi možemo da se branimo barijerama. Daj nam da gvirnemo u njihovu tehnologju. Daj nam američku flotu da nas brani. Pa jebalo te sunce, mi bi bili Švajcarska na Balkanu.

KinderLad wrote:Ono što ti ne razumeš da je to upravo ono o čemu ti ja pričam.

Zuper wrote:

KinderLad wrote:Ono što ti ne razumeš da je to upravo ono o čemu ti ja pričam.

Pa da, govoris.
Plocnici Pariza, Vatikan izbliza...
Mozes da se raspitas u Londonu, koji tako volis, o omladinkama iz napredne nato Litvanije...

Zuper wrote:Kako se ne bih izervirao? Pa pogledja sta su tvoji istomisljenici napravili...svaki normalan covek mora da se nervira.
Celo vreme ti to objasnjavam a ti k'o papagaj-nato...
Oni se razvili a toliki lopovluk(cuj kronizam). Vucicev lopovluk nije manji, veci je.
Sta li je tek onda u africkim zemljama koje su slusale MMF, SB i zapadne vlade?

Zuper wrote:
Dakle, kako Koreja, Kina, Singapur a ne Argentina, Brazil, Poljska?

KinderLad wrote:...bleda senka kronizma u takvim režimima.

Летећи Полип wrote:

Zuper wrote:
Dakle, kako Koreja, Kina, Singapur a ne Argentina, Brazil, Poljska?

Da li je moguće da je čoveku, kome se inače priča o politici uvek svede na priču o geopolitici, ovako zatrokirao mozak?

Nord Stream 2: Was steckt hinter Kritik der Ukraine und Polens? – OMV-Chef erklärt
Der Streit um den Bau der Gaspipeline Nord Stream 2 hat laut dem Vorstandschef des österreichischen Energiekonzerns OMV, Rainer Seele, das Vertrauen der Investoren erschüttert und der europäischen Wirtschaft beträchtlichen Schaden zugefügt. Dies sagte er gegenüber der Zeitung „Frankfurter Allgemeine“.

Laut dem OMV-Chef ist es in Bezug auf die Konkurrenz nur zu begrüßen, dass die „Zeiten der Monopolstellung der Ukraine vorbei“ sind.

Глава австрийского газового концерна предрек конец "украинской монополии"

МОСКВА, 19 фев — РИА Новости. Запуск "Северного потока — 2" положит конец "украинской монополии" в вопросах транзита газа, заявил глава австрийского концерна OMV, участвующего в реализации проекта Nord Stream 2, Райнер Зеле в интервью немецкому изданию Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
После запуска газопровода страны Восточной Европы потеряют возможность устанавливать слишком высокие цен за транзит, что является позитивным моментом с точки зрения конкуренции, отметил Зеле.

Germany & Netherlands the only real euro winners, study finds

The eurozone’s single currency, the euro, has been a serious drag on the economic growth of almost every member of the bloc, according to a study by German think tank, the Centre for European Politics (CEP).

Germany and the Netherlands, however, have benefited enormously from the euro over the 20 years since its launch, the study showed. The currency triggered credit and investment booms by extending the benefits of Germany’s low interest-rate environment across the bloc’s periphery. However, those debts became hard to sustain after the 2008 financial crisis, with Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Cyprus forced to seek financial aid as growth slowed and financing became scarce.



According to CEP, over the entire period since 1999, Germans were on average estimated to be cumulatively richer by €23,000 ($26,120) than they would otherwise have been, while the Dutch were €21,000 ($23,850) wealthier. To compare, Italians and French were each €74,000 ($84,000) and €56,000 ($63,600) poorer, respectively.

The survey did not include one of Europe’s fastest-growing economies, Ireland, due to a lack of appropriate data.
Study authors Alessandro Gasparotti and Matthias Kullas said most eurozone members had enjoyed periods during which the currency union had been net positive, but these were far outweighed by the periods when it dragged on growth. Greece was a partial exception, they added.

“In the first few years after its introduction, Greece gained hugely from the euro but since 2011 has suffered enormous losses,” the authors wrote, explaining that over the whole period, Greeks were each €190 ($216) richer than they would have been.

The study concluded that since the loser countries could no longer restore their competitiveness by devaluing their currencies, they had to double down on structural reforms. Spain was highlighted as a country that was on track to erase the growth deficit it had built up since the euro’s introduction.

ontheotherhand wrote: da nemački kapital postane dominantan i da svima bude буља, pitam se.

Anduril wrote: ne razumem kako ovakvi likovi uopste mogu biti uzimani ozbiljno.

паће wrote:

Anduril wrote: ne razumem kako ovakvi likovi uopste mogu biti uzimani ozbiljno.

Уз довољну рекламу?

Anduril wrote:

паће wrote:
Уз довољну рекламу?

Ne samo to. Citava makro-ekonomska "nauka" je puna ovakvih bullshit studija koje onda jos manje pismeni politicari koriste da argumentuju ovo ili ono. 
Svakom naucniku ko zna bilo sta iz statistike i o kontrolnim grupama je jasno koliki je ovo fuseraj. Ali, to je tipicno za celu oblast.

Anduril wrote:Studija je naravno bullshit. Mnoge kredite koje su Grcka i co. dobili nikada nece biti vraceni -oni kao duguju ali samo na papiru iz izuzetno niske kamate. O stampanom novcu od strane ECB gde se kupuje bezvredne drzavne obveznice da ne govorimo. 
Plus, u Nemackoj je stednja trandicionalno uvek bila na najvisem nivou i od 2008. svake godine nemacke stedise (uglavnom stariji ljudi) gube milijarde zbog niskih kamata. Kamate su niske ne zbog potreba nemacke ekonomije nego zbog ovih drugih ekonomija. 
Ovo su basics a izgleda da ova tzv. studija nije nista od toga ozbiljnije uzela u obzir. To i ne cudi jer bi to sve zajedno bilo mnogo teze spakovati u neku studiju. Totalno neozbiljna nauka - ne razumem kako ovakvi likovi uopste mogu biti uzimani ozbiljno.

Dear Europe, Brexit is a lesson for all of us: it’s time for renewal
Emmanuel Macron

Citizens of Europe, if I am taking the liberty of addressing you directly, it is not only in the name of the history and values that unite us, but because time is of the essence. A few weeks from now the European elections will be decisive for the future of our continent.

Never since the second world war has Europe been so essential. Yet never has Europe been in such danger. Brexit stands as the symbol of that. It symbolises the crisis of a Europe that has failed to respond to its peoples’ need for protection from the major shocks of the modern world. It also symbolises the European trap. The trap lies not in being part of the European Union; the trap is in the lie and the irresponsibility that can destroy it. Who told the British people the truth about their post-Brexit future? Who spoke to them about losing access to the EU market? Who mentioned the risks to peace in Ireland of restoring the border? Retreating into nationalism offers nothing; it is rejection without an alternative. And this is the trap that threatens the whole of Europe: the anger mongers, backed by fake news, promise anything and everything.

We have to stand firm, proud and lucid, in the face of this manipulation and say first of all what Europe is. It is a historic success: the reconciliation of a devastated continent is an unprecedented project of peace, prosperity and freedom. Let’s never forget that. And this project continues to protect us today. What country can act on its own in the face of aggressive strategies by the major powers? Who can claim to be sovereign, on their own, in the face of the digital giants? How would we resist the crises of financial capitalism without the euro, which is a force for the entire EU? Europe is also those thousands of projects daily that have changed the face of our regions: the school refurbished, the road built, and the long-awaited arrival of high-speed internet access. This struggle is a daily commitment, because Europe, like peace, can never be taken for granted. I pursue it tirelessly on behalf of France, in order to take Europe forward and to defend its model. We have shown that things we were told were unattainable, the creation of a European defence capability and the protection of social rights, were in fact possible.

Yet we need to do more and faster, because there is another trap: the trap of the status quo and resignation. Faced with major crises in the world, citizens so often ask, “Where is Europe? What is Europe doing?” To them it has become a soulless market.

Yet Europe is not just an economic market. It is a project. A market is useful, but it should not detract from the need for borders to protect and values that unite. Nationalists are misguided when they claim to defend our identity by withdrawing from the EU, because it is European civilisation that unites, frees and protects us. But those who would change nothing are also misguided, because they deny the fear felt by our people, the doubts that undermine our democracies. We are at a pivotal moment for our continent, a moment when together we need to politically and culturally reinvent the shape of our civilisation in a changing world. Now is the time for a European renaissance. Hence, resisting the temptation of isolation and division, I propose we build this renewal together around three ambitions: freedom, protection and progress.

The European model is based on freedom: of people, diversity of opinions and creation. Our first freedom is democratic freedom: the freedom to choose our leaders as foreign powers seek to influence our votes at every election. I propose the creation of a European Agency for the Protection of Democracies to provide each EU member state with European experts to protect their election process against cyber-attacks and manipulation. In this same spirit of independence, we should also ban the funding of European political parties by foreign powers. We should have European rules banishing incitement to hatred and violence from the internet, since respect for the individual is the bedrock of our civilisation and our dignity.

Protecting our continent

Founded on internal reconciliation, the EU has forgotten the realities of the world. Yet no community can create a sense of belonging if it does not have protected territorial limits. The boundary is freedom in security. We therefore need to rethink the Schengen area: all those who want to be part of it should comply with obligations of responsibility (stringent border controls) and solidarity (a single asylum policy with common acceptance and refusal rules).

We will need a common border force and a European asylum office, strict control obligations and European solidarity to which each country will contribute under the authority of a European Council for Internal Security. On migration, I believe in a Europe that protects both its values and its borders.

The same standards should apply to defence. Substantial progress has been made in the last two years, but we need to set a clear course. A treaty on defence and security should define our fundamental obligations in association with Nato and our European allies: increased defence spending, a truly operational mutual defence clause, and a European security council, with the UK on board, to prepare our collective decisions.

Our borders also need to guarantee fair competition. What country in the world would continue to trade with those who respect none of their rules? We cannot suffer in silence. We need to reform our competition policy and reshape our trade policy, penalising or banning businesses that compromise our strategic interests and fundamental values such as environmental standards, data protection and fair payment of taxes; and the adoption of European preference in strategic industries and our public procurement, as our American and Chinese competitors do.

Recover the spirit of progress

Europe is not a second-tier power. Europe in its entirety is a vanguard: it has always defined the standards of progress. In this, it needs to drive forward a project of convergence rather than competition: Europe, where social security was created, needs to introduce a social shield for all workers, guaranteeing the same pay for the same work, and an EU minimum wage, appropriate to each country, negotiated collectively every year.

Getting back on track also means spearheading the environmental cause. Will we be able to look our children in the eye if we do not also clear our climate debt? The EU needs to set its target – zero carbon by 2050 and pesticides halved by 2025 – and adapt its policies accordingly with such measures as a European Climate Bank to finance the ecological transition, a European food safety force to improve our food controls and, to counter the lobby threat, independent scientific assessment of substances hazardous to the environment and health. This imperative needs to guide all our action: from the Central Bank to the European commission, from the European budget to the Investment Plan for Europe, all our institutions need to have the climate as their mandate.

Progress and freedom are about being able to live from one’s work: Europe needs to look ahead to create jobs. This is why it needs not only to regulate the digital giants by putting in place European supervision of the major digital platforms (prompt penalties for unfair competition, transparent algorithms, etc), but also to finance innovation by giving the new European Innovation Council a budget on a par with the United States in order to spearhead new technological breakthroughs such as artificial intelligence.

A world-oriented Europe needs to look to Africa, with which we should enter into a covenant for the future, ambitiously and non-defensively supporting African development with investment, academic partnerships and education for girls.

Freedom, protection and progress: we need to build European renewal on these pillars. We can’t let
nationalists with no solutions exploit people’s anger. We can’t sleepwalk to a diminished Europe. We can’t remain in the routine of business as usual and wishful thinking. European humanism demands action. And everywhere, people are standing up to be part of that change. So by the end of the year, let’s set up, with representatives of the EU institutions and the member states, a Conference for Europe in order to propose all the changes our political project needs, which is open even to amending the EU treaties. This conference will need to engage with citizens’ panels, and hear from academics, business and worker representatives, as well as religious and spiritual leaders. It will define a roadmap for the EU that translates these key priorities into concrete actions. There will be disagreement, but is it better to have a static Europe or a Europe that advances, sometimes at different speeds, and that is open to all? In this Europe, the people will really take back control of their future.

In this Europe, the UK, I am sure, will find its true place. The Brexit impasse is a lesson for us all. We need to escape this trap and make the forthcoming elections and our project meaningful. It is for you to decide whether Europe and the values of progress that it embodies are to be more than just a passing episode in history. This is the choice I put to you: that together we chart the road to European renewal.

How would we resist the crises of financial capitalism without the euro