Azeron wrote:Crown,
It what reality do you live, in which any statement from the Blair Government could be cinsidered fact, or generally truthful?
I concur.But that can be said of all politicians.
People invest in england, becasue of the potential in England, not becasue of the EU. England speaks ther same langauge and precieves the world in roughly the same way America does. Our values are not really that different, and how we deal with out problems isn't either. Thats why we have been working together on nearly everything for the past 120 some odd years.
How many countres have had such a close relationship that has lasted for such a long time. When the US replaced England the worlds greatest power, there was no war or hositility between us. That is a first in the history of mankind. I think that it stems largely about how we view ourselves, as parts of an English Community with about the same objectives in the world, respective to capabilities at the time. when WW2 was going on, the US gathered a huge army on English soil, How many countries would let another nation put an army on its soil willingly, even if its an ally? Not many. Now you are going to let Germany AND france station armies on England Proper? excuse me, but yu have been trying to prevent that for over a thousand years? Do you really think germany and Fracne is really that concerned about the security of England? Do you think that for a second that germany or france is ever going to consider english lives worth as much as thier own?
This is the most nonsensical piece of bullshit I have heard from you so far
aside that bullshit about a protest stamped out by leftist governments with the help of the military.I am glad to inform you that there is a thing called
"NATO".It is a military alliance,and thanks to it the EU is filled with US bases.Also they keep,or at least kept,joint military exercises with substantial deplyment of troops in some member countries.You may argue
that the european countries do not have much choice but not even the UK
had many other options at the time.I sincerely hope that you can understand the reasons by yourself.
whats going on here, is that the EU, is a big idea. It sounds nice, everyone plays by the same rules, same currency, laws, customs etc. That sort of awes people into thinking that its a good idea. But what do european countries have in common? the only thing I can think of is borders (and maybe disdain for the french, but thats a universal thing).
When italy was unified it was pretty much the same.As far as I know even italian was nearly an artificial language imposed by the èlite.And again I point out you Switzerland.
when you are forming this EU, it appears to me, that you are not using any system in particular, but an amalgamation of all the systems of europe. Who here from europe or america thinks the French Legal ysstem is fair, where the judge jury and prosecutor are same person? You cna be arrested for having a friend too close to the fringe of the political system regardless of what your own beliefs are. You thinks that a system that has a view like this can be combinied into a system that will produce an ounce of fairness?
Should we speak about the US where someone can be arrested only because he is an arab,albeit luckily this will cease soon(by the way where do you take that ideas about frenchs being arrested for their political ideology)?Bullshit as usual I would bet.
Jury is one of the worst &£$%& tools used in the judiciary.Personally
I rate it just under the use of torture in questionings and popular election of judges.
I am more than happy to live in a country where such &£$%& is applied only to a portions of the trials.
Of course if you are a member of the Ku Klux Klan or the red brigades you may appreciate it.
Now it has been suggested that italy is a rich counrty, and that Europe is wealthy in gerneal. To dispell that notion, the cold harse relaity is, that if Europe joined the US, the average worker would fall under the poverty line. Now before you get all huffy and puffy about a specific number I am using $23,000 as the poverty line, since there is no single number becasue poverty depends greatly on dependents, so I am using a family with 2.5 kids or a family of 5)
here are some stats on per capita income
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/
(all numbers are USD, 2000 est)
Italy - $22,100
Germany - $23,400
France - $24,400
UK - $22,800
US - $36,200
Now just to note, the poorest US state Missispi, has a per capita GDP of about $23,000 (I will find a reference for this later) So as you can see, The average European woker would qualify as poor, as in Missiipi Southern farmer Poor. Many Euro countries are far below the US stats on poverty, adn its really worse, becasue of the highly protectionist markets and barriers to entry for foriegn products, Euro consumers have to pay more for the same products, excluding taxes becasue compaines can milk the consumer since there is fewer choices availiable. So if you took in account that teh dollar goes further in the US, we should readjust euro incomes down significantly.
You are clueless,as usual(no surprise).Italy is in the top ten of world economy and a G8 member.These are facts.
First of all I have already warned you to take official statistcs with the greatest caution.A great portion of italian economy,around the 25% is simply not registered in order to not to pay taxes.In France this percentage should be aroud 10-15%.This counts.
Then many services,sanitation,decent schools etc,are provided by the state
for free or nearly free.This is an important factor when dealing with standards of life.
And poverty is a relative thing.By official statistics probably I am poor or close to it.Yet I am well fed,I can frequent a decent university,I have a decent home and still I am able to save some money.
Euro inability to compete in the mass market volume areas, probably accounts for the way the Euro economies gears up for high tech products and high qulaity products, because the margins for profit are much fatter there and they can;t compete where they are slim and making allot of money involes allot of turnover (the number of times you can sell an item. Like a supermarket where they only make 1-2% on each sale, but if they sekll the same item enough times they can turn that into a hefty profit)
Clueless as usual.What you are saying is true,and only partially,for BOTH the US and the EU.Both are gearing towards high tech,where the US apparently has the prevalence,while however mantaining even some low tech production.Manifacturing of low tech goods is often transferred in the third world where lower wages make it cheaper.By the way India is becoming important in the high tech sector.
Now the disparity of the incomes between the US and the EU, I beleive are not so much somethign thats so right about the US policies, as much as something thats so wrong In europe. People are the most valueable assets that a country that can ever have. The better the people, coupled with the right kind of regulation will do remarkable things (look at singapore and hong kong).
If you exclude the part about the regulation you have written the best explanation for the success of the italian small industries.
Now if we fundementally by looking at the numbers of economic performace, we can asume that the economic policies are fundementally bad (not so bad, but bad nontheless), we look at what types of regulations lead to greater poverty, and isolate them, and see how entrenched they are. Looking at england and the progress it has made, and its politcal leanings, at deregulation, and becoming more like the US, could be changed for the better by joining with the US, where our type of regulations lead to greater growth and more prosperity for the little guy workign his heart out in the factory. If England should go for the EU, it will go down the road of greater harmful regulation, taxation harming england for the indefinite future.
In some sectors deregulation and privatization work.In others,british ralroads for example,it has been a failure.And as far as "the little guy working his heart out in the factory" typically he cannot be described exactly like a deregulation supporter...
Bt furthermore what the numbers suggest about england, is that it is undervalued and undercapitalized, and that by joining the USA it could see substantial growth, by utilizing whsat it alreadyu has, some of the best people in the world in a more effective and enables way. I see 40% growth in the British Economy as a shoe in for the stte. I thin kteh average Englishman could use 40% more pay in his pocket. Thats not even taking into account the synergistic effects of what a merger would do for both of US. It would be a harbinger of doom to the German and French Beaurocrats in Brussels who not so secretly wish to rule England.
Speaking about conspirations...
Anyone here from england who thinks they don't need 40% more pay?
Maybe free beer too...
(note, free beer is an expression that is sometimes used by the economists,I am not saying that Her Majesty subjetcs are a bunch of drunkards)
.