EU to self destruc, because of countries like Poland?

[Litti]

Time for a little rant.

I´m very annoyed with the current situation. Lech Kaczynski is rambling about something so idiotic that the rest of Europe does not know whether to weep or laugh.

Is this the way to embrace European unity? To go on about what happened with Germany in the second world war and draw ghost statistics what might have been? It seems Poland has some serious issues with Russia as well when it comes to dealing with the past. If these feelings are so strong, maybe such a close union wasnt the correct decision? If this is all a smokescreen to drive their own political benefits, all the same. Get the hell out of the house if you cant accept the fact that there are big dogs and small cats.

USA does not give special benefits to any certain states so why should we? I dont expect Finland to be at the same level as France.

Has the European Union expanded too fast towards East? Now we have members who contribute nothing when compared to Germany, UK and France but they still demand the same amount of votes.

There was this wave of delirium which started ten years ago. Politicians thought it would be wise to bring as many countries in as possible and then build a constitution together. Now the result is that we´ve got rich small countries who are reasonably content with their place and bigger poorer countries who think they deserve more.

Are these power struggles ever going to end so we can ratify the constitution? I still believe the Union is essential if we are to succeed economically and save our cultural heritage at the same time but if it continues ike this, China and co are going to run over us while we debate.

:|

[Snoshi]

From other thread

Germany's Nazi past has returned to haunt the EU summit.

A vitriolic outburst by Poland's prime minister revealed the Second World War bitterness that still strains the heart of Europe. Jaroslaw Kaczynski accused the Germans of "incomprehensible crimes" against his country, turning what was already set to be an acrimonious meeting into a confrontation between historical enemies.

Poland has been fighting plans for the summit - being held in Germany - to change the EU's voting system to one based on population. It would increase the influence of the host country, EU's largest with 82million people, at the expense of smaller members such as Poland, which has only 38million.

Mr Kaczynski stunned other EU leaders by claiming that Poland has 28million fewer people than it should have as a result of the slaughter inflicted by Germany between 1939 and 1945. He breached one of the great taboos of the EU - Don't Mention the War - and highlighted Poland's tortured relations with Germany. His heated intervention provoked a furious reaction across the EU and appeared to revive age-old disputes. It was the German invasion of Poland in September 1939 which triggered the war.

By its end in 1945 some 6.5million Polish civilians were dead - close to a quarter of the country's population. Mr Kaczynski said: "It was the Germans who inflicted unimaginable injury, terrible harm, on Poles - incomprehensible crimes - and Poles like Germans, while Germans do not like Poles."

"We are only demanding one thing, that we get back what was taken from us. If Poland had not had to live through the years of 1939-45, Poland would be today looking at the demographics of a country of 66million." Germany wants the summit to agree a treaty that would revive part of the EU constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.

[Litti]

Oh my God, I hadnt even read that quote. I just heard he had mentioned something similar but this is just completely and utterly ridiculous.

[Snoshi]

^^ No ****... He wants to have greater voting power because Poland might have had greater a population?

[Largomateratops]

I have nothing against poles or poland, but the Kaczynski twins have to leave!

They have brought up nothing constructive for europe and they are only trieing to undermine the construction of closer ties within the union.
They are simply demanding too much... They want to form the European Union their way and seem to be not willing to accept any suggestions for a compromise! I even can´t believe that their points of view are good in any way for poland.

So for me it´s them or poland!

P.S.: But than again they are very funny! :cantbeli:

[c_r_b]

The problem is already solved.
The EU will make the new treaty without Poland.
source in german: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,490254,00.html

[Conman]

I have to agree that the Polish guy is being kind of a tit by dredging up Germany's past during WWII. Yes Nazi Germany's actions during the war were unspeakable and evil. However there is no doubt in my mind that the majority, and by this I mean 99% and up, of the German people are truly sorry and ashamed that this happened and won't ever let it happen again. I also think that the sins of the father are not revisited upon the son and the current Germany should in no way be held accountable for their ancestors misdeeds

Anyway back on topic yes i believe the EU is expanding too far and too fast. I believe that EU needs to stop, step back and closely examine just exactly what it is trying to become. Is it trying to become just an economic joining of Europe; Is it trying to become somewhat more integrated by becoming say a Confederacy (note to all Americans out there I am talking about a confederacy more along the lines of the confederacy of the Swiss Cantons during the middle ages than the CSA). Or is it trying to become a United States of Europe.
These are the 3 directions that i see the EU having to choose from

[muck]

Yeah, quite impressive. :) The television showed how Merkel hit on desk and said: "Then just without Poland". And somehow she is right in my opinion. It cannot be that 26 member nations come to an agreement despite of all concerns while only Poland blocks the success of that summit.

[perdurabo]

tsk tsk UK also has issues with this threaty, of course only Poland is bad guy of EU, Poland sends troops to Iraq Poland halts EU constitution, Poland sucks blood of litle Jews. Go F* yourselfe eourpeans!
When France and Holland said no to constittion NONE said we just make EU without them, when UK send troops on every US war noone said about troian donkey of EU. When in France synagogues are burning none said anything about french antisemitism (in one year in Warsaw we had 1! assault on antisemitic background!), noone remembers about big UK rrebate and french farmers that take moust of eu farming funds. But when Poland wants realy equal voting system, that would give each EU citizen same voting power suddenly you try to make deals about eu without us. Yes one our moron used some stupid historical argument but this isn't issiue here! he is stupid litle fag that still lives with his other and dosent have bank account BUT voting system proposed by our goverment is FAIR FOR EVERY COUNTRY IN EU!
Thats doublestandards you bas+ards!

[Thor]

Germany contributes with what, 70 percent of the EU budget? We are a major contributor as well.

What is Poland's net contribution?

[Litti]

Besides food, probably the car and chemical industry are the biggest? I dont really know, I´m out of my element here but I´m certain they bring less to the table than Sweden at the moment. For you are on the giving side after all Thor.

[c_r_b]

That treaty is already years behind the timetable, so there is timepressure.
Poland rejectected the compromise, with leaving no other way.
The article above says, Poland will get the possibility to sign the treaty later.

[Moledet]

Polish bastards p-)

[markjh]

tsk tsk UK also has issues with this threaty, of course only Poland is bad guy of EU, Poland sends troops to Iraq Poland halts EU constitution, Poland sucks blood of litle Jews. Go F* yourselfe eourpeans!
When France and Holland said no to constittion NONE said we just make EU without them, when UK send troops on every US war noone said about troian donkey of EU. When in France synagogues are burning none said anything about french antisemitism (in one year in Warsaw we had 1! assault on antisemitic background!), noone remembers about big UK rrebate and french farmers that take moust of eu farming funds. But when Poland wants realy equal voting system, that would give each EU citizen same voting power suddenly you try to make deals about eu without us. Yes one our moron used some stupid historical argument but this isn't issiue here! he is stupid litle fag that still lives with his other and dosent have bank account BUT voting system proposed by our goverment is FAIR FOR EVERY COUNTRY IN EU!
Thats doublestandards you bas+ards!

Calm down :)
I'm German, but im 100% against this constitution. It will give the EU politicians, wich arent elected by the people, way too many rights.
Im against this kind of EUDSSR ;)
But why for Gods sake, do the Kasczynskis (spelling?) have to come up with such BS?
As for your other points, I agree with you, but you guys should work on that in a more diplomatic way. p-)

[zad]

Germany contributes with what, 70 percent of the EU budget? We are a major contributor as well.

What is Poland's net contribution?

A little lesson of economy, how subsides works in the UE

a new country enter in the UE, ok, that means that the rest of UE members don´t have to pay customs duty to export products to the new country.
A direct consecuence of this is that a very important number of companies of this new member will have to close because they can´t compete with bigger multi-nationals of other UE members with strongs economies, so the new member recive subsides to improve his economy.

Do this benefice the countries who paid the most of subsides?
yes, because they have a new market to exploit, their companies increase their sales and buy small companies inside the new member.

Do this compensate the cost of the subsides for this countries?
yes, because the countries who started the EU(France, Germany...) were not stupids.

What are the economic consecuences for the new members?
At begining big sectors of their economies nearly colapse because they can´t compete, after a while with the help of the subsides their economies grow stronger and more competitive.

I am not suporting the Polish position, I think they are whining too much.

[Aeroflot]

As conman said, the EU needs to examine itself and determine what it wants to be, because right now this sounds almost similar to what happened when the United States drew up the Articles of Confederation. All our states wanted to be equal, but some of them were so small that giving them equal vote would be unfair to the states with larger populations, if I remember what I learned in US history (=P). But, to get to my point, the EU needs to maybe set up a new form of governance to be able to suit all the states so that way, for example, Germany cannot bully Belgium because Germany might contribute more, but Belgium stands equal with Germany. I don't know how this can be done, or if it can be done in Europe. I'm no expert, but this is what needs to be done from my view.

[Chimera]

tsk tsk UK also has issues with this threaty, of course only Poland is bad guy of EU, Poland sends troops to Iraq Poland halts EU constitution, Poland sucks blood of litle Jews. Go F* yourselfe eourpeans!


What's the link between the troops in Iraq and the European Treaty? Calm down and remember that whatever your country does or not in Europe, you'll win more than if you weren't in.

And your country's contribution to EU is very very low.

And nice to see you don't feel European yourself, which shows outstandingly how deep you don't give a damn about the idea of being European and that you're just part of EU to get the check back.

[Switek]

Polish bastards p-)

quoted for truth p-)

[tsuri]

Poland gets all the bad press because their leaders seem to be trying to win a poo flinging contest. If they want their hypothetical population without WW2, maybe we should give them back their hypothetical borders without WW2.

Others such as the United Kingdom are doing their share of idiocy as well. The UK is apparently opposed to the idea that universal human rights should be a guaranteed and legally challengable universally to all citizens of the European Union.

EU won't self destruct. Certain countries have been sabotating it for decades and it is still going strong.

I am curious to see if we will get a Europe of two Speeds soon or Plan B, I sure as hell hope for the latter.

The willing countries(and that is quite the majority) just pull out of the EU, make their own one and leave those that sabotage any attempts at integration behind.

EDIT:

the EU needs to maybe set up a new form of governance to be able to suit all the states so that way, for example, Germany cannot bully Belgium because Germany might contribute more, but Belgium stands equal with Germany.

A system for that purpose exists already and it works well enough. It is incredibly complicated to balance all possible coalitions against each other, the largest countries cannot rule over the small ones and vice versa. The net payers cannot bully the net recievers and so on. The system gives small states disproportionally heavy weight, by downgrading the big states a little.
The Penn-Rose System Poland wanted to have, basically would have downgraded the small states and the big states in favour of the medium states (Spain and Poland)

[Litti]

The likes of Sweden and Finland will be there to see this to the end, that much is certain. And so will UK, France, Italy, Germany and many others.

What I meant was that the current concept might collapse if these internal conflicts continue to go on. We dont have infinite amount of time to ratify the agreements. Countries like Poland are important, because they offer a lot. But in the end there might be a smaller Union - the elite club with Scandinavia and a couple of others.

[Kampfbaer]

The EU has grown too much, too fast. After the fall of the Iron Curtain the people wanted to see Europe united and let the eastern countries join fast.

Unfortunately the politicians didn´t realize that the political system that worked for the "old" EU (EC) wasn´t able to accept more members. The renewal process was screwed from the beginning because too few countries were willing to accept a kind of majority vote in important questions.

Try for yourself to join up with four friends of yours and plan, say a holiday trip. Everyone will contribute some ideas and all will be happy, now try the same trick with 26 of your friends and it will get much more difficult to make a plan that is acceptable to everyone.

The EU will have to improve radically and fast, if it is to stay around any longer.

Failing to do so, the EU will be just a loose framework for an open market.

IMHO it is quite possible that we will see a kind of Union in the Union emerge, composed of countries, that like to get closer to each other without those countries who aren´t willing to join in.

I think that this inner circle will be made of Germany, France and the BENELUX countries, maybe Austria and possibly Italy (at least with the current government)

just my 2 (Euro)cent

[perdurabo]

Calm down :)
I'm German, but im 100% against this constitution. It will give the EU politicians, wich arent elected by the people, way too many rights.
Im against this kind of EUDSSR ;)
But why for Gods sake, do the Kasczynskis (spelling?) have to come up with such BS?
As for your other points, I agree with you, but you guys should work on that in a more diplomatic way. p-)
i'm calming down :)
i dont know why this stupid little fag brought this argument down, really it was usles and foolish statement! I 100% agree with you that we should work on that in diplomatic way, i'm realy sorry for going down to mud fight:-(

[Nightsky]

If they want their hypothetical population without WW2, maybe we should give them back their hypothetical borders without WW2.

p-) good idea, visiting the riesengebirge without having to learn Polish sounds fun rofl

[Nightsky]

on a serious note, not even the proposed system matches perdurabo's thoughts of every citizen in Europe having an equal right of voice, that'd mean that Germany would have approx. twice as many votes as Poland.

And the EU needs to move away from the principle of unanonimousness for sure, otherwise there'll be no progress with 27 opinions on the table (or was it 28?)

And Poland should learn that the EU is no one-way-street ...

[perdurabo]

What's the link between the troops in Iraq and the European Treaty? Calm down and remember that whatever your country does or not in Europe, you'll win more than if you weren't in.
link is when poland does something we allways get bad press, did anyone started thread about europe falling apart because France and Holland killed constitution last time? NO. that are just double standards!

And your country's contribution to EU is very very low.


And nice to see you don't feel European yourself, which shows outstandingly how deep you don't give a damn about the idea of being European and that you're just part of EU to get the check back.
you are on this bord for how long? check my profile search for my past(not those recent ones about voting system) posts about EU.

[perdurabo]

on a serious note, not even the proposed system matches perdurabo's thoughts of every citizen in Europe having an equal right of voice, that'd mean that Germany would have approx. twice as many votes as Poland.

And the EU needs to move away from the principle of unanonimousness for sure, otherwise there'll be no progress with 27 opinions on the table (or was it 28?)

And Poland should learn that the EU is no one-way-street ...
its called penrose system not twice as much power because it wouldn't be direct vote of every country but square root of country population this gives mathematicly ideal voting balance for every country! Germany would get more than Poland this is truth and we don't argue with that! (apart from our delusional PM) what we don't agree is disproportion of voting power.

[tsuri]

link is when poland does something we allways get bad press, did anyone started thread about europe falling apart because France and Holland killed constitution last time? NO. that are just double standards!

Since they were a)excercising their right as the peoples of their countries and b)founding members and net contributors

people looked over that blunder. Seriously what is problematic about two countries not ratifying the Constitutional Treaty? It's why they had a referendum in the first place.

Going back on your word and picking apart a treaty you already signed and accepted is a completely different matter. Starting to insult the ones that let you join their club is also not a very nice tactic. Good thing that Poland principially votes for the oppostion ;)


on a serious note, not even the proposed system matches perdurabo's thoughts of every citizen in Europe having an equal right of voice, that'd mean that Germany would have approx. twice as many votes as Poland.
This has to to with legitimation issues. It would be totally democratic but totally rob states of their percieved right to exist. The legitimation of parts of the EU comes from the people of Europe but the voting comes from the legitimation of governments and therefore state law is important.

[perdurabo]

EDIT:
the Penn-Rose System Poland wanted to have, basically would have downgraded the small states and the big states in favour of the medium states (Spain and Poland)
how something that is based on mathemathics would favour something?
this is realy simple mathematical equatation that dosent favours anyone! while double majority favours big four and gives realy disproportional power to them.

[Chimera]

link is when poland does something we allways get bad press, did anyone started thread about europe falling apart because France and Holland killed constitution last time? NO. that are just double standards!

And your country's contribution to EU is very very low.

you are on this bord for how long? check my profile search for my past(not those recent ones about voting system) posts about EU.

I feel European, and i think i am European. Someone tellin me "Go f*** yourself europeans!!" sounds quite anti-european to me... when people get nerveous, they show their true colors...

And when my country opposed to the first constitution, we faced very strong criticisms from Germany, Spain, etc. And a lot pf people said Europe was falling apart in this time, and yes, we were the ones to blame.

And going to Iraq wasn't bad press for you since you been successfully rewarded by your American buddy recently. France opposing the war in Iraq, THAT was bad press.

[perdurabo]

Good thing that Poland principially votes for the oppostion ;)
we have olde highlander saying "every sh!t can flow down with the river but only noble fish can swim upwards aginst the stream. Not everyone has to be cow and agree on any EU proposal, we are using our power to change things we dislike just like any other nation in this union.

[perdurabo]

I feel European, and i think i am European. Someone tellin me "Go f*** yourself europeans!!" sounds quite anti-european to me... when people get nerveous, they show their true colors...

when you see constant sh!t thrown on your country you get nervous and strike back is it strange to you?

[Thor]

I dont really know, I´m out of my element here but I´m certain they bring less to the table
I think they are the largest net receiver in the union.


little lesson of economy, how subsides works in the UE
Thank you, I really felt I needed that..


a new country enter in the UE, ok, that means that the rest of UE members don´t have to pay customs duty to export products to the new country.
The beneficiary of this is Poland since it 1) has a great comparative advantage with low salaries/low production costs/low costs of living 2) the EU inner market is ~40 times larger than the polish inner market.


Do this compensate the cost of the subsides for this countries?
yes, because the countries who started the EU(France, Germany...) were not stupids.
It's like saying that EU would benefit from taking in Zimbabwe into the union because it will open up a new export market.

The only way that would have been true for Eastern Europe had it been if EU had offered membership in EFTA and not EU to start with. EU chose not to due to political circumstances.


What are the economic consecuences for the new members?
At begining big sectors of their economies nearly colapse because they can´t compete
Very much the opposite as they have an immense comparative advantage. E.g. that's why Poland has been the major beneficiary of corporate outsourcing operations (i.e. jobs and companies moving to Poland) in EU.

[tsuri]

how something that is based on mathemathics would favour something?

The system is used to equalize voting weight. The result would be that votes in the middle would not move as much as those on the extremes. Relative to their current votes the large countries and the smaller countries would move more than Poland and Spain who are in the middle.

The System is not injust, it merely replaces one bias with another one.


while double majority favours big four and gives realy disproportional power to them.
In order to get a double majority, the large states need allies, they get favoured, yes but that happens in all systems out there.
Every country will try to get the voting system that favours them most and that is the reason you won't see square roots any time soon. There are just more large and small countries than there are medium sized ones.


we have olde highlander saying "every sh!t can flow down with the river but only noble fish can swim upwards aginst the stream. Not everyone has to be cow and agree on any EU proposal, we are using our power to change things we dislike just like any other nation in this union.

I just meant that you will vote your potatoes out of office soon. Which as a citizen of Europe, I look forward to. As a scientist not so much, they produce lots of unconventional ****.

[PolishKhalsa]

What J. Kaczynski said about Germany and Poland might sound politically incorect and untimely to some but what he said is the truth and judging by the reactions here some Germans do not like to hear the truth.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Alliances and Unions..what a concept. Except, a grand european union..not a very good idea. Too many countries that contribute too little. Too many countries paying too much. In the long run,if it does become a reality, it will create a major shift, both militarily, economicly, and socially.

You have some countries that are considering the Union now, that could not even pay attention,let alone taxes, tarriffs,and consumer prices. What would happen to the economies of Germany, France, or Itlay or the other countries when they "pick up the slack for the non contributing countries?

There is no "equality" when it comes to indivual countries. There is just who as more, an who does not have enough. And as for voting rights....yeah right. It seems the members who contribute the most, have the clout to carry over major issues that effect the Union as a whole.

So as for a dream of a United Europe.....think of the deeper reasons why WWII was started, then you will see the reasons a united europe will never work.

[Thor]

What J. Kaczynski said about Germany and Poland might sound politically incorect and untimely to some but what he said is the truth and judging by the reactions here some Germans do not like to hear the truth.
But what has that got to do with EU?

If it was a union between just Germany and Poland that point would make sense. Now it doesn't.

[W.E.Kurtz]

Very much the opposite as they have an immense comparative advantage. E.g. that's why Poland has been the major beneficiary of corporate outsourcing operations (i.e. jobs and companies moving to Poland) in EU.
yeah you can pay us shiitty wages, thank u for thatwoot

[Venom PL]

I just meant that you will vote your potatoes out of office soon. Which as a citizen of Europe, I look forward to

Quoted for truth.


So as for a dream of a United Europe.....think of the deeper reasons why WWII was started, then you will see the reasons a united europe will never work.

Never say never !!!

[tsuri]

What J. Kaczynski said about Germany and Poland might sound politically incorect and untimely to some but what he said is the truth and judging by the reactions here some Germans do not like to hear the truth.

We also killed lots of French, Britons, Dutch and vice versa.

If you want to play the hypothetical game, you could extrapolate birth rates from back before the 30 year war and go with that. Sounds entirely unreasonable and idiotic? Bet your ass it is.

Europeans have been constantly at war in the past. The present is not a historical injustice but a product of our history. The point is that we stopped killing each other and not going back to old rivalries.

Today France and Germay compete in the Commission, until the beginning of this century we competed on the fields of some smelly farmers. Do we want to give that up because of a stupid voting system?

[Thor]

yeah you can pay us shiitty wages, thank u for thatwoot
Compared to the cost of living in London they are shiitty, compared to the cost of living in Poland they are rather good. And polish wages have risen very fast, so fast that many foreign companies now plan to outsource from Poland.

[PolishKhalsa]

We also killed lots of French, Britons, Dutch and vice versa.

If you want to play the hypothetical game, you could extrapolate birth rates from back before the 30 year war and go with that. Sounds entirely unreasonable and idiotic? Bet your ass it is.

Europeans have been constantly at war in the past. The present is not a historical injustice but a product of our history. The point is that we stopped killing each other and not going back to old rivalries.

Today France and Germay compete in the Commission, until the beginning of this century we competed on the fields of some smelly farmers. Do we want to give that up because of a stupid voting system?

French, Britons, Duch it was mostly war (tens of thousends killed) . in Poland it was genoside ( millions killed) for which Germany did not even pay war reparations.

[Herrmannek]

I don't care if you understand whats Poland's reasoning behind its actions, and if anyone laughs about it or not. Fact is, need for veto was anticipated by "founding fathers" as Americans would say. And if it was predicted and written down as tool it was meant to be used. And now we are probably going to use it. And UE will have to eat that frog you like it or not...

[PolishKhalsa]

But what has that got to do with EU?

If it was a union between just Germany and Poland that point would make sense. Now it doesn't.

If it does not have anything to do with EU why is everybody so upset?

[Thor]

If it does not have anything to do with EU why is everybody so upset?
Because your PM brings it into the EU discussion despite of that??


And now we are probably going to use it. And UE will have to eat that frog you like it or not...
I don't think anyone will veto anything. There tend to be a lot of extra drama in EU negotiations.

There was BTW a great documentary that filmed behind the scenes in the different camps during the Copenhagen EU summit.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

What J. Kaczynski said about Germany and Poland might sound politically incorect and untimely to some but what he said is the truth and judging by the reactions here some Germans do not like to hear the truth.

It just would not be the Germans that would

be a problem, but some countries in the former eastren bloc countries that would.

For those who take offense about their country being singled out, do not take offense, please. I am going to make a valid,and livid point.

WWI..the treaty of Versailles(pardon spelling)..the countries allied against Germany, strip Germany of most of its rights to being a country...they could not produce military weapons, their country is in ruins after the treaty was signed, there was no infrastructure to speak of(factories, good roads, etc etc) and, the country was basicly left to fend for itself.

Now come the depression years..Germany is still in shambles, there is alot of social discontent. Enter, a young, ambitious politician, who starts his own political party, and rebuilds Germany,to the power she was. Violating the treaty that ended WWI, he sells his newly devoloped military hardware,and in 1939,decides to unite germany with poland,and the rest is history.

I brought up history as a reason, as to why it would not be a good idea to unite Europe as a whole.

Contributing countries would have to contribute way too much to pick up the slack for countries that could not or would not contribute. This would place a strain on the economies of members that did contribute. This could, lead to massive unemployment, social unrest, and possible civil wars starting, escalating into a wider war.

I am sure there are more than enough German people to make sure the events of WWI and WWII will not happen again. But whats not to say SOME OTHER COUNTRY would be the problem?

[Olybrius]

The problem is already solved.
The EU will make the new treaty without Poland.
source in german: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,490254,00.html


Yes a majority of country can decide to open a new conference to build the treaty without Poland.
Such a solution was already used against M Thatcher in 1985

[SHAM]

I don't think anyone will veto anything. There tend to be a lot of extra drama in EU negotiations.

There was BTW a great documentary that filmed behind the scenes in the different camps during the Copenhagen EU summit.

yeah i saw that..was very open, suprisingly so.
The danish PM's comments when the individual countries left the negotiations were quote interesting, including about the polish pm's attempts to get large quotas prior to joining.

[Herrmannek]

I don't think anyone will veto anything. There tend to be a lot of extra drama in EU negotiations.

There was BTW a great documentary that filmed behind the scenes in the different camps during the Copenhagen EU summit.

I wouldn't vote for Kaczynski brothers if I wasn't sure they are mad enough for the job :)

[sp2c]

When France and Holland said no to constittion NONE said we just make EU without them,

not?

are you calling the media a liar?
the suggestion has been made (by Belgium of all nations afaik)

[PolishKhalsa]

It just would not be the Germans that would

be a problem, but some countries in the former eastren bloc countries that would.

For those who take offense about their country being singled out, do not take offense, please. I am going to make a valid,and livid point.

WWI..the treaty of Versailles(pardon spelling)..the countries allied against Germany, strip Germany of most of its rights to being a country...they could not produce military weapons, their country is in ruins after the treaty was signed, there was no infrastructure to speak of(factories, good roads, etc etc) and, the country was basicly left to fend for itself.

Now come the depression years..Germany is still in shambles, there is alot of social discontent. Enter, a young, ambitious politician, who starts his own political party, and rebuilds Germany,to the power she was. Violating the treaty that ended WWI, he sells his newly devoloped military hardware,and in 1939,decides to unite germany with poland,and the rest is history.

I brought up history as a reason, as to why it would not be a good idea to unite Europe as a whole.

Contributing countries would have to contribute way too much to pick up the slack for countries that could not or would not contribute. This would place a strain on the economies of members that did contribute. This could, lead to massive unemployment, social unrest, and possible civil wars starting, escalating into a wider war.

I am sure there are more than enough German people to make sure the events of WWI and WWII will not happen again. But whats not to say SOME OTHER COUNTRY would be the problem?

Do not worry about Germanys contribution. It is done for a reason that has nothing to do with beeing generous. It is about markets and stability which in a long run translates into profit. In 20-30 years Poland will contribute financially on par with western EU for the same reasons.

[PolishKhalsa]

Yes a majority of country can decide to open a new conference to build the treaty without Poland.
Such a solution was already used against M Thatcher in 1985

but a majority can not pass the treaty without Poland So what really happend is the negotiations got extended for a few months.

[Switek]

This all thread is meaningless. You'll know new agreement soon and new wave of of paneuropean friendship...

btw I really believe that political goals of Kaczyński bros are made under legitimate interest (us Poles, of course) but its performance is far from good taste... (I really hate potato twins but they are right in many things)

:)

Veto? Forget this ... they're cowards... ;)

[Nightsky]

French, Britons, Duch it was mostly war (tens of thousends killed) . in Poland it was genoside ( millions killed) for which Germany did not even pay war reparations.


erm, as far as I can see there's a lot of land in the east which you got as some sort of compensation ... :roll:

we're living in the present, in case you didn't notice ...

[PolishKhalsa]

Borrring.... they agreed on something.

[signatory]

yawn

The EU does not and can not self-destruct for any particular reason.

The worst that can happen: The EU will not advance.

[PolishKhalsa]

erm, as far as I can see there's a lot of land in the east which you got as some sort of compensation ... :roll:

we're living in the present, in case you didn't notice ...

First most of this land was polish anyways but even so Poland did not want to move its borders. It was done by Russia which took half of eastern Poland.

[perdurabo]

Every country will try to get the voting system that favours them most

quoted for truth!



I just meant that you will vote your potatoes out of office soon. Which as a citizen of Europe, I look forward to. As a scientist not so much, they produce lots of unconventional ****.
we hope it happens soon too! i'm realy first to criticise those f4gs but i realy belive sr system is good solution, also i don;t defend ducks but i defend my country if you attack ou goverment we sometimes laugh sometimes agree with you BUT if you throw sh!t at my country expect heavy reaction from us, we are quite emotionally tied to it and have long history of defending it.

[Dinivan]

It's astounding what Blair has been doing, CSFP, the human rights and the symbols of the Union are important issues. But at least he finally agreed to accept the treaty by not including the human rights (why is Blair so scared about the idea that the European Court of Justice could enforce those rights in the islands?) and the symbols, and by changing the name of the foreign minister to high representative of the Union (or something like that).

But the attitude of Poland is ridiculous and miserable (for using the Nazi argument). They are against the rest of 26 members, threatening to use its veto power even if that generates a crisis in the EU, and that's not the first time they do this (e.g. in the relations with Russia). Germany has offered Poland to delay the new voting system until 2014 (which is already too far in time, cos this is very necessary for the EU to function well), but they did not even consider it. They just want the rest of the members to accept what they demand without negotiations, in a quite childish behaviour. Sincerely, if they're going to behave this way forever, they could have remained outside the Union.

Thank God that the germans have elected Merkel. Let's make a petition to nominate her as the future President of the European Union :) Give me an M, give me an E, give me an R, give me a K, give me an E, give me an L... MEERKEEL! :D


its called penrose system not twice as much power because it wouldn't be direct vote of every country but square root of country population this gives mathematicly ideal voting balance for every country! Germany would get more than Poland this is truth and we don't argue with that! (apart from our delusional PM) what we don't agree is disproportion of voting power.
Germany has twice the population of Poland. Do you think it's strange that they have more power? The rest of the Union thinks this is fair, including Spain which has a population size similar to that of Poland.


Unfortunately the politicians didn´t realize that the political system that worked for the "old" EU (EC) wasn´t able to accept more members. The renewal process was screwed from the beginning because too few countries were willing to accept a kind of majority vote in important questions.
They did realize about that. That's what the treaty of Amsterdam and Nice tried to solve. Unfortunately, at Nice, member states only agreed that they were in disagreement. Fortunately, they wanted to solve this and that's what the Constitution is for, its objective was to make the EU25 as easy to manage as the "EU6".

[perdurabo]

erm, as far as I can see there's a lot of land in the east which you got as some sort of compensation ... :roll:

and i can see lots of our former lands on east that aren't our now too...
[/quote]
we're living in the present, in case you didn't notice ...[/quote]
agreed.

[W.E.Kurtz]

Compared to the cost of living in London they are shiitty, compared to the cost of living in Poland they are rather good. And polish wages have risen very fast, so fast that many foreign companies now plan to outsource from Poland.
no fcuk?? i was in london last year and i can tell U i was making very good money(for my needs p-)). the thing is that living in london IS expensive but when i was earning around 3k pounds p/m belive me it was GOOD money... polish wages rising very fast????:)hehe maybe U talk about Wolska not Polskarofl

im drunk right now so sorry for spelling and slow replap-)y/ carry on

[W.E.Kurtz]

quoted for truth!


we hope it happens soon too! i'm realy first to criticise those f4gs but i realy belive sr system is good solution, also i don;t defend ducks but i defend my country if you attack ou goverment we sometimes laugh sometimes agree with you BUT if you throw sh!t at my country expect heavy reaction from us, we are quite emotionally tied to it and have long history of defending it.
well there is one question whos next?? PO/SLD/LID/LPR thats why ill never vote in this country - same old PIGS over and over again...Perdurabo face it WERE DOOMED:)

[perdurabo]

But the attitude of Poland is ridiculous and miserable (for using the Nazi argument). They are against the rest of 26 members, threatening to use its veto power even if that generates a crisis in the EU, and that's not the first time they do this (e.g. in the relations with Russia).
you have right that this emotional nazi argumentation is unnecesery poo throwing, but in both cases we had right


Germany has offered Poland to delay the new voting system until 2014 (which is already too far in time, cos this is very necessary for the EU to function well), but they did not even consider it.
do you think delays in time changes something?


They just want the rest of the members to accept what they demand without negotiations, in a quite childish behaviour.
BS, they said hey are open for negotiations and compromise but only proposal they met was stupid delay in time and more poo throwing at Polands direction, you aren't negotiating with us too!


Sincerely, if they're going to behave this way forever, they could have remained outside the Union.
ohh if they don't want to play with our rules they can get their toys and go home, realy mature answer



Germany has twice the population of Poland. Do you think it's strange that they have more power? The rest of the Union thinks this is fair, including Spain which has a population size similar to that of Poland.
and i wrote it erlier that germany should have more voting power than Poland, but doble majority isn't fair.
BTW imagine Turkey is joining ad soon it will have more population than Germany will you admit it more power than your country?



They did realize about that. That's what the treaty of Amsterdam and Nice tried to solve. Unfortunately, at Nice, member states only agreed that they were in disagreement. Fortunately, they wanted to solve this and that's what the Constitution is for, its objective was to make the EU25 as easy to manage as the "EU6".thats why we propose something diffrent! our system can menage both nowadays union and future union with Turkey and maybe Ukraine!

[PolishKhalsa]

Now that they agreed on this stupid voting system I can not wait for Turkey to join EU.

[perdurabo]

how this consensus looks like? i cant see it on news agencies can anyone give us a link?

btw about square root system:
http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/mathphys/politik/eu/CEPS.pdf

[Dinivan]

do you think delays in time changes something?
BS, they said hey are open for negotiations and compromise but only proposal they met was stupid delay in time and more poo throwing at Polands direction, you aren't negotiating with us too!

According to your two leaders, yes. They would be willing to accept the new voting system if it was delayed until 2020 (or so I read). 2014 is half way between next year and 2020, it seems reasonable... except for the two brothers. I don't know if you realize about this, but they are ruining the reputation of your country.


and i wrote it erlier that germany should have more voting power than Poland, but doble majority isn't fair.
BTW imagine Turkey is joining ad soon it will have more population than Germany will you admit it more power than your country?
I'm spaniard, not german. So yes, I'm already willing to lose power because losing power for Spain or Poland means that the European Union will work better, which in turn will benefit much more to our two countries than having some more voting rights in the council.

[PolishKhalsa]

how this consensus looks like? i cant see it on news agencies can anyone give us a link?

btw about square root system:
http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/mathphys/politik/eu/CEPS.pdf

Nice until 2017
break clause permanent
poland and spain 14 more seats in Parlament.

rzeczpospolita.pl and some speculation on my part.

[PolishKhalsa]

BTW I do not see why Spain sould get more seats in EU Parliment. They were satisfied with the original proposal :)

[perdurabo]

According to your two leaders, yes. They would be willing to accept the new voting system if it was delayed until 2020 (or so I read). 2014 is half way between next year and 2020, it seems reasonable...

they reached consensus with 2017 so much closer to potatoes proposal but still it is only delay not new quality :-(


except for the two brothers. I don't know if you realize about this, but they are ruining the reputation of your country.

oh we do get it ore than you think, what we Poles see rest of EU can't grasp diffrence beatwin our moronic goverment and our country and we see constant attacks on our nation so when we wherent infuriated by this funny article in TAZ about potatoes we are mad when we see constant poo throwing on our nation.


I'm spaniard, not german. So yes, I'm already willing to lose power because even if you don't realize about this, losing power for Spain or Poland means that the European Union will work better, which in turn will benefit much more to our two countries than having some more voting rights in the council.

http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/mathphys/politik/eu/CEPS.pdf

read this moust of countries got underpowered in this dobule majority, Penrose system dosen't mean worse work of EU it just changes balance of voting for more fair. But case closed those two has no balls nor brains.

[Dinivan]

2017. Ten more years of Nice, the worst treaty ever made in the European Union, just because of Poland. This is completely unacceptable snif

[perdurabo]

2017. Ten more years of Nice, the worst treaty ever made in the European Union, just because of Poland. This is completely unacceptable snif
lol you will get your voting system be happy, worry more about what france pulled, no more free market prepare for social just system rofl

[lightfire]

all we need more is Russia to bring its 2 kapeikas..Akready a total mess.

[eskrima]

yawn

The EU does not and can not self-destruct for any particular reason.





actually in all EU treaties there is no prevision of the process followed if a country wishes to abandon EU.

[PolishKhalsa]

HA HA HA. Now Belgum vetoes the summit irespective of Polish compromise. Is Markel going to go over Belgums head?

[daily666]

Ok, I hate the ducks and think the argument of WWII population in this issue is hilarious but I was just wondering why the press (and some members) blame Poland for the (possible) fiasco of the meeting while UK and Holland have risen other issues unnaccetable for them.

The aim of this meeting is "to replace, and reduce, the EU constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005". So.... they want to introduce the reforms of the EU constitution from the backdoors. Sounds cool ain't it? And now, Poland is the scapegoat for what the French and Dutch did two years ago.


Britain meanwhile, seen as the other problem country, is also trying to get water-tight guarantees that the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which could give workers extra rights to strike, will not apply to the UK.


Correspondents say failure to reach a deal on the treaty would plunge the EU into a fresh crisis as deep as the one that followed the rejection of the constitution two years ago.
by BBC

From the news...
Brown uses his veto

Gordon Brown intervened directly to prevent a French attempt to weaken EU competition laws yesterday, as leaders moved towards a deal on a new treaty.

So why the f*ck Poland is to blame? Will Germany hold talks without UK now, as easy as it tried to proceed without Poland?

[Thor]

by BBC

From the news...
Brown uses his veto


So why the f*ck Poland is to blame? Will Germany hold talks without UK now, as easy as it tried to proceed without Poland?
You got a link to that?

As far as I know no one used a veto. They negotiated and a compromise was reached. The french couldn't pursue that unilaterally.

[daily666]

Not sure if accurate but Polish and Lithuanian news agencies inform that Poland and Germany reached a compromise on the EU treaty.

[daily666]

You got a link to that?

Afaik no used a veto, a compromised was reached.


Yes as for the compromise:

The negotiations were successful," spokeswoman Jurgita Apanaviciute from the Lithuanian delegation told AFP, after her Baltic state's 80-year-old President Valdas Adamkus -- a fluent Polish speaker -- had helped mediate.

link about the veto

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1975220.ece

[daily666]

Belgium, Spain, Italy, Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, Greece, Luxemburg and Malta are against the compromise achieved by UK, France, Germany, Lithuania and Poland.

Looks like a showdown...

[Thor]

There was no veto. The french stood alone but they might have managed to enforce a compromise.

[PolishKhalsa]

Belgium, Spain, Italy, Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, Greece, Luxemburg and Malta are against the compromise achieved by UK, France, Germany, Lithuania and Poland.

Looks like a showdown...

I suggest Markel does what she proposed to do with Poland. She can call the treaty conferance without those countries.

BTW what the f** is Spains problem

[daily666]

I suggest Markel does what she proposed to do with Poland. She can call the treaty conferance without those countries.

BTW what the f** is Spains problem

Seems that the Czechs and Lithuanians didn't agree on the exclusion of Poland from the summit, than Luxemburg proposed some new ideas on the voting rights. Sarkozy and Blair helped during the talks with Kaczynski and a deal was reached.

The system will be that Nice treaty will stay in power till 2017.

[solidarnosc]

Seems that the Czechs and Lithuanians didn't agree on the exclusion of Poland from the summit, than Luxemburg proposed some new ideas on the voting rights. Sarkozy and Blair helped during the talks with Kaczynski and a deal was reached.

The system will be that Nice treaty will stay in power till 2017.

So the EU will continue to be ineficient and attacked because its inefecient by the same countries who stop it becoming more efficient. The Nice treaty was a joke and not a good basis to run the EU.

[tony6]

I can't wait to see the Turkey inside EU - especially after 2017.
Germans will be the first to change their way of voting after this large country enters the union.

[Thor]

Good luck in getting EU-25 to accept Turkey into the union..

[Musashi]

2) the EU inner market is ~40 times larger than the polish inner market.
Is there something wrong with your brain?
Do you mean 38,5 x 40? Even China does not have 40 times larger market.

Good luck in getting EU-25 to accept Turkey into the union..
You mean EU27?

[Thor]

Is there something wrong with your brain?
My synapses are quite nimble actually.


Do you mean 38,5 x 40? Even China does not have 40 times larger market.
Which one would you say constitute the largest market, European Union or African Union?


You mean EU27?
Them too.

[quinsen]

this compromise helps nobody. it had better been failed.

[Sharp]

What J. Kaczynski said about Germany and Poland might sound politically incorect and untimely to some but what he said is the truth and judging by the reactions here some Germans do not like to hear the truth.

Hey, stand up, open your eyes, we are in 2007 !! TWO THOUSANDS SEVEN (yeah i know i dont write it good).
WW2 happened - 50 - fifty YEARS AGO.

if you wanted to have so much PEOPLE in your SO SMALL country , why did you not asked your people and your government for a " BABY BOOM " ?
France did it. I don't know for other countries. My grand parents had 6 to 8 childrens during the baby boom.
maybe you did it, i don't know, but if your "presidentS" are crying about it, well, it seem that it didn't worked for you as excepted, so the only ones you have to blame are YOUR politicians (or your plumbers maybe p-)).

[Sharp]

I can't wait to see the Turkey inside EU - especially after 2017.
Germans will be the first to change their way of voting after this large country enters the union.

What is your point by making a such post ?
why can't you wait to see the turkey inside the eu? just because a majority of countries don't want them here then you would like , YOU, polish, to seem them in, just because you're angry against the germans?

a friend like you worth GOLD, for sure.:cantbeli:

[Olybrius]

a good agreement i think , the treaty will be enter in force in 2009 , only the double majority voting will be delayed until 2014 to be fully implemented in 2017. Finally Poland made much ado about nothing.

An humourous article in the independant about Europe



John Lichfield: The continent is united - by its desire to squabble

Published: 22 June 2007

It is all very simple. The British are opposed to what they have already agreed to. The French are eager to agree what they have already rejected.

And then there are the Poles. The Poles are opposed to anything the Germans can agree to. Since the Germans are running the meeting, that is likely to make life difficult. And interesting.

The Poles are especially angry that there are only 38,000,000 Poles, while there are an unreasonable number of Germans (82,000,000). This, according to the Polish Prime Minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, is the fault of the Germans for wreaking destruction in Poland 70 years ago.

This is a fair point in its way. However, the European Union is supposed to be about Europe's future not its past. The Second World War is usually deployed as an argument for Europeans to work together. The Polish government is the first to use it as an argument for falling out.

Well done, the Poles. To find a new argument in Brussels is not easy. Britain has been re-cycling the same ones for 34 years.

The two-day, or three, European summit which began in Brussels yesterday is supposed to find an agreement on new and easier ways for the Europeans to agree. Put another way, the 27 governments are squabbling about how to prevent themselves from squabbling.

When I last covered a European summit, almost 20 years ago, there were only 12 member states. Life was hard enough. A 12-space Rubik's Cube was never easy to solve, especially when one of the squares was Britain.

Now the European Union is a 27-space Rubik's cube. The number of perverse spaces - those which always end up on the wrong side of the cube - has grown. And Poland seems determined to emerge as the "Britain of the east".

Even the French and the Dutch, founder members of the old EEC, joined the awkward squad two years ago. Their people rejected the first attempt to make it easier for Europeans to agree. Both are now, mostly, happy to agree to the second attempt without asking their people for a second opinion.

The French people rejected the draft constitution mostly because it included the old treaties going back to 1957. They had no particular objection to the new bits. The old bits have now been dropped from the new text (but still exist). The word "constitution" has also been dropped.

The reasonable Dutch are asking for very little as a going-home present.

Tony Blair, on the other hand, can no longer agree what he could agree to two years ago. He has to come back to Britain with a text which looks different from the old one. Otherwise, Gordon Brown will find it hard to tell The Sun and the Daily Mail why there will be no referendum in Britain.

Two years ago, Mr Blair's government said the EU Constitution was, variously, "good for Britain" or "as meaningless as The Beano".

Now Mr Blair says that it contains four or five dire threats to the British way of life (such as the EU deciding to have one foreign affairs supremo, instead of two; or enshrining a charter of social rights which mostly exist in the UK already).

The impression of many officials in Brussels was that most of Mr Blair's "red lines" could easily be dealt with by opt-outs. In other words, they are straw men, designed for public burning.

The Polish government has a sounder argument for disagreeing with itself. It was a different Polish government which agreed the old text. The Polish president, Lech Kaczynski, and the Prime Minister, his identical twin brother, object to new rules on voting by EU governments. Jaroslaw has not travelled to Brussels; his nicer brother, Lech, has come instead. This is taken as a sign that Poland plans to cave in.

But how can anyone be sure that it is really Lech and not Jaroslaw? One of them has a mole on his face. But which one is the Pole with the mole?

And thus was the future of Europe decided...


http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article2692372.ece

[Musashi]

if you wanted to have so much PEOPLE in your SO SMALL country, why did you not asked your people and your government for a " BABY BOOM " ?
My country is neither small, nor big. I am sure its area is above the EU average. With an area of 312,685 square kilometres it's larger, than for example the UK or Italy. Will you, my dear idiot, call these two countries "very small"?
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pl.html
Next time please focus on something you are good at, instead of ridiculing yourself on MP.net :bash:
It's a very friendly advice from a man, who does not have anything against France (except for 1 or 2 French members of MP.net), because the rest of the world could be under impression all the Frenchmen are as geographically-retarded as you are judging by your example.

About the baby boom... We simply cannot afford to have it. Our budget could not bear tax reliefs for having children.

[Switek]

EU to self destruc, because of countries like Poland?

Anything wrong happened? Is there a compromise?


EDIT: Mods, close this thread couse it can turn into flamewar, please.

[perdurabo]

What is your point by making a such post ?
why can't you wait to see the turkey inside the eu?
because it will be too late then? countries always should plan few steps ahead. But i see 99% of EU prefers tomporary solutions that change noting or almoust nothing.:cantbeli:



just because a majority of countries don't want them here then you would like , YOU, polish, to seem them in, just because you're angry against the germans?

a friend like you worth GOLD, for sure.:cantbeli:dude negotiations with Turkey started long before our joining, and IF EU is going to get new members Turkey is first on the list, because of deals EU signed. Are you also history challenged? we know you have problems with geography.

article for germans:
http://debatte.welt.de/kommentare/25275/es+sind+die+polen+die+europa+retten?
i think it realy hits the spot

[Herrmannek]

As a side note... If EU is so weak it is going to collapse because of voting laws issues its not a bad idea to be the first one to bail out :)... Who would like to be in a body ruled by a people with clerks mindset, who got hysterical when things aren't going along their clerk's imagination... EU don't need more integration.. it needs some fresh breath of common freedoms and common sense...

[Snoshi]

Polish minister makes Nazi allusion to Merkel

Published: 06.23.07, 16:42 / Israel News

An ultranationalist Polish minister invoked an expression from the Nazi era on Saturday to describe German Chancellor Angela Merkel's negotiating tactics over an EU treaty.

Deputy Prime Minister Roman Giertych said Merkel's threat to push ahead even if Poland vetoed the treaty had been tantamount to telling Polish leaders "Haende hoch!" (Hands up!) - a German phrase associated by Poles with the commands of Nazi occupiers. (*******)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3416459,00.html

[muttbutt]

Ah crap like this happens at almost every EU summit, yet we muddle on bit by bit...still think bringing up WWII and phantom statistics was retarded though

[Herrmannek]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3416459,00.html

He is not ultranationalist...... he is marginally nationalist, generally he is Populist aiming for traditional voters, luckily or not with minor success :) .

As for "Haende hoch!" (Hands up!). Do those western guys have at least slight sense of humor. I doubt it was even meant to be reference to Nazi germany? In all polish war movies, for obvious reasons good/bad guys say "Haende hoch!" quite usual phrase used when asking someone to surrender, together with "schnella" probably only phrase in German all Poles would understand.... :cantbeli:

[Doublethinker]

Heh heh... these poles are always good for a couple of laughs. Always trying to play important and be everybody's equal, but in reality all they need is a good babysitter who won't be too politically correct to give the crybaby some decent spanking ;)

[Herrmannek]

Heh heh... these poles are always good for a couple of laughs. Always trying to play important and be everybody's equal, but in reality all they need is a good babysitter who won't be too politically correct to give the crybaby some decent spanking ;)

Said a guy who is probably coming from one of the 26 countries that cried like a baby for the last 3 days :)

[PolishKhalsa]

why did you not asked your people and your government for a " BABY BOOM " ?
France did it. I don't know for other countries. My grand parents had 6 to 8 childrens during the baby boom.
maybe you did it, i don't know, but if your "presidentS" are crying about it, well, it seem that it didn't worked for you as excepted, so the only ones you have to blame are YOUR politicians (or your plumbers maybe p-)).

Go read some history books kid.

[Sharp]

why arent you responding me instead of insult me?

[Switek]

Said a guy who is probably coming from one of the 26 countries that cried like a baby for the last 3 days :)

No, Doublethinker is a pretty decent guy and comes from the country where everything is is the best ;)

Anyway his last statement disappoints me. He reached a level of commentary from "Komsomolskaya Pravda" :|.

[tsuri]

dude negotiations with Turkey started long before our joining, and IF EU is going to get new members Turkey is first on the list, because of deals EU signed. Are you also history challenged? we know you have problems with geography.
It is not mandatory. We can take in Albania, Macedonia, Croatia or Ukraine any day without taking Turkey in first. It is not a waiting line, the "negotiations" (well we tell them what to do and they do it) take the time, they take.


Who would like to be in a body ruled by a people with clerks mindset,
Poland.


EU don't need more integration
Of course it does. We have it for integration. If you want free trade and no membership fees, join EEA.

The reason for the 2014 compromise btw is: In 2013 the new EU budget gets made. Poland wanted to press as much money out of this meeting as possible, hence the acceptance to change the voting system after they get their funds.

[PolishKhalsa]

why arent you responding me instead of insult me?

I am not insulting you I am giving you good advice.

[Doublethinker]

Said a guy who is probably coming from one of the 26 countries that cried like a baby for the last 3 days :)

Hmm? No, I'm from the country which is bigger than the whole EU altogether multiplied by two. Russia rarely gets invited to such mad tea parties and the more I watch european politics in action, the less I feel bad about it. Should just stick to economic union and waste the political piece.

[Herrmannek]

Hmm? No, I'm from the country which is bigger than the whole EU altogether multiplied by two. Russia rarely gets invited to such mad tea parties and the more I watch european politics in action, the less I feel bad about it. Should just stick to economic union and waste the political piece.

Then I forgive you :)

[PolishKhalsa]

EU to self destruc, because of countries like Poland?

Anything wrong happened? Is there a compromise?


EDIT: Mods, close this thread couse it can turn into flamewar, please.

No do not close this thread I want to hear more from the Germans on why WWII and its consequences should not be talked about anymore.rofl

[Snoshi]

No do not close this thread I want to hear more from the Germans on why WWII and its consequences should not be talked about anymore.

Because thats past. It happened 60 years ago.

[Doublethinker]

No, Doublethinker is a pretty decent guy and comes from the country where everything is is the best ;)

Anyway his last statement disappoints me. He reached a level of commentary from "Komsomolskaya Pravda" :|.

I never claimed to have any warm feelings for Polish or European politics, so I'm hardly being inconsistent. I'm pro-democracy and pro-capitalism and pro-European Economic Union, but not in this schizophrenic way Europe is trying to build it right now, more of a die-hard capitalist of early XXth century. Really, I mean how stupid can one be to bite the hand that feeds you and throw in the taboo topic while doing that? Russia, despite suffering the worst with respect to German occupation policies, never mentions nazism even quarter as much as poles do when critisizing German foreign politics. And claiming that I'm somehow connected to fans of Komsomolskaya Pravda, you really are being intellectually dishonest, applying good ol' stereotypes, even tho they evidently don't fit.

[Switek]

No do not close this thread I want to hear more from the Germans on why WWII and its consequences should not be talked about anymore.

It should be talked but much more calmly and I suggest to open separate thread to discuss this topic.

[PolishKhalsa]

Because thats past. It happened 60 years ago.

and Germany still did not pay war reparations.

[Doublethinker]

Then I forgive you :)

Why, thank you!

[Doublethinker]

No do not close this thread I want to hear more from the Germans on why WWII and its consequences should not be talked about anymore.rofl

Why not talk about how the Worldwide Flood directly influenced world population levels? And demand reparations from Jews while at that, because were it not for their God, the Polish population would be counted in billons ;)

[PolishKhalsa]

Why not talk about how the Worldwide Flood directly influenced world population levels? And demand reparations from Jews while at that, because were it not for their God, the Polish population would be counted in billons ;)

Yes bring the Jews into this. The poles might eventually forgive you but good luck with the Jews.

[Doublethinker]

Yes bring the Jews into this. The poles might eventually forgive you but good luck with the Jews.

What? I see no need to ask jews to forgive me. PS: Nice try at evading an arguement.

[Snoshi]

Yes bring the Jews into this. The poles might eventually forgive you but good luck with the Jews.

lol... Most of the Jews already forgave Germany..

[Macs.]

I don't know what the goals of the Polish goverment were, but they were successful on embarrassing themselves completely.

[Switek]

I never claimed to have any warm feelings for Polish or European politics, so I'm hardly being inconsistent. I'm pro-democracy and pro-capitalism and pro-European Economic Union, but not in this schizophrenic way Europe is trying to build it right now, more of a die-hard capitalist of early XXth century. Really, I mean how stupid can one be to bite the hand that feeds you and throw in the taboo topic while doing that? Russia, despite suffering the worst with respect to German occupation policies, never mentions nazism even quarter as much as poles do when critisizing German foreign politics. And claiming that I'm somehow connected to fans of Komsomolskaya Pravda, you really are being intellectually dishonest, applying good ol' stereotypes, even tho they evidently don't fit.

Kaczyński bros use agressive, annoying and simple stupid way of performing their policy both in internal and international stage. They believe in pure power. I feel ashamed very often by what our government is doing.

Most of the critics which Poland gets is simple unjust and it was part of negotiation tactics.

If your term "those Poles" reffered only currently ruling twins, not all Poles I will withdraw my complaints

[PolishKhalsa]

What? I see no need to ask jews to forgive me. PS: Nice try at evading an arguement.

There is no argument. Your past is always going to hound you.

[Doublethinker]

Kaczyński bros use agressive, annoying and simple stupid way of performing their policy both in internal and international stage. They believe in pure power. I feel ashamed very often by what our government is doing.

Most of the critics which Poland gets is simple unjust and it was part of negotiation tactics.

If your term "those Poles" reffered only currently ruling twins, not all Poles I will withdraw my complaints

In this case it is directed at all poles who support such an embarassing and idiotic behaviour which is evidently counter-productive in the long run, since it alienates your best allies. And even with regards to this forum, there seems to be quite a lot, so...

[Doublethinker]

There is no argument. Your past is always going to hound you.

Hahaha! Oh, I see, you think I'm a German? :)

[Herrmannek]

I don't know what the goals of the Polish goverment were, but they were successful on embarrassing themselves completely.

Don't be jealous :)

[Switek]

In this case it is directed at all poles who support such an embarassing and idiotic behaviour which is evidently counter-productive in the long run, since it alienates your best allies. And even with regards to this forum, there seems to be quite a lot, so...

During the last three days alcohol consumption has risen significantly couse most Poles didn't watch sober about how it was. p-)

It was a really embarrasing but political goals was achieved. Our government isn't forever, new elections will bring changes.

[PolishKhalsa]

Hahaha! Oh, I see, you think I'm a German? :)

Hahaha and you think I am Polish? :)

[Doublethinker]

Hahaha and you think I am Polish? :)

Yep, I do.

[PolishKhalsa]

Yep, I do.

I think you are German too.

[Doublethinker]

I think you are German too.

I'm Russian. What a highly intellectual exchange :roll:

[PolishKhalsa]

Does anybody have a good link for the division of voting power after this agreement? Is the Ioannine clause permanent now? or does it expire?

[Flamming_Python]

You guys shouldn't argue so much. I can sorta understand Polish concerns (don't want their interests to be margenalised in favour of Germany's), but ultimately Germany will be able to get more member countries on its side (and therefore more votes) than Poland could in case of a future German-Polish dispute, and this whole arguement is only making it easier to happen.

More over, you need to unite ASAP in order to resist Putin's evil empire :)

[lightfire]

More over, you need to unite ASAP in order to resist Putin's evil empire :)

Only to think of energetical freedom.

[Wodan]

I can't wait to see the Turkey inside EU - especially after 2017.
Germans will be the first to change their way of voting after this large country enters the union.

current turkish population:

71,158,647 (people (germany: 82.5 million)

turkish birth rate:

Total fertility rate:
1.89 children born/woman

With that birth rate and that population, I don´t think the EU has much to fear IF Turkey becomes member..

at the moment EU has 492.5 million citizens..

maybe some day we will have belarus, norway, switzerland, croatia in, or even russia...


81% of austrians are against it, 69% of germans, and many others are also against it

IF they get in it will be decades ahead from now..

so why are you so obsessed with turkey..

[SHAM]

A brief summary from the BBC


At-a-glance: EU treaty proposals
European Union leaders have reached agreement on proposals for a new treaty to govern the 27-member bloc. Here are some of the main points:

'REFORM TREATY' NOT 'CONSTITUTION'
The rejection of the draft constitution by France and the Netherlands was perceived in some EU member states as an expression of the citizens' fear of a European super-state.

To remove that fear, the new document to be drafted at an Inter-Governmental Conference (ICG) convening in July will be called a Reform Treaty - sitting alongside other treaties of the EU, but not replacing them.

Terminology such as "law" and "framework law" will be abandoned - the existing "regulations", "directives" and "decisions" will be retained.

And it will not mention any state-like symbols, such as the EU flag, the anthem or the motto "Strength in Diversity".


VOTING SYSTEM
The original proposal of the failed constitution for a "double majority" voting system will be incorporated into the new treaty.

It means decisions will need the support of 55% of member states representing 65% of the EU's population.

But, to placate Polish fears that the system penalises it to the advantage of large states such as Germany, a compromise was reached to delay the introduction of the new system until 2014, and then gradually phase it in over three years.

The scope of decisions to be taken under this system is extended to 40 new areas - mainly in matters related to the police and the judiciary. However, the UK has been allowed to opt out of criminal matters and police co-operation.

And the national veto will be maintained in the fields of foreign affairs, defence, fiscal matters, and social security and culture.


EU PRESIDENT
A president to be elected by EU leaders for a two-and-a-half-year term will replace the current system in which EU leaders rotate into the president's post every six months.


FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The constitution's envisaged post of "foreign minister" has been dropped in favour of a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

He or she will also become vice-president of the Commission.

The IGC will agree that the establishment of the post will not affect "the responsibilities of the member states, as they currently exist, for the formulation and conduct of their foreign policy or their national representation in third countries and international organisations".


EU COMMISSION
From 2014, the EU's executive arm, the Commission, will be reduced in size. There will no longer be a commissioner to represent every member country - but from two-thirds only.

Commissioners will be selected on a system of rotation to serve five-year terms.


LEGAL PERSON STATUS
The European Union will have the status of a legal person.

To assuage fears that it is developing into a super-state, the IGC has been tasked to agree on the following declaration: "The conference confirms that the fact that the European Union has a legal personality will not in any way authorise the Union to legislate or to act beyond the competences conferred upon it by the member states in the treaties."


CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
Britain has been allowed to opt out of a 50-article charter containing an exhaustive list of well-established rights - from freedom of speech and religion to the right to shelter, education and fair working conditions.

The UK was concerned at the charter's impact on business and its legal system.

Moreover, the charter will not become part of the treaty - it will just be referred to.


NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS
The period given to national parliaments to examine draft legislative texts and to give a reasoned opinion on subsidiarity will be extended from six to eight weeks.

National parliaments may demand, if a certain threshold is reached, that the European Commission re-examine a draft act they deem to be an encroachment on their national competences.


This was a major concern for the Netherlands.


SOLIDARITY
A reference has been included to EU solidarity in the event of an energy supply problem.


This came at the insistence of Lithuania and Poland, concerned at their own high dependence on Russian hydrocarbons.


ENLARGEMENT
At Netherlands' insistence, a reference to criteria for new EU members was added.

So part of the conditions for entry will be a commitment to promoting EU values and an obligation to notify the European Parliament and national parliaments of an application for accession to the EU.


REVISING TREATIES AND WITHDRAWAL FROM THE UNION

The Reform Treaty will have a provision that enshrines the right to revise treaties to increase - but also reduce - the competences conferred upon the EU.

And it also will include an article on voluntary withdrawal of a member state from the union

The presidency election could turn out to be quite interesting, it will be worse than the eurovision voting!
But it all remains proposals for now.

[Musashi]

why arent you responding me instead of insult me?
Are you asking me or other member?
About me... because I can discuss with somebody, who knows what he writes and has a basic knowledge on that, despite having different opinon than me.
Instead I've noticed you write what you know, but you don't know what you write.

[Sharp]

my answer about the polish presidents was all the most serious and " non-agressive" (you didn't seem to have noticed it ..).
but no i'm not waiting an answer from you, i dont like arrogant peoples.

i'm particulary waiting an answer from "polishkhalsa", wich tried, to defend Kaczynski positions about germany [...claiming that Poland has 28million fewer people than it should have as a result of the slaughter inflicted by Germany...]

[tsuri]

'REFORM TREATY' NOT 'CONSTITUTION'
The rejection of the draft constitution by France and the Netherlands was perceived in some EU member states as an expression of the citizens' fear of a European super-state.

Fun Fact: They actually changed the unfitting name because a treaty does not have to go through a referendum :p



To remove that fear, the new document to be drafted at an Inter-Governmental Conference (ICG) convening in July will be called a Reform Treaty - sitting alongside other treaties of the EU, but not replacing them.

Which is a large mistake. Why do you think it was so long in the first place? It was supposed to replace all the other treaties.



Terminology such as "law" and "framework law" will be abandoned - the existing "regulations", "directives" and "decisions" will be retained.
And it will not mention any state-like symbols, such as the EU flag, the anthem or the motto "Strength in Diversity".

Wishful thinking at work. The powers stay exactly the same, the critics just took down the symbolism. The flag, anthem and motto still remain official.



FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The constitution's envisaged post of "foreign minister" has been dropped in favour of a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Which is again wishful thinking. They only changed the name. Everything else remained the same.



CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
Britain has been allowed to opt out of a 50-article charter containing an exhaustive list of well-established rights - from freedom of speech and religion to the right to shelter, education and fair working conditions.

The UK was concerned at the charter's impact on business and its legal system.

Whatever did they do that for?



NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS
The period given to national parliaments to examine draft legislative texts and to give a reasoned opinion on subsidiarity will be extended from six to eight weeks.

National parliaments may demand, if a certain threshold is reached, that the European Commission re-examine a draft act they deem to be an encroachment on their national competences.
Which only shows a defect in the national governmental system really. If the parliaments cannot control their administrations and have to take the EU backdoor.. fine by me.


ENLARGEMENT
At Netherlands' insistence, a reference to criteria for new EU members was added.

So part of the conditions for entry will be a commitment to promoting EU values and an obligation to notify the European Parliament and national parliaments of an application for accession to the EU.

Which is bad because we can't just send countries away when we do not like them.

[Musashi]

but no i'm not waiting an answer from you, i dont like arrogant peoples.
I am not arrogant towards most people I argue with. You are an exception amongst very few ones on this forum.
Did not you notice I haven't been arrogant towards German members in this topic so far? Why? Because they have sensible arguments and don't write BS as you.

I've been shocked, that even Wodan unexpectedly stopped trolling as he used to do and wrote a sensible post here ;) I wish I could give him +rep for shaping up despite I don't like him ;)

BTW,
I also consider you arrogant p-)

[Sharp]

other the fact that i said poland were a small country (compared to france, wich isn't untrue , it's just about some mathematics , but here was not my point, i can easily understand you don't like to listen it), i don't really see where i said BS.

don't worry i love you too dear european cousin.

[Kitsune]

[...claiming that Poland has 28million fewer people than it should have as a result of the slaughter inflicted by Germany...]

As absurd the argument is, I actually can't quite find that it is even correct what Jaroslaw (the evil twin) said here. Ok, Poland lost nearly a quarter of its population during WWII. And today, Poland has 38 million inhabitants...this should be then three quarters of the population of the virtual high and mighty Poland of which Jaroslaw dreams. But when I do the math, I only arrive at 50.7 million inhabitants for this alternate reality, not 66 million.
And as said: this assumes that all the minorities which Poland contained back then would have stayed: the Jews, the Germans, the Lithuanians, the Ukrainians. What is more: even in that other reality Polands relation to Germany might not be very different to our world. Because, no matter how the worldwar came to be, Germany itself lost around 8 million people from 1939 to 1948. This would not have happened without WWII. Plus, a few years before WWII Germany was united with Austria, this was undone again by the victors. So today, in this other virtual reality where WWII never happened, the assumed larger virtual Poland would most likely face an virtual Greater Germany of 100 to 110 million people - in other words the relation would be similiar to today.

[PolishKhalsa]

VOTING SYSTEM
The original proposal of the failed constitution for a "double majority" voting system will be incorporated into the new treaty.

It means decisions will need the support of 55% of member states representing 65% of the EU's population.

But, to placate Polish fears that the system penalises it to the advantage of large states such as Germany, a compromise was reached to delay the introduction of the new system until 2014, and then gradually phase it in over three years.

The scope of decisions to be taken under this system is extended to 40 new areas - mainly in matters related to the police and the judiciary. However, the UK has been allowed to opt out of criminal matters and police co-operation.

And the national veto will be maintained in the fields of foreign affairs, defence, fiscal matters, and social security and culture.



Anybody know how the 'Ioannina blocking clause' has changed?

[Musashi]

As absurd the argument is, I actually can't quite find that it is even correct what Jaroslaw (the evil twin) said here.
He's evil. We agree at least here.


Ok, Poland lost nearly a quarter of its population during WWII. And today, Poland has 38 million inhabitants...this should be then three quarters of the population of the virtual high and mighty Poland of which Jaroslaw dreams. But when I do the math, I only arrive at 50.7 million inhabitants for this alternate reality, not 66 million.
And your math is based on what?
Poland's population in 1938 was 35 million. We suffered 6+ million casualties in 1939 because of German and also Soviet (as you kindly reminded) invasion. But you should know 90-95% of them were killed by Germans and out of 6 million casualties just 320,000 were soldiers.
The other matter you probably don't know is, Poland's population was just 22 million in 1945. That's because apart from the killed ones many people, who were transported to Germany or the USSR did not return to Poland (example: 2 my grandpa's sisters moved to Canada being forced workers in Germany). Besides many people stayed outside Poland when borders changed in 1945 and the other ones were not allowed to return to Poland (anti-commies). None of these events would have taken place without WWII.
So as we started with 22 million people in 1945 and had 38.5 million in 1993 (now we have about 38.4 million because of negative birth rate) is the number 66 million so improbable as our population nearly doubled in 50 years? Notice the number 66 is not twice bigger than 38 (the population in 1938), either. Let's remind you a few million people emigrated from Poland in 1945-89 (expelled by commies or Polish-German families encouraged by German governents to move to Germany). Considering them our population has EASILY doubled since 1945. I think our fugly twins gave a really correct number as the number was not rounded up and considered the people, who left Poland wilfully during the communism era.

Because, no matter how the worldwar came to be, Germany itself lost around 8 million people from 1939 to 1948. This would not have happened without WWII.
I told you you can blame just yourselves you lost these people and the territory, while we cannot blame ourselves we lost our ones.

Plus, a few years before WWII Germany was united with Austria, this was undone again by the victors.
Propose Austrians to join Germany. It's your internal problem. Do you suppose they would agree for that?
BTW
As you are so precise, Germany "united" with Czechia and the western part of Poland, either ;)


So today, in this other virtual reality where WWII never happened, the assumed larger virtual Poland would most likely face an virtual Greater Germany of 100 to 110 million people - in other words the relation would be similiar to today.
As above.

[Musashi]

other the fact that i said poland were a small country (compared to france, wich isn't untrue , it's just about some mathematics , but here was not my point, i can easily understand you don't like to listen it), i don't really see where i said BS.
Having seen your phrase "SO SMALL country" somebody living on other continent could think Poland has an area of Luxemburg or Monaco, while it's a medium size country, with the area of 312,685 square kilometres. It means it is the sixth-largest EU country if my brain serves me well. The position no. 6 out of 27 is not bad.
Moreover by writing "SO SMALL country" you must have claimed such countries like Italy or the UK (apparently smaller than Poland) should not make problems because they are soooo small (for you of course). What our British and Italian members think about it? p-)


don't worry i love you too dear european cousin.
I must disappoint you, but I have conventional ****** preferences and feel strange reading your comment p-)
On another side I wish France all the best, because I have a family in Merlebach, near Metz ;)

[Kitsune]

@Musashi:

My math is simply based on the assumption that Poland lost a quarter of its popualation. (According to the British telegraph, Poland lost only 18.51%, that would be less than a fifth, but never mind that for now. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/21/neu321.xml )
So, when Poland lost one quarter of its population back in WWII, that left three quarters, right? That would mean that the Poland of today would have also three quarters of this virtual, larger population it would have without WWII. Which means we have to mulitply todays population of 38 million with 1 1/3. Result: 50.67 million Poles. Check: 0.75 times 50.67 million gives 38 million. Bingo. But still a far cry from 66 million.
Now of course, if the telegraph should be right, matters would be even worse - in that case Poland would have only 46.63 million (calculation as above).





I told you you can blame just yourselves you lost these people and the territory, while we cannot blame ourselves we lost our ones. And I tell you again that I don't follow your delusion of 100% German guilt versus 100% Polish innocence. And if you don't like it you can go and attempt procreation with yourself. I refuse to continue discussing the guilt question any further with you.
My argument had nothing to do with it. Either WWII has happened or it has not. If it hadn't, Poland would not have lost a quarter of its inhabitants. But the unfortunate side-effect would have been that Germany would also not have lost millions of Germans. And would accordingly have more people today than it has in our world. What you and your ruling twins are suggesting is a world with a more popoulous Poland of a reality where WWII has never happened while at the same time Germany is assumed to be unchanged from our reality where WWII has happened. And that makes no sense whatsoever - you can't have it all.

[Musashi]

@Musashi:

My math is simply based on the assumption that Poland lost a quarter of its popualation. (According to the British telegraph, Poland lost only 18.51%, that would be less than a fifth, but never mind that for now. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/21/neu321.xml )
What can I say about this article? It's a pure BS, as the journalists claim:

Poland's five million war dead, including three million Jews, represented 18.51 per cent of its population at the time – a higher proportion than the Soviet Union lost. Its 24 million dead represented 13.4 per cent of its population.
These idiots claim we lost 5 million, while we lost 6+. It's a proof of their "professionalism" and "knowledge".

So, when Poland lost one quarter of its population back in WWII, that left three quarters, right? That would mean that the Poland of today would have also three quarters of this virtual, larger population it would have without WWII.
No, because as I stated we had just 22 million people in 1945, not 29 million (35 - 6) or even 30 million (35 - 5) as the retarded journalist claim. Despite the missing millions (difference between 29 million - the people who survived the war and 22 million - the people who were present in Poland at that time) they still calculated the population as if we had just the killed. As I stated, the ones who left Poland would have stayed there if the WWII had not happened.

[*^*]

WW2 happened - 50 - fifty YEARS AGO.

This is too funny :):cantbeli:

[Venom PL]

Come on guys this discussion is pointless like other “what if” discussions.
Let’s just close this chapter and move on.

[johanness]

What can I say about this article? It's a pure BS, as the journalists claim:

These idiots claim we lost 5 million, while we lost 6+. It's a proof of their "professionalism" and "knowledge".

5 millions , of which 3 millions were jew citizans ( I made a split of them , 'cause it seems you want to say poland suffers the same as the whole european jews )

the 1 more million you mentioned more maybe are the german and jewish citizans of Poland killed by polands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

[Musashi]

the 1 more million you mentioned more maybe are the german and jewish citizans of Poland killed by polands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Do you claim we killed 1,000,000 Germans and particularly Jews? :roll:
No, this million are the Poles, Belorussians and Ukrainians, who inhabited eastern Polish territories before WWII and are sometimes classified as Soviet losses.
See the point no. 45 in your link.

[johanness]

Do you claim we killed 1,000,000 Germans and particularly Jews? :roll:
No, this million are the Poles, Belorussians and Ukrainians, who inhabited eastern Polish territories before WWII and are sometimes classified as Soviet losses.
See the point no. 45 in your link.

Though estimates of the dead range widely, from 40 thousand to as many as a million Germans perished during flight and expulsion from Poland in 1944-45.[19] Of around 12.4 million Germans residing within the lands of post-war Poland in 1944, 3.6 million were expelled, one million were certified as Poles, 300,000 remained in Poland as a German minority, and up to 1.1 million are unaccounted for and presumed to be dead. [20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II

[Vandervahn]

Basically, I think we can agree that the comments of the polish president were uncalled for, and especially in the context they were made simply outrageous and completely off the mark. Still, they demonstrate a seemingly prevalent opinion within Poland that is very specific among the EU member states:

The extreme civilian advance the EU represents, especially given Europes belligerent past, is not of main importance to Poland. The membership and the subsequent benefits are seen as a deserved reward for having been bullied around for centuries. Poles seem to see themselves entitled to a dominant EU position to make up for injustice that has happened in the past. Symptomatic for this is the extreme opposition that Poland has shown against making contributions that would perceivedly reduce influence on other members - specifically Germany. Other states like the UK, but also the French, have also had a long-running list of blockade politics - but their aim is very simple: to maximize their economic profits. Still, most of the EU members and ALL of the big ones have, at various moments in the EU development, sticked back their national interests more than once for a "greater good".

Only poland manages to oppose about any decision that would require some compromise from them - even as in this case, against EVERY other member. For Poland the "EU" is basically a leverage with which to exact influence upon Germany, and underlying fear of being in turn influenced by Germany in everywhich way is apparent in about every political discussion so far. The main problem for the polish officials with the new EU voting system is not that less-than-one-point advantage for them following the square root system, but rather the "dominance" it would give Germany. Poland takes the whole Germany-at-the-head VERY personal - an opinion that is simply unacceptable any longer, and that poisons about any intra-EU debate.

This disparity in the wishes of EU members that want the EU to advance from the past, and those that see the EU still through war-tinted glasses, will not lead anywhere in the long run. The EU, while admittedly originating as a mutually assured control mechanism of former arch enemies, was built specifically to overcome these long-running sentiments. And the only solution to go on with european integration is that the Germany-objectors, which encompass mainly Poland but also others, get that stupid finger-pointing crap out of their heads and start to accept that their place within the EU will likely never be that of the dominating members. And especially, EVERY member has to accept that the EU exists to a large part because of and through Germany, Germanys economy and subsequently Germanys power.

My opinion is formed on Polish political behaviour on the EU level and polish media opinions in the recent years as well as analyses I have read, some of them also from polish experts. And yes, I AM angry that the sins of previous generations are again abused as a scapegoat for irresponsible political maneuvering.

[zulu261]

Iron Angie will do it without Poland, nothing can stop her p-)

[Quack of Doom]

Fun Fact: They actually changed the unfitting name because a treaty does not have to go through a referendum :p
Don't be too sure of that, some major opposition partys in the Netherlands want a referendum for this treaty.

And for the constitution a referendum wasn't necessary, some country's choose to have a referendum wich resulted in to big NO's from the Netherlands and France. Only becouse people didn't know what they had to vote for.

[perdurabo]

Iron Angie will do it without Poland, nothing can stop her p-)
your iron angie just agreed for niece till 2017, 6 more votes and special blocking priviledge for Poland, seems like iron angie met potatoes and kissed their asses p-)

[Switek]

Iron Angie will do it without Poland, nothing can stop her p-)

Done

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/339/eumapur1.gif

:)

[zulu261]

your iron angie just agreed for niece till 2017, 6 more votes and special blocking priviledge for Poland, seems like iron angie met potatoes and kissed their asses p-)

Poland prevented getting butt****ed with accepting the compromiss. Compared to Poland, the big nations want to get the EU going, so the offer was given.

But yeah, the cash will roll anyway. Poland gave a nice "Thank You" for the money they got from us.

[Lov3ll]

Done

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/339/eumapur1.gif

:)

I was staring at that picture for 5 minutes trying to figure out what was different :cantbeli: but I got there in the end! poor Poland :p

[Dinivan]

The 8 opinions of poles shown in BBC news:


Jacek Chwalek, 54, Warsaw

Poles have been giving their reaction to the EU summit result.

Management consultant Mr Chwalek says: "It's too early to judge the success or not. This agreement is just a preparation for the intergovernmental conference.

"It's definitely worth articulating your point of view and it's worth fighting for what you believe in."


Pawel Grzeskowiak, 34, Warsaw

Mr Grzeskowiak, 34, a lawyer, says: "I think in the end it was a success because the president and the prime minister didn't block the whole summit and we got some concessions.

"We didn't get 100% of what we wanted, but at least we maintained the Nice voting system for the next ten years. We'll see what happens in 2017."


Anna Lech, 23, Siedlce

Student Ms Lech says: "I think that it was a success for Poland. We showed that we can reach a compromise and that we can act to benefit the whole of the EU.

"I think that what we have obtained is good for us, although by the year 2017 probably people will think differently regarding whether it was a good or bad move."


Jerzy Malinowski, 55, Gliwica

Mr Malinowski, a photographer, says: "It was a success because we have obtained a compromise thanks, to a great extent, to Tony Blair.

"I think that the way we approached the discussions was like a battle rather than to reach an agreement.

"But, because it did end in agreement, then it's a success. Poland got what it wanted."


Marcin Motel, 39, Warsaw

Says Mr Motel, a businessman: "It was a success, firstly because the EU members have to take into account that they can't ignore such a big country like Poland, and secondly, a compromise was reached and it is beneficial, not only to Poland but also to the other EU members.

"The fact that we have been able to reach a compromise is a success."


Bogumila Ratajczak, 27, Leszno

Ms Ratajczak, a translator, says: "No I don't think it was a success for us. I disagree with the way our prime minister and president dealt with the problem.

"Those words that they used, 'square root or death', were not diplomatic. A compromise is always good because we can't act as if we are alone in Europe."


Iwona Stefanska, 50, Warsaw

"Of course it was a success, because we have to fight for our interests until the end," says Ms Stefanska, an artist.

"For me, it's a success that Poland is standing up for itself. It's not exactly what we wanted but we should congratulate the government that they prepared so well for this summit. They were unbreakable."


Leszek Zdebik, 56, Rzeszow

Says Mr Zdebik, a businessman: "I think it was a success. The voting system is not the most important thing, it's the fact we reached an agreement despite Poland fighting for a different system.

"In Poland, the governing elite doesn't fully understand what the EU is about when it comes to taking decisions."

------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Possibility 1: Poles have been brainwashed by the government and now they think they have the right to demand whatever they want from the European Union.
Possibility 2: It was too early for Poland to join the European Union. They do not feel European and they just believe the Union is a cow they can milk to get more money, not caring about the consequences for the advancement of this project. Brits may have similar beliefs but at least they can argue they joined the EEC, not the EU.

In any case, I would like them not to have joined. I regret myself for having supported the enlargement.

[Lov3ll]

Brits may have similar beliefs but at least they can argue they joined the EEC, not the EU.

In any case, I would like them not to have joined. I regret myself for having supported the enlargement.

We or at least I believe that the EU should stop trying to merge Europe into one country with one constitution and one person speaking for the whole of Europe on foreign affairs and forcing the other countries to follow their rules and be more about economic and military partnership. p-)

[Switek]

The 8 opinions of poles shown in BBC news:

....

Possibility 1: Poles have been brainwashed by the government and now they think they have the right to demand whatever they want from the European Union.
Possibility 2: It was too early for Poland to join the European Union. They do not feel European and they just believe the Union is a cow they can milk to get more money, not caring about the consequences for the advancement of this project. Brits may have similar beliefs but at least they can argue they joined the EEC, not the EU.

In any case, I would like them not to have joined. I regret myself for having supported the enlargement.

Thank you mate for your deep insight! rofl. Eventually I will find out that we Poles just have gone from trees...

A short qiuz:

Please find a Pole on this pic and make an reeason why you pinted the first from the right?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Human_evolution_scheme.png/200px-Human_evolution_scheme.png

rofl

[RSone]

Poland wanting more voting rights? Ok sure, but don't base it on BS arguments like: OMG TEH GERMANZ KIKED OUR BUTTZ IN WW2, you weren't the only ones. That's like us(Holland) being pissed at france because they helped the Belgians splitting off the Kingdom back in 1830!
You contribution right now to the union is next to nothing, while we are the largest net contributor(i think something in the area of 4 billion each year) and a lot of the crap the rest of the union import, goes to our country. Yet we have jack**** in political power in the Union. People find it strange we voted against the constitution? Just look at what the Union has done for us, and what we do for the Union.
We don't even need the Union, we could still trade with the Germans and the Brits, and all our trading partners. Yet we don't quit. And then the brothers madness want more power for poland? Come back when you have done a bit more for the Union.

[lastdingo]

Those twins need to be removed from office asap, they damage Polands' standing and relationships too much. I believ they have slight paranoia, reports about their earlier behaviour indicate that.


But the treaty itself is not a good thing, basically I hate to see that our governments draw us into a kind of non-democracy, with mostly foreign rule.
Almost nobody here believes that people from let#s say Poland, Greece or Portugal should have a sying in our domestic policy, yet that's exactly what the EU stands for.
The freedom to travel among the nations was great, the dropping of the tariffs as well and the common market is probably also a good thing. The greatest thing the EU gave us is that almost noone in the EU is thinking about the possibility of war amongst us.

But these good things are used as justifications for thousands other regulations that the EU brought to us and I reall don't see any need for those other facets of the EU.
Especially the lack of democracy is horrible. A voter in Luxembourg is something like six times as relevantas a voter in Germany if it's about EU policy. Well, inf act both are utterly irrelevant becaus our governments do what they want anyway - we can only stop them after several years of bull**** production. That's when we are allowed to give the others their turn of bull**** production.

[Switek]

Those twins need to be removed from office asap, they damage Polands' standing and relationships too much. I believ they have slight paranoia, reports about their earlier behaviour indicate that.

True. I share you hopes, as well.


Poland wanting more voting rights? Ok sure, but don't base it on BS arguments like: OMG TEH GERMANZ KIKED OUR BUTTZ IN WW2, you weren't the only ones. That's like us(Holland) being pissed at france because they helped the Belgians splitting off the Kingdom back in 1830!
You contribution right now to the union is next to nothing, while we are the largest net contributor(i think something in the area of 4 billion each year) and a lot of the crap the rest of the union import, goes to our country. Yet we have jack**** in political power in the Union. People find it strange we voted against the constitution? Just look at what the Union has done for us, and what we do for the Union.
We don't even need the Union, we could still trade with the Germans and the Brits, and all our trading partners. Yet we don't quit. And then the brothers madness want more power for poland? Come back when you have done a bit more for the Union.

Of course, there is no single company from other 26 EU countries in my country which participate in consumption/investment of those donations.

For God's sake. Stop judging all Poles by our ruling "evil twins"! This government will leave its office in two years. The good thing is there is impossible to get worse than tis one :|.

[Mamont]

A short qiuz:
Please find a Pole on this pic and make an reeason why you pinted the first from the right?
rofl
rofl You mean this?
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8328/poleevolutionfz5.gif

[Herrmannek]

For God's sake. Stop judging all Poles by our ruling "evil twins"! This government will leave its office in two years. The good thing is there is impossible to get worse than tis one :|.
Stop dreaming :
First: they or their people will be in office after elections for sure.
Second: there is much more worse options... And virtually no better one...

[perdurabo]

deleted i was pissed off

[Switek]

Stop dreaming :
First: they or their people will be in office after elections for sure.
Second: there is much more worse options... And virtually no better one...

You dream can be true if another few milions of young Poles will join to one milion who already have left Poland.

Very possible option.

[Dinivan]

But these good things are used as justifications for thousands other regulations that the EU brought to us and I reall don't see any need for those other facets of the EU.
All those regulations are needed. In the 80's the single market did not exist because every state had made regulations to stop non-national industries (for example each state defined a different composition of fire-resistant paints, so if a firm wanted to export its paint from one state to the other it would have had to change the whole productive chain; another example, when the french forced all cars to wear yellow lights instead of white, etc), so states made a "mea culpa" and asked Cockfield to write a report on what could be done. He said 242 were needed, and so the Single European Act was signed.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Human_evolution_scheme.png/200px-Human_evolution_scheme.png
I have to identify the poles in there? what a hard question... the fifth starting from the left? oh wait, maybe they're more like the fourth... :D j/k hehe

[Herrmannek]

You dream can be true if another few milions of young Poles will join to one milion who already have left Poland.

Very possible option.

PiS have strong support still the same as its original election support. And its more than 2 years after elections... Its unknown precedence here. From any party after 1989 they are closest to be reelected into office for second term... Anyway we will see...

[Wenegade]

For God's sake. Stop judging all Poles by our ruling "evil twins"! This government will leave its office in two years. The good thing is there is impossible to get worse than tis one :|.

I totally agree with you on this point, it is nearly the same as with Berlusconi in Italy and Haider in Austria. But as a hundred other people already said, the way your government asked for their interests are absolutely unacceptable.

I personally see the EU as a big nation where everyone should be EQUAL and have the same rights. Therefore i support the proposed voting system, countries with more people have to get more power. Especially Austrians complain about having not enough power, but what do you want to do.. letting Austria (or Poland) rule about the others??? Then it would be the case like

A voter in Luxembourg is something like six times as relevantas a voter in Germany if it's about EU policy. said.

[PolishKhalsa]

I totally agree with you on this point, it is nearly the same as with Berlusconi in Italy and Haider in Austria. But as a hundred other people already said, the way your government asked for their interests are absolutely unacceptable.

I personally see the EU as a big nation where everyone should be EQUAL and have the same rights. Therefore i support the proposed voting system, countries with more people have to get more power. Especially Austrians complain about having not enough power, but what do you want to do.. letting Austria (or Poland) rule about the others??? Then it would be the case like
said.

We discussed the voting system so many times and most agreed that double majority gives germany unproportional power and the square root system is most balanced. So if you want everybody to be EQUAL the constitution just went the opposite way.

[PolishKhalsa]

Originally Posted by lastdingo
A voter in Luxembourg is something like six times as relevantas a voter in Germany if it's about EU policy.

Absolutely NOT true. A voter in Luxembourg is IRRELEVANT in comparison to a voter in Germany which makes the voter in Germany overrepresented.

[Switek]

... But as a hundred other people already said, the way your government asked for their interests are absolutely unacceptable.

Absolutely agree. Never said opposite. The problem of Poles is that they play the same way (pure Machiavellism) in Poland what is more than annoying.

Not all Poles voted for twins (including myself).

[tsuri]

We discussed the voting system so many times and most agreed that double majority gives germany unproportional power and the square root system is most balanced. So if you want everybody to be EQUAL the constitution just went the opposite way.

How does a voting system that requires 15 States with 65% of the Population give Germany unproportional power?



Absolutely NOT true. A voter in Luxembourd is IRRELEVANT in comparison to a voter in Germany which makes the voter in Germany overrepresented.

What are you smoking? Luxembourg has less voters, therefore the individual voter is overrepresented. There are more Germans and thus the individual German has less importance than the individual Luxembourger.

[lastdingo]

Absolutely NOT true. A voter in Luxembourg is IRRELEVANT in comparison to a voter in Germany which makes the voter in Germany overrepresented.

That's plain wrong.

Democracy is only achieved if every voter's vote is as much worth as any other voter's vote (unless he's already representing).

The voting power of Luxemburg is about six times as high per capita as in Germany.
Every single vote (no matter if in germany or Luxembourg) is irrelevant, but in the sum the votes are relevant - and then the small countries' voters are per soul more worth than the large countries' voters.


There's also no balance at all in square root. It's neither a democratic system nor does it balance states. It's something in the middle, the worst of two worlds.
Advocating square root systems does also expose which people did neither understand democracy nor unity. The EU attempts to march towards a common European people - but those who advocate nonsense like square root voting systems advocate the old nation states egoisms.

Imagine the EU as a unified country. All citizens are the same. Just in some regions, the citizens have votes with two or three times the weight of other region's votes. That's silly. It's enither democracy nor a way how to realize the European dream.



We discussed the voting system so many times and most agreed that double majority gives germany unproportional power and the square root system is most balanced. So if you want everybody to be EQUAL the constitution just went the opposite way.

That's a flat-out lie. Every voter the same weight is not unproportional, but PROPORTIONAL. All else is a lie.
If you cannot stand being a minority in the EU (which by the way the Germans are, too) - then leave it. Quickly. We won't miss Poland. We never missed Poland. Nobody needs that country. Come back if there's a true majority of European-minded poles. (I'd have written that without the present context as well - it was my opinion ever since the EU enlargement was discussed for the first time).

________________

Ah, by the way. I was strongly remembered of why so many people opposed the EU enlargements, especially concerning Poland and other Eastern European countries. It was a very serious mistake, I guess it was only done for dreams of more and even more power for Europe and as a strategy to exploit Russia's weaknes and make Russia's geostrategic situation too weak for a rise back to power.
Well, it certainly had nothing to do with domestic benefits.

[PolishKhalsa]

How does a voting system that requires 15 States with 65% of the Population give Germany unproportional power?

What are you smoking? Luxembourg has less voters, therefore the individual voter is overrepresented. There are more Germans and thus the individual German has less importance than the individual Luxembourger.

Not smoking anything I wish I was :). Here is an exerpt from an article that explains this:
...
The original, six-member Community is a good example of this counter-intuitive idea. Germany, France and Italy each had four votes in the council of ministers, the Netherlands and Belgium had two and Luxembourg one vote. Germany then had more than 100 times the population of Luxembourg, yet only four times the number of votes.

Intuition might suggest that tiny Luxembourg was surely over-represented. In truth, the opposite was the case. The threshold for a majority was set at 12 votes. Since every member except Luxembourg had an even number of votes, Luxembourg was never in a position to cast a make-or-break vote. Despite being numerically over-represented, Luxembourg in effect had zero voting power.
...

The situation with double majority is very similar. Read the full article if you want more info
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/422078ce-1d38-11dc-9b58-000b5df10621.html

[lastdingo]

Is it common practice in Poland to dig out decades old stuff to support present discussions?
"The original, six-member Community..." is almost as much a thing of the past than WW2. Nobody cares about that anymore.
Is Poland really THAT backward?

And what you don't seem to understand is democracy. It requires democrats. How can people be convinced of the democracy and therefore be democrats/support the democracy if there's no even voting power? Nobody cares about what effects may take place later on in the system. The roots themselves are rotten.


BTW, your link is nonsense. Look at it.

[PolishKhalsa]

Is it common practice in Poland to dig out decades old stuff to support present discussions?
"The original, six-member Community..." is almost as much a thing of the past than WW2. Nobody cares about that anymore.
Is Poland really THAT backward?

And what you don't seem to understand is democracy. It requires democrats. How can people be convinced of the democracy and therefore be democrats/support the democracy if there's no even voting power? Nobody cares about what effects may take place later on in the system. The roots themselves are rotten.


BTW, your link is nonsense. Look at it.

Last time I checked Germeny had a decent math curriculum I would go back to school if I were you.

[PolishKhalsa]

BTW, your link is nonsense. Look at it.

Here is the article:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/422078ce-1d38-11dc-9b58-000b5df10621.html
[QUOTE]
Multiple answers to Europe's maths problem
By Wolfgang Munchau

Published: June 18 2007 03:00 | Last updated: June 18 2007 03:00

What is a fair voting system for the European Union? It looks as though, thanks to Poland, European leaders will be forced to debate this difficult question at their summit this week.

Since the simplified draft treaty is substantively identical to the old and rejected constitution - minus some cosmetics - the voting system proposed is going to be the same one: passage of legislation requires a coalition of countries representing at least 55 per cent of the member states and 65 per cent of the population. The Poles have threatened a veto unless the second of those two numbers is based on the square root of the population size - to reduce Germany's influence. It sounds arbitrary, but the Poles have a point. Mathematics is on the side of Poland.

To an uninitiated observer, this does not appear immediately obvious. Does it not seem fair that the voting power of a country in an international organisation should be proportional to its population size? The answer is no. In fact, it is totally unfair. The reason is that effective voting power in multi-nation settings such as the EU depends not on voting size but on the ability to form winning coalitions. Large countries are better placed than their relative population size would suggest.

The original, six-member Community is a good example of this counter-intuitive idea. Germany, France and Italy each had four votes in the council of ministers, the Netherlands and Belgium had two and Luxembourg one vote. Germany then had more than 100 times the population of Luxembourg, yet only four times the number of votes.

Intuition might suggest that tiny Luxembourg was surely over-represented. In truth, the opposite was the case. The threshold for a majority was set at 12 votes. Since every member except Luxembourg had an even number of votes, Luxembourg was never in a position to cast a make-or-break vote. Despite being numerically over-represented, Luxembourg in effect had zero voting power. That would have been different if, for example, an odd number had been chosen as the threshold.

So how do you measure effective voting power? Lionel Penrose, the British mathematician and psychiatrist who developed a theory of voting power in the 1940s, concluded that votes in international organisations should be based on the square root of the population. This is where the Poles got their idea. In the 1960s, John Banzhaf, a US attorney, established an index to measure a country's voting power. There are two versions of the Banzhaf index. The absolute Banzhaf index measures the ability of a country to cast the decisive vote in a winning coalition as a proportion of all coalitions in which that country takes part. In the case of the pre-1973 EU, the absolute Banzhaf index for Luxembourg was precisely zero. For Germany it was 24 per cent. Germany, not Luxembourg, was over-represented.

What about the EU today? With 27 members, there are a total of 133m possible coalitions. The economists Richard Baldwin and Mika Widgrén have calculated the Banzhaf indices for each member state, both under the current regime, established by the treaty of Nice and in force since 2004, and the constitution*. The results clearly support the Polish case. Germany's absolute Banzhaf index shoots up from about 5 per cent to more than 15 per cent (it would have gone up to 30 per cent under the original draft). The trouble is that everyone's absolute Banzhaf index also goes up, including Poland's. How could that be?

The reason is that the constitution dramatically improves the probability of legislation being passed. Mathematically, the passage probability can be defined as the ratio of "winning" coalitions to all coalitions. In the 15-member EU, this ratio was 8 per cent (this means that 8 per cent of all possible coalitions produce a Yes vote). Under the Nice rules it has fallen to 3 per cent and will approach zero as the EU expands further. This is why the present voting system needs to be fixed.

The constitutional treaty raises this ratio to 13 per cent. But as the overall passage probability rises, so does a country's ability to cast a pivotal vote. This explains why the absolute Banzhaf index rises for everybody, including Poland. The Polish problem is that Germany's influence would be enormous in relative terms.

Is Poland's square root solution the only alternative? Of course not. EU leaders could, for example, raise the threshold for population size and number of countries from their 55 and 65 per cent respectively or introduce some complicated new formula - perhaps with a square root in it. There is a quite a bit a leeway left without creating Nice-style gridlock. Professors Baldwin and Widgrén propose another simple and effective solution: drop the voting rules of

the constitution and just repair the Nice rules by reducing some of the high thresholds.

The Poles have put their finger on an important issue, though their own answer is not as compelling as they think. If and when EU leaders set out to amend the rules, they should heed the lessons of the past. Any new system needs to fulfil two parallel goals: it needs to make the voting system more effective and it needs to be fair. The Nice system is fair and ineffective. The constitution is effective but unfair.

If they get this wrong again, they will be back at the negotiating table not too long from now. But if they get it right, they will have managed to create the one and only substantive change from the original treaty.

*www.cepr.org/pubs/PolicyInsights/

PolicyInsight3.pdf

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
[QUOTE/]

[Herrmannek]

BS as always. EU at least for now and I hope for long is union of countries not people.. And I want MY INDEPENDENT COUNTRY to be represented in parliament with proper force, negative and positive so nothing we don't like could be pushed our throats and something we want could be passed...

This Usually means that a smaller countries get stronger voice than it would be if we would care only about population size... Whats wrong in current GERMANO-FRANCO push is that EU would still not be democratic in sense of the population amount you talk about(no one really wants that), but only 3 or 4 biggest countries in the EU could work as independent countries and other even if in broad coalition could do **** about it... And fact is EU have a taste on big part of Polish independence already(moral issues, external matters and so on), it may be not a problem for map-fly-****-sized countries but for fifth or 6th country in EU its a big and serious problem... No Passaran old man in gray would say :) As for esthetic's of the polish diplomation I don't car if it work, its not that we kill innocent children. Do we?...

[Switek]

Is it common practice in Poland to dig out decades old stuff to support present discussions?
"The original, six-member Community..." is almost as much a thing of the past than WW2. Nobody cares about that anymore.
Is Poland really THAT backward?

And what you don't seem to understand is democracy. It requires democrats. How can people be convinced of the democracy and therefore be democrats/support the democracy if there's no even voting power? Nobody cares about what effects may take place later on in the system. The roots themselves are rotten.


BTW, your link is nonsense. Look at it.

Stop blaming my country and all Poles! :bash:

[Kojo]

They should just kick Poland out since obviously they aren't happy with the funding and the opportunities to work in the EU. They obviously made a mistake joining the EU and as the EU we should help them to set it straight. :)

Seriously I've never saw such a weak argument, it's good to be a critic of the EU superstate building, but coming with stuff like this just makes Poland look like a whiney spoiled kid. They benefit from the EU a great deal and all they have been doing till now is demand more and make politics harder for the rest, great attitude for such a new member.

[Switek]

They should just kick Poland out since obviously they aren't happy with the funding and the opportunities to work in the EU. They obviously made a mistake joining the EU and as the EU we should help them to set it straight. :)

When God made Poles, he must have been drunk. It's obvious failrue!

rofl

[Kojo]

Stop blaming my country and all Poles! :bash:


Well these guys kinda are representing the majority of the Poles, vote someone else next time :)

[lastdingo]

Last time I checked Germeny had a decent math curriculum I would go back to school if I were you.

Indeed, high art of discussion. Absolutely without context or base, but who cares? Spill out the ****, it will stick in someone#s mind.

Well, my math is was good enough for a master in economics, but who cares? After all, there's no relation at all between what you quoted and what you replied...

So I'll join the game.
How about you going back in time and learn basics of European culture and philosophy?

....

(Guess now he's not very amused.)







B2topic fo the serious guys over here:

The Poles have a simple problem. It's that you need to sacrifice a lot if you want to participate in present day's EU and what's planned as future EU. They are certainly right in that it's not (yet) a good idea to give up so much. The other nations shouldn't either. The style how their representatives actually behaved was completeley unacceptable though. They didn#t ask for not so much sacrifices, but they asked for over-proportional power over others. There's a huge difference.

In my opinion, the EU is threatened by violent disintegration in about 20 years if we continue like that. There could be a civil war in Europe simply because further integration will be coonsidered by creeping foreign rule not only in small countries, but also in the large ones sometime.
Only compromises can be achived, and these compromises are unlikely to be very good. It may be that the EU will just deteriorate.

It's too bad, sine freedom to travel, no tariffs, common market and peace among the member nations were indeed magnificient achievements - they may be ruined by over-reaching aims of our political elites.

[perdurabo]

They should just kick Poland out since obviously they aren't happy with the funding and the opportunities to work in the EU. They obviously made a mistake joining the EU and as the EU we should help them to set it straight. :)

Seriously I've never saw such a weak argument, it's good to be a critic of the EU superstate building, but coming with stuff like this just makes Poland look like a whiney spoiled kid. They benefit from the EU a great deal and all they have been doing till now is demand more and make politics harder for the rest, great attitude for such a new member.
they should kick france out cause they arent happy with free market
they should kick out UK cause they aren't happy with anything apart from free amrket.
Get life kiddo its politics noone is going to kick anyone because of some issues:bash:

[PolishKhalsa]

Indeed, high art of discussion. Absolutely without context or base, but who cares? Spill out the ****, it will stick in someone#s mind.

.

Look who is changing the topic. The question was if Luxembourgs voters are overrepresented. I have given you someone elses proof that Luxembourgs voters have in fact ZERO (or close to zero) voting power in the double majority sytem. If you do not understand it I am giving you friendly advice to go back to school.

PS. maybe I was wrong about German math curriculum. Sorry.

[tooms]

This Usually means that a smaller countries get stronger voice than it would be if we would care only about population size... Whats wrong in current GERMANO-FRANCO push is that EU would still not be democratic in sense of the population amount you talk about(no one really wants that), but only 3 or 4 biggest countries in the EU could work as independent countries and other even if in broad coalition could do **** about it...


Agreed but 27 votes for Poland compared to 29 votes for Germany is disproportionate. France and UK should have less votes than Germany too. That's disrespectful because that means a German counts less than anybody in Europe.

[PolishKhalsa]

The Poles have a simple problem.......they asked for over-proportional power over others. .

Repeating the same lie over and over again does NOT make it the truth.

[lastdingo]

Look who is changing the topic. The question was if Luxembourgs voters are overrepresented. I have given you someone elses proof that Luxembourgs voters have in fact ZERO (or close to zero) voting power in the double majority sytem. If you do not understand it I am giving you friendly advice to go back to school.

PS. maybe I was wrong about German math curriculum. Sorry.

No, you didn't. You cited an example that is obsolescent for decades.

Further, you don't seem to understand why this issue is so relevant. Any system with different voters weight is undemocratic, no matter what else was installed to counter the problem.
Let's take the hyptothetical situation that you keep mentioning - Luxembuourg being irrelevant in votings. Well, that's even less democratic, isn't it? Now remove the zero weight from the system to resolve Luxembourg's disadvantege. What's left? An undemocratic system that overemphasizes Luxembourg voter's wills.
I'm quite sure ou still don't understand and will never do, but this is the problem - same power for each voter is essential for democracy. Any discussion about non-proportional voting systems is a discussion of anti-democrats and deserves the reactions that anti-democrats deserve.

Now nationalists may claim that they cannot live with being a minority. That's their right. Leave ASAP. Becoming a minority is the high price for becoming part of something larger than before. Only those who pay the price deserve the advantages. All else - again - leave ASAP!

[lastdingo]

Repeating the same lie over and over again does NOT make it the truth.

Now you understand. Maybe youd raw the consequence and shut up?

[Musashi]

How about you going back in time and learn basics of European culture and philosophy?
Could you be so kind and write what "European culture" is? Are you able to define it or is it too challenging a bit?
Don't you see there is a huge difference in for example Dutch and Greek culture or German and Portugese?
We don't accept a system of imposed laws. Is it a "European culture" to maintain mass murderers in prisons? If we wish to eliminate a fvcka, who murdered his wife and kid and 80+% of Poles support death penalty, we should be allowed to do it, while we are restricted to some "humanitarian" laws now and cannot do it, because EU laws protect murderers.
It's better solved in the USA, where such a murderer would be eliminated in one state and he would not be in other, where death penalty is forbidden. And the states, where death penalty is forbidden don't even try to impose their law on the states, where death penalty is allowed. That's very fair.

[johanness]

You are free to join the USA.

[Switek]

You are free to join the USA.

Really outstanding idea!
rofl

[lastdingo]

Could you be so kind and write what "European culture" is? Are you able to define it or is it too challenging a bit?
Don't you see there is a huge difference in for example Dutch and Greek culture or German and Portugese?


Musashi, you apparently didn't see that I merely wanted to throw as much dirty argumentation back to that Pole as he threw at me.
Sometimes, such measures are necessary to make trolls feel uncomfortable with their own style to stop that.
There was no emphasis on "European culture" at all, I just wanted to make him feel as he tried to make others feel.

[Doublethinker]

I totally agree with you on this point, it is nearly the same as with Berlusconi in Italy and Haider in Austria.

Haider was the best thing to happen to Europe since de Gaulle.

[Doublethinker]

We discussed the voting system so many times and most agreed that double majority gives germany unproportional power and the square root system is most balanced. So if you want everybody to be EQUAL the constitution just went the opposite way.

If anything, voting rights should be divided acording to the GDP, inflation rates, import/export numbers, size of the market. First and foremost Europe should be an economic union, then a political entity. Trying to put political meaning of the union before economic meaning, is like mismatching a horse and a carriage.

[Wenegade]

Haider was the best thing to happen to Europe since de Gaulle.

This is "offtopic extreme" but.. can you explain your statement???

[Doublethinker]

o nothing we don't like could be pushed our throats and something we want could be passed...
Absolutely amazing example of understanding of democracy.

[lastdingo]

If anything, voting rights should be divided acording to the GDP, inflation rates, import/export numbers, size of the market. First and foremost Europe should be an economic union, then a political entity. Trying to put political meaning of the union before economic meaning, is like mismatching a horse and a carriage.

OK, but I'm very glad to remind you that almost all EU citizens prefer democracy and that ideas like yours are compeltely unacceptable.
Promotion of a system like yours might in fact be illegal in soem EU member states as it violates many constitutions of Europe. In Germany for example, any party or club devoted to such a system could easily be forbidden for its desire to abolish the very foundations of our constitution and freedom.

[Doublethinker]

This is "offtopic extreme" but.. can you explain your statement???

What's their to explain? Haider was the first one to have a programe how to fix the growing cultural diversity in Europe, being brave enough to acknowledge that Europe DOES have its own heritage and that some are hosts, while others are no more than guests - said goes both for people and for cultures.

[Doublethinker]

OK, but I'm very glad to remind you that almost all EU citizens prefer democracy and that ideas like yours are compeltely unacceptable.
Promotion of a system like yours might in fact be illegal in soem EU member states as it violates many constitutions of Europe. In Germany for example, any party or club devoted to such a system could easily be forbidden for its desire to abolish the very foundations of our constitution and freedom. What's undemocratic about the proposed system? As has been mentioned in the article posted above, in the original Union Germany had only 4 times more votes than Luxembourg, and two times more than Belgium. That must be very undemocratic, since German population is 100 times larger than that of Luxembourg. Yet the system worked. And worked well.

[PolishKhalsa]

No, you didn't. You cited an example that is obsolescent for decades.


This was just an example to try to make you understand. Read the article and move your greay cells.




Further, you don't seem to understand why this issue is so relevant. Any system with different voters weight is undemocratic, no matter what else was installed to counter the problem.



Yes any system with different vote weights is undemocratic but some are more undemocratic than others and double majority is more undemocratic than square root.
You can not make the votes of Louxembourg voters 1-1 to German voters because the votes are PER COUNTRY and the yes/no votes of individual voters in Louxemburg do not contribute to the yes/no outcome in Germany. If the Louxembourg yes votes are added to German yes votes and no votes to no votes only than you can use 1-1 relationship.





Let's take the hyptothetical situation that you keep mentioning - Luxembuourg being irrelevant in votings. Well, that's even less democratic, isn't it? Now remove the zero weight from the system to resolve Luxembourg's disadvantege. What's left? An undemocratic system that overemphasizes Luxembourg voter's wills.



Not true. If you are going to tally votes per country and not of individual voters you can come up with an aproximation that will create a balance of voting power. but the relationship of individual German voter to Lux voter can not be 1-1 mathematically however it is 1-1 in terms of voting power. 'square root' is one of the best approximations.

[Doublethinker]

They should just kick Poland out since obviously they aren't happy with the funding and the opportunities to work in the EU. They obviously made a mistake joining the EU and as the EU we should help them to set it straight. :)


As far as I've heard, there is no legal mechanism in the EU to eject members.

[Sharp]

said that culture of each country would be killed if a one european entity would be created is, i think, pretty much overeacted.
it is like said that texas , miami or california have the same culture ..

if some peoples all over the world find a way to visit few countries in europe, it means that they have a geography and at least a minimum political knowledge, and in a such way there wouldnt have much differences if all of this is regrouped under an entity.

this is pretty of topic, but this seem to be the goal of this topic then ....

[PolishKhalsa]

...
First and foremost Europe should be an economic union, then a political entity. Trying to put political meaning of the union before economic meaning, is like mismatching a horse and a carriage.

Agreed!!!!!!!

[lastdingo]

What's undemocratic about the proposed system? As has been mentioned in the article posted above, in the original Union Germany had only 4 times more votes than Luxembourg, and two times more than Belgium. That must be very undemocratic, since German population is 100 times larger than that of Luxembourg. Yet the system worked. And worked well.

Lots of dictatorships have prospered well. Stalin industrialized Russia - but that doesn't help his historical account much.

Democracy is based on the voting of equal citizens - it has nothing to do with economic power relationships.

By the way; the original EC wasn't nearly as powerful as today's EU and it's obsolete now anyway.
Finally, the system did NOT work well. It just managed to do have no more disadvantages than advantages. A good system would have achieved the maximum difference between advantages and disadvantages, in the favour of advantages. A bureaucracy tends to exploit the advantages and then grow on until it needs to stop for adding more activities would mean that the sum of accumulated disadvantages would exceed the sum of acumulated advantages. That's bureaucracy theory, and it can be observed very well in the practice of the EU.


@PolishKalsa:

It sounds quite confused or at least difficult to understand what you write, but as far as I understood you simply stumbled upon the disadvantage of representative democracy, no more.
I don't like representative democracy as a tool for the big decisions, but it's necessary to keep the costs down for everyday decisions.
But it's not legitimate to add additional confusion and manipulation to representative democracy just because you're uncomfortable with it, as that does not improve the democracy.
The systemic problems of multi-tiered representative democracy are always the same.

Example:
A federal state has majority election of individual senate members. The senate members have a majority decision on a law. In the end, the people that actually voted for the senate members who voted for the law are an overall minority. **** happens, democracy isn't perfect and should be kept simple for this reason.
Same situatzion: A national head of state is elected by majority vote and votes (let's say with exact weight relative to his population) together with other heads of states on a common European law. Again, the voters who actually were the foundation for the pro-voters are an overall minority.
But unless we add nationalism into the scenario, there's no reason to view the effect different than the normal representative democracy effect inside of a single country.

It would be best to make important decisions dependent on plebiscites once the new EU is formed, and keep most other decisions in the common European parliament which should be based on the same maths as normal federal parliaments.
Any attempts to weigh countries different by mathematical experiments that shall make small countries more able to influence decisions than the quantity of their citizens would legitimate are simply ... illegitimate.

[tsuri]

If anything, voting rights should be divided acording to the GDP, inflation rates, import/export numbers, size of the market. First and foremost Europe should be an economic union, then a political entity. Trying to put political meaning of the union before economic meaning, is like mismatching a horse and a carriage.
Err no? We ARE talking about the supranational government thingy that was established for cooperation in a wide area of politics and not just an economic club. Read the Roman treaties, it's all in there.


This Usually means that a smaller countries get stronger voice than it would be if we would care only about population size... Whats wrong in current GERMANO-FRANCO push is that EU would still not be democratic in sense of the population amount you talk about(no one really wants that), but only 3 or 4 biggest countries in the EU could work as independent countries and other even if in broad coalition could do **** about it...
Woah what ARE they serving in Poland? You need merely 4 states(of any size) to block anything, the big states can't impose anything on the small states and vice versa.

[RSone]

Besides state size doesn't say that much about importance to the union. Holland has about twice the economy of belgium and luxembourg combined, has a bigger economy than Poland, despite the fact that Poland is far larger.

[Switek]

Besides state size doesn't say that much about importance to the union. Holland has about twice the economy of belgium and luxembourg combined, has a bigger economy than Poland, despite the fact that Poland is far larger.

This why some of your farmers lease fileds there p-)

[Doublethinker]

Lots of dictatorships have prospered well. Stalin industrialized Russia - but that doesn't help his historical account much.

Democracy is based on the voting of equal citizens - it has nothing to do with economic power relationships.
I still can't see the answer. What's undemocratic about the proposed system?

[Doublethinker]

Err no? We ARE talking about the supranational government thingy that was established for cooperation in a wide area of politics and not just an economic club. Read the Roman treaties, it's all in there.


Well, Duuuh... That's exactly what I was critisizing in the post you replied to.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

Absolutely NOT true. A voter in Luxembourg is IRRELEVANT in comparison to a voter in Germany which makes the voter in Germany overrepresented.

I live in the EU and last I checked, we never get to vote for anything! Decisions are simply made over our heads.

Someone else already said it right, EUdSSR.

[Switek]

I live in the EU and last I checked, we never get to vote for anything! Decisions are simply made over our heads.

Someone else already said it right, EUdSSR.

And politcians sels us thier own "truths"

[Ddavid]

He, so much ado about nothing.

Sure, previous submit might have been easier for our imperators, but they didn't squabble that much.

[PolishKhalsa]

@PolishKalsa:

It sounds quite confused or at least difficult to understand what you write, but as far as I understood you simply stumbled upon the disadvantage of representative democracy, no more.
I don't like representative democracy as a tool for the big decisions, but it's necessary to keep the costs down for everyday decisions.
But it's not legitimate to add additional confusion and manipulation to representative democracy just because you're uncomfortable with it, as that does not improve the democracy.
The systemic problems of multi-tiered representative democracy are always the same.


We can not dissmiss a fairer system just because it is less complicated than some other and in case of double majority it acctually is more complicated than square root system.




It would be best to make important decisions dependent on plebiscites once the new EU is formed, and keep most other decisions in the common European parliament which should be based on the same maths as normal federal parliaments.


Finally we agree on something. (somewhat at least)

[tsuri]

I live in the EU and last I checked, we never get to vote for anything! Decisions are simply made over our heads.

You must have checked after June 2004, you remember? The last election?

You also elect your government which represents your interests in the intergovernmental parts of the system.

If you want direct democracy, move to Switzerland.

[Atlantic Friend]

I live in the EU and last I checked, we never get to vote for anything! Decisions are simply made over our heads.

Someone else already said it right, EUdSSR.

Ah, yes, the EU is SO like the USSR. Except when it comes to little things like individual rights, democrcacy, countries joining freely, possibility for said countries to actually be represented at EU level and demand dramatic changes without being invaded into submission, you know, meaningless little things like that. As for the rest, it's daily oppression, oppression, oppression.

Come to think of it, it's also absolutely outrageous that even at the national level, my government doesn't call me every day to make sure me and the 62 million otghers are okay with every decision. I mean, just because the President and Congress got elected they think they have a mandate ? Ha !

;)

[perdurabo]

Besides state size doesn't say that much about importance to the union. Holland has about twice the economy of belgium and luxembourg combined, has a bigger economy than Poland, despite the fact that Poland is far larger.
wait few years p-)

[johanness]

Maybe many Poles are under the impression , that germans ,french ,italians....
san marinos , stand like one man behind their governement.
This is not the case. German socialist are close to other european socialist ,
our conservativ politicans are close to other european conservativ,our greens... and so on.
The national rivality is not stronger then the political one( most of the time...)
Just go and find your political friends in Europe ( for the twins this would be a
little bit hard now ).

[Atlantic Friend]

wait few years p-)

I wish Poland all the best, but if it'd be best if EU member demanded representation based on what it currently represents in terms of population and wealth, instead of what it might achieve at some undefinfed point in the future.

[Switek]

I wish Poland all the best, but if it'd be best if EU member demanded representation based on what it currently represents in terms of population and wealth, instead of what it might achieve at some undefinfed point in the future.

You got te essence of so called "constitutional treaty". This why our previous (based on quadratic root) proposal had sense ... :|

[perdurabo]

I wish Poland all the best, but if it'd be best if EU member demanded representation based on what it currently represents in terms of population and wealth, instead of what it might achieve at some undefinfed point in the future.
welth is relevant and changes quite quickly, while population and land usually stays on same level(+/-)

[Vandervahn]

We can not dissmiss a fairer system just because it is less complicated than some other and in case of double majority it acctually is more complicated than square root system. ...

You keep repeating that the square root approach were the "fairer" system, and you are of course free to do that. But the arguments given for it are flawed from the root.

Every single analysis sooner or later argues from the standpoint of not giving evil Germany too many voting rights. And that is all it boils down to: prevent a majority for Germany whatever the costs.

The question has to be asked: why would that be a bad thing? People speak of a better democratic distribution the square root system would give. One can turn the argument around and say that Germany with its with-a-margin largest market and population to be rightfully represented as well as the smaller nations have a right to be adequately heard. The latter is guaranteed by their voting-right bonuses. In this system the middle nations neither get an overproportional vote nor other benefits, BUT they also do not lose influence they deserve. It is also a lot more communicable to the already EU-weary "stupid masses".

A previous poster said that the square root would only shift voting power from up and below to the middle - and that is really all it does. As such it is by no means "fairer", its just a number game. The original draft at least was considered as "fair" by about everyone - including France, the UK and Italy. And one can´t really accuse those of having a history of easily subdueing to "German dominance".

Usually, these reviews argueing against a Germany-first position also add a spike to their club by invoking fear of the "Group of 4"... as if it was the aim of France, the UK, Germany and Italy to bully others around. Firstly, this is not easily possible even with the proportional system. Second, the square root system wouldn´t prevent it anyway - a healthy majority, which WILL be the result of any decent compromise, will win in both cases. Third, there is little precedence of cases where the 4 heavyweights were unanimously among themselves anyway.

And while it may not be a popular thought, the EU is bound to roughly go the way that its largest and most influential members want it - that is how it works. A minority rule would be, in itself, undemocratic even more. That is the reality Poland obviously wants to overlook.

[joka]

I live in the EU and last I checked, we never get to vote for anything! Decisions are simply made over our heads.

Someone else already said it right, EUdSSR.

Since when have you ever got to vote on anything in international organizations? Not to mention an international treaty?
If you were to get to vote on the commission (executive branch) and council (senate) the EU would in effect be a federation.
Which I personally wouldn't object to, but I have the feeling you would. I find it rather weird to criticize the EU for the reluctancy of memberstates to relinquish more powers to the people. The reason we don't get to vote on anything is because memberstates are clinging on to every shred of sovereignty they can. Which is what I thought eurosceptics wanted?

[Kojo]

Well originally all the countries were to hold a referendum about the european constitution, in the end only France and The Netherlands actually did afaik, they were also the only ones to say NO against the constitution :) The rest of the countries knew that most likely the results wouldn't be much different and didn't bother asking their people, but just went along with it. Hell even in The Netherlands the politicians didn't take the NO serious and just went on to do what they wanted in the first place, securing that well payed job in Brussels for when they were done being a politician in The Netherlands.
The people voted NO (about 60% i think), yet somehow most politicians were still convinced the people still actually wanted this constitution and the people were merely misinformed or they merely voted NO because they weren't happy with the government... And here we are getting this bloody constitution shoved through our throats, cause politicians know what's best for the people instead of politicians representing their people. Why? Because there is lots of money involved for those very same politicians that get to decided about it. EU is a politicians retirement plan by now.

[joka]

Well originally all the countries were to hold a referendum about the european constitution, in the end only France and The Netherlands actually did afaik, they were also the only ones to say NO against the constitution :) The rest of the countries knew that most likely the results wouldn't be much different and didn't bother asking their people, but just went along with it

Utter horse manure. You're either deliberately spreading information you know to be false or incredibly uninformed. Source, link, anything? No, didn't think so.



Hell even in The Netherlands the politicians didn't take the NO serious and just went on to do what they wanted in the first place,

So your democratically elected leadership does what it thinks is best even in the face of adversity and that's something to condemn? I certainly wouldn't want a government that changed position everytime the public opinion sways. Come election time and you (along with the majority) notice, that they haven't infact operated with your best interests at mind, vote them the hell out of there. Somehow I think that's not going to happen though, why is that?



securing that well payed job in Brussels for when they were done being a politician in The Netherlands.

IIRC. Each country get's to appoint what, one commisioner, and soon not even that, one judge to the ECJ and recommend one person for ECB board of directors? (Other jobs you apply to like any other job, or get voted in to) And you think the reason we have this whole elaborate multibillion-euro organization is so that once every 6 years the elite get's to appoint a few of their buddies to a "high paid job" (nevermind that the most of them could easily get hired by the private sector which pays many times over what a taxfunded organization can ever pay). Good luck with life.



The people voted NO (about 60% i think), yet somehow most politicians were still convinced the people still actually wanted this constitution and the people were merely misinformed...
Then vote them out of office.

[Kojo]

Utter horse manure. You're either deliberately spreading information you know to be false or incredibly uninformed. Source, link, anything? No, didn't think so.
It's right next to your source, link, anything, proving me wrong ....



So your democratically elected leadership does what it thinks is best even in the face of adversity and that's something to condemn? I certainly wouldn't want a government that changed position everytime the public opinion sways. Come election time and you (along with the majority) notice, that they haven't infact operated with your best interests at mind, vote them the hell out of there. Somehow I think that's not going to happen though, why is that? Obviously you haven't been watching dutch politics, last elections were a big win for the socialist party, one of the reasons was indeed the referendum not being taken seriously.



IIRC. Each country get's to appoint what, one commisioner, and soon not even that, one judge to the ECJ and recommend one person for ECB board of directors? (Other jobs you apply to like any other job, or get voted in to) And you think the reason we have this whole elaborate multibillion-euro organization is so that once every 6 years the elite get's to appoint a few of their buddies to a "high paid job" (nevermind that the most of them could easily get hired by the private sector which pays many times over what a taxfunded organization can ever pay). Good luck with life.

Well if it was truely that little people working there for each country it wouldn't be that multibillion elaborate organization you say it is , now would it. :roll:


Then vote them out of office.

That was what some people tried yes, but then again even if the people change, you would still have the same problem, since the system didn't change, if there is room for corruption there will be corruption, humans have proven to be very consistent that way, socialist, capitalist, religious, doesn't matter.

[Breakfast in Vegas]

Ah, yes, the EU is SO like the USSR. Except when it comes to little things like individual rights, democrcacy, countries joining freely, possibility for said countries to actually be represented at EU level and demand dramatic changes without being invaded into submission, you know, meaningless little things like that. As for the rest, it's daily oppression, oppression, oppression.

Come to think of it, it's also absolutely outrageous that even at the national level, my government doesn't call me every day to make sure me and the 62 million otghers are okay with every decision. I mean, just because the President and Congress got elected they think they have a mandate ? Ha !

;)

I was of course SLIGHTLY exaggerating.. :)

Nonetheless, a lot of decisions that affect my daily life (including tax and other direct cost-related issues) are being made at the EU level by self-serving bureaucrats. This is probably true of any government to a degree, but I personally find it extreme in Europe... especially living in Germany, where we are expected to pay and keep our mouth shut.

[joka]

It's right next to your source, link, anything, proving me wrong ....

I'm not sure I follow. Let's brake this down. You made two (2) claims which are utterly false in this universe.
1.
Well originally all the countries were to hold a referendum about the european constitution, in the end only France and The Netherlands actually did afaik,No, there was no "originally everyone was supposed to hold a referendum before they they went on their mischievous ways" Each country made their own decission according to their own customs. Personally I think referendums should only be held on fundamental matters, such as eg. EU membership, not 400-page international treaties. As such I find nothing wrong in the actions of my own government (Finnish).

2.
they were also the only ones to say NO against the constitution :-) The rest of the countries knew that most likely the results wouldn't be much different and didn't bother asking their people, but just went along with itGoogle Spain and Luxembourg. (Two countries in Europe that also held a referendum)
PS. An interesting fact is that, in the referendums held, more people actually voted in favour of the now burried constitutional treaty than voted against it. Yet those that are opposed to any sort fundamental treaty for the EU claim to have the mandate of the people.

(I'll answer to the rest later on, que to the computer)

[PolishKhalsa]

You keep repeating that the square root approach were the "fairer" system, and you are of course free to do that.

I keep repeating this because a lot of members here keep repeating the opposite without either understanding the two systems or not wanting to understand.


But the arguments given for it are flawed from the root.

I beg to strongly disagree.



Every single analysis sooner or later argues from the standpoint of not giving evil Germany too many voting rights. And that is all it boils down to: prevent a majority for Germany whatever the costs.

No country should get TOO MANY voting rights.

Actually when you crunch the numbers it is quite obvious that the purpose of double majority system was to give almost total control of EU to large countries and thresholds were set just right to eliminate troublesome Poland from the group. Spain fell a victim of it too; but this is just an aside.



The question has to be asked: why would that be a bad thing? People speak of a better democratic distribution the square root system would give. One can turn the argument around and say that Germany with its with-a-margin largest market and population to be rightfully represented as well as the smaller nations have a right to be adequately heard.


You hit the nail on the head. The large nations are REPRESENTED and the smaller nations have ONLY the right to be heard using double majority.




The latter is guaranteed by their voting-right bonuses. In this system the middle nations neither get an overproportional vote nor other benefits, BUT they also do not lose influence they deserve. It is also a lot more communicable to the already EU-weary "stupid masses".

A previous poster said that the square root would only shift voting power from up and below to the middle - and that is really all it does.

The previous poster was wrong.


As such it is by no means "fairer", its just a number game. The original draft at least was considered as "fair" by about everyone - including France, the UK and Italy. And one can´t really accuse those of having a history of easily subdueing to "German dominance".

Usually, these reviews argueing against a Germany-first position also add a spike to their club by invoking fear of the "Group of 4"... as if it was the aim of France, the UK, Germany and Italy to bully others around. Firstly, this is not easily possible even with the proportional system. Second, the square root system wouldn´t prevent it anyway - a healthy majority, which WILL be the result of any decent compromise, will win in both cases. Third, there is little precedence of cases where the 4 heavyweights were unanimously among themselves anyway.

And while it may not be a popular thought, the EU is bound to roughly go the way that its largest and most influential members want it - that is how it works. A minority rule would be, in itself, undemocratic even more. That is the reality Poland obviously wants to overlook.

Actually the double majority system allows almost extreme minority rule. About 32% of EU population can control the rest and that 32% has to include people from Germany, France, GB and Italy most of the time. The square root would still give importance to the largest countries in EU but it would make the population percentages much more democratic by spreading them accross more countries and giving smaller countries chances to be decision makers not just passive observers. The argument that there is little precedence of cases where the 4 heavy weights were unanimously among themselves simply does not fly You just saw the exception to this rule at the current summit. . If they have the possibility they will use it if it suits them.

[ZhukovG]

well actually Polish are able to work on EU since february 2006 they have lots of working opportunities in Spain I dont know other EU laws

I cannt believe now Poland are asking for more votes just because as Kaczynski says they lost 28 millions ppl on WWII I think this the begginning of Poland feeling as a victim of the past so they would ask more and more things specially money

Read this spiegel news:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,490014,00.html

[PolishKhalsa]

Read this spiegel news:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,490014,00.html

What a load of BS this article is. Historical inacuarcies, stereotypes and outright lies. If this is the real view of Germans toward Poles, Polish-German relations are really in trouble.

[SHAM]

What a load of BS this article is. Historical inacuarcies, stereotypes and outright lies. If this is the real view of Germans toward Poles, Polish-German relations are really in trouble.

I think its fair to say that polish-european relations are potentialy in trouble. Lots of hot air and little substance for now. Lets give it 10 years and see how the numbers are balancing.
But for now the polish PM is entertaining. Just when you thought there could be nobody better than john howard and phil the greek at putting there foot in it.
A good lesson in negotiations though, negotiating via the press is not such a good idea, even though it might save face for you at home.

[tsuri]

No country should get TOO MANY voting rights.

Actually when you crunch the numbers it is quite obvious that the purpose of double majority system was to give almost total control of EU to large countries and thresholds were set just right to eliminate troublesome Poland from the group. Spain fell a victim of it too; but this is just an aside.
Oh god, another example of the excellent drugs they seem to be giving out in Poland.

I will break it down for four year olds, read it, understand it and stfu.

Double Majority is a system that requires two majorities to get something through the council (hence the name).

The first majority is the majority of population. It requires that states in favour represent 65% of the EU population. This would of course benefit the large states in theory. So how does it get balanced out?

With the second majority. It requires that the majority of votes is represented as well. The small states have more votes which creates an equilibrium between large states and small states. Nobody can overrule anyone, the votes are also distributed in such a way that net payers and net recievers are balanced as well. The System is highly complicated but just enough for states.

Individual states are less important because you always need a coalition of them.

The point in the debate was also not if or if not the Penrose System was better or not. The point was: A VOTING SYSTEM WAS ALREADY NEGOTIATED. Poland tried to re-open that part of the treaty which would have resulted in an extreme conflict because everyone would have tried to re-open everything else. When confronted, they insulted the President of the Union. The British blocked too but they were at least polite ^^



What a load of BS this article is. Historical inacuarcies, stereotypes and outright lies. If this is the real view of Germans toward Poles, Polish-German relations are really in trouble.

We get the same from your side. And this column does not really represent a majority view. Most people have a "positive ignorance" if you will. They don't care but really like the food ;)


The argument that there is little precedence of cases where the 4 heavy weights were unanimously among themselves simply does not fly You just saw the exception to this rule at the current summit. . If they have the possibility they will use it if it suits them.
There is the UK. They always block everything. They merely joined the EU to sabotage it and so they do. If you had followed the summit, you would have noticed that they have not agreed with the Germans at first, same with the French. They were forced in EU line when they saw that there was no majority for their wishes. Diplomacy.



Nonetheless, a lot of decisions that affect my daily life (including tax and other direct cost-related issues) are being made at the EU level by self-serving bureaucrats. This is probably true of any government to a degree, but I personally find it extreme in Europe... especially living in Germany, where we are expected to pay and keep our mouth shut.

Same on our side of the Border.. People if you live in the EU, please care to understand what it is and how it works. Those "self serving bureaucrats" are your elected governments. The Federal and the State Government are represented in the Union, depending on the issue. The rest are your elected representative in Parliament and a guy that was appointed by our Government.

It works almost exactly the same in our national administration.

The decisions are made by someone from your local Government (In the Bundesrat), your member of Parliament(Bundestag) and an indirectly elected Federal Government (Bundesregierung)

[Freibier]

Before the next summit, Poland should be divided between Germany, Lithuania, Czechia and Slovakia - problem solved

[Switek]

Few more years with our government and there will be nothing to divide ...

[PolishKhalsa]

.....................

[Freibier]

No Germany - no Europa
No Poland - no Problem








j/k
:-P

[PolishKhalsa]

yank
yank

:)

[DeltaWhisky58]

WARNING:

Get this thread back on topic, or the thread will be closed and further infractions/suspensions issued.

[perdurabo]

DW close it, this isn't going back on topic cause even topic name points directly at us Poles "EU is going down and those Poles are the problem". Freibier was kidding but he hit the spot of moust western europeans thinking. Europe ends on Odra river, anything that comes from east of it is alwyas wrong and bad. Until recent i was pro-european but now i'm starting to regret. Thx mates.

[johanness]

Agree with Perdurabo.
Everybody said,what he thought have to be said (needless or not ...).

The joke from Freibier was a good end.

My thanks to Switek,he was the fairest one and tried to bring in shape

[theholeinthedonut]

I'm not sure I follow. Let's brake this down. You made two (2) claims which are utterly false in this universe.
1. No, there was no "originally everyone was supposed to hold a referendum before they they went on their mischievous ways" Each country made their own decission according to their own customs. Personally I think referendums should only be held on fundamental matters, such as eg. EU membership, not 400-page international treaties. As such I find nothing wrong in the actions of my own government (Finnish).

2. Google Spain and Luxembourg. (Two countries in Europe that also held a referendum)
PS. An interesting fact is that, in the referendums held, more people actually voted in favour of the now burried constitutional treaty than voted against it. Yet those that are opposed to any sort fundamental treaty for the EU claim to have the mandate of the people.

(I'll answer to the rest later on, que to the computer)


I would be very careful citing Luxembourg as an example for approbation of the EU constitution. 56,52 % approval is extremely low for our local standards ( we are extremely pro EU), the more you have to know that there was a huge "propaganda" campaign sponsored by the governement that was on the verge of brain washing. Finally, the prime minister J.-CL. Juncker ( Who is considered to be something inbetween a Saint and a Super hero) threatened to resign in the case of a rejection of the constitution. So believe me, regardless of my own opinion, the result of the poll in luxembourg was rather a disaster for those in favour of the constitution then a success.

[DeltaWhisky58]

OK guys, but be careful of asking for the lock.