(Replying to PARENT post)

I like Angela Merkel, and I live in the EU (Ireland). I think she's wrong about a lot of things though.

The EU is on shaky foundations. The original principles of free movement, free trade, solidarity & peace are great. I totally support them. They move the world in a liberal (ie liberty) direction and they really do promote the central goal, centuries of peace. Europe has been at peace for a logn time. It's an achievement, and we need to defend that. But, there was never a truly agreed upon and understandable basis for how these would be promoted and protected and an explicit definition of where and how the EU's authority ends and the State's begins. This has left our national governments with a nice scapegoat, great for populists, nationalists and fringe politicians to use for their purposes.

The Greek saga is a perfect example. Rather than an intelligent abstract policy of allowing Greek to make their own decisions, support with limited liability for the Union we get a German style bureaucratic approach. Regulation an oversight.

I also appreciate her refugee policy. My grandparents (like many's) were refugees in WWII. I think it came from a genuine place of human solidarity. I hope it doesn't sting Germany too badly.

I hope that the EU gets another round of constitutional, foundational work. Take as long as it takes, but do it right. This is for the next 200 years. The problem, as I see it, is that politics has polarized into pro and anti EU. Anti-EU political outsiders from either (or neither) traditional wings using anti-EU rhetoric as an easy populist tools and pro-EU insiders defending the EU as a bureaucratic status quo.

One thing I think needs to change urgently is an exit policy. We need a way for countries that don't want to be in, to get out. It will act as a relief from a lot of populist pressure. If the UK want out, they should have an available option. Similar for Greek. No hard feelings, civilized-like, we can still be friends, just do what the people want.

πŸ‘€netcanπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

>allowing Greek to make their own decisions,

Apparently, Greece owes Germany $80+ billion dollars[1]. Of course, if it were up to Greece alone, they'd prefer to say "just forgive our past loans and let's reset the odometer to 0 for a new set of loans. And oh, btw, don't expect to get paid back on the new loans either since we don't want your input on how to reform our ineffective government to even make payback possible."

People want to interfere with Greece because they took lots of other people's money.

If a company borrowed money from bond holders and timely payment is not possible, those bondholders can pressure the company to hire their turnaround managers in return for refinancing, or force it into bankruptcy and seize assets.

Whether it's a country or a company borrowing other people's money, it's hard to see how a "hands off" policy by the lenders would be possible.

[1]http://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-how-much-greece-owes-...

πŸ‘€jasodeπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

The EU has lost its main purpose - in a sense it's a victim of having largely done its job.

Although it was originally created to prevent future wars in Europe, the role it performed most effectively for most of its life was to be an incentive for countries on its borders to open their markets and become democracies. Spain, Portugal, Greece, and most of eastern Europe, left dictatorships and/or communism behind and joined the European gravy train all, all through the 80s and 90s.

But its borders are rather different now -- corrupt cronyism (to the East) and Islamic radicalisation (ISIS etc, to the south) are the main threatening neighbours. It's less effective at dealing with those, and there's not many countries it can dangle the carrot of membership in front of, and the prospects of them being accepted are lower.

So with the potential gains gone, it's left looking like a layer of bureaucracy and interference sitting heavy-handedly on top of two dozen market-based democratic economies.

πŸ‘€wbillingsleyπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

One of the founding principles of the EU has really been to try and avoid a repeat of the world wars that are still (just about) in living memory. In that respect it's been a wild success, I'm not sure we've ever had such a lasting amount of peace.

As someone with a mixed UK / Greek background it's been interesting and often painful seeing the current woes of the EU. Greece has had a lot of problems, many of which really do benefit from outside oversight. I've seen a large amount of corruption there, be it deliberate or just letting things slide. Having input from outside to try and stamp out some of the more rampant stuff is very much a good thing.

However this isn't always a good thing, the rise of the far right 'golden dawn' can very much be attributed to old stirrings of anti German sentiment, much of it based on inflammatory second world war tub thumping (although ignoring the fact that many of the particularly right wing areas now were Nazi sympathisers, go figure).

The UK has, in contrast, been much more high handed. I think a lot of the Greeks are worried but ultimately they really do want to stay in the EU, where as I'm not sure that's the case in England. There's this air of superiority, both from the colonial past and the nature of the UK as an island that lends itself well to always expecting to be treated specially for some reason.

Rather than forever going towards a broader union I can't help wondering if a more hazy framework would work better, rather than having an authority in Brussels/Strasbourg could we not have representatives from sovereign governments that debate these issues when they affect areas larger than countries? Much of the current legislation seems as though it doesn't really need to be done on such a sweeping scale.

πŸ‘€iNerdierπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> Europe has been at peace for a logn time

I think in terms of peace it's useful to distinguish between the EU and Europe. There have been a couple of wars in Europe in my lifetime. Not to mention a few military dictatorships (which had a kind of 'peace' I suppose - but not a good one), assassinations of leaders etc.

Maybe (hopefully!) we'll get through this without it imploding - maybe end up with a more Hanseatic League kind of set up, maybe more like the US. 'May you live in interesting times' and all that... ;-)

πŸ‘€billybofhπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Is there really a strong anti-EU movement? Admittedly I don't really follow the nationals politics of the other member states, but at least from my position - living in one of the PIGS - what I see is mostly a movement against the Euro. I mean, sure, Merkel, SchΓ€uble and Juncker are demonized quite a bit, but I think the argument is for improving the EU, not leaving it.
πŸ‘€icebrainingπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> We need a way for countries that don't want to be in, to get out.

Can you imagine a US state doing that? I don't think unions are reversible at this state in history. The national state is not exactly living a revival. This is majorly a financial crisis.

> This has left our national governments with a nice scapegoat, great for populists, nationalists and fringe politicians to use for their purposes

That is a very good observation. It's the reason Greece is suffering at the moment. But leaving the EU at this point would be even worse.

πŸ‘€return0πŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Most of the peace was achieved by having two superpowers use Europe as their high noon staring contest location. Most of Europe was exhausted from two generations of war at that point, so having another would be a fools errand.

Also, i don't think Merkel has much say in any of this. Its her finance minister and his buddies at the ECB that is running the show.

πŸ‘€digi_owlπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> We need a way for countries that don't want to be in, to get out. It will act as a relief from a lot of populist pressure. If the UK want out, they should have an available option

That has been possible since the Treaty of Lisbon.

πŸ‘€rmcπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

This is not only the UK I believe, it's just the UK is the only country where citizen will have their opinion heard about the EU, the sentiment is shared by other countries. On my case in France, they won't do a vote because they are really afraid of the result, the anti-EU movement is going stronger every year and I believe it's the same in Germany, Spain and Italy. As much I as love the EU myself, it's currently not very democratic I must admit.
πŸ‘€realusernameπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

I detest Merkel generally, but her refugee policy was the right thing and earned her some grudging respect from me. Unfortunately it could very well be her undoing if she doesn't pull it off very well.
πŸ‘€vidarhπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> Rather than an intelligent abstract policy of allowing Greek to make their own decisions.

I think the point was that Greece needs to change and arguably are incapable of making the decisions that need to be made. Germany felt that there was an need/opportunity to impose that change. Whether it was the right move or will be successful is a completely seperate discussion.

The rampant tax avoidance, the unsustainable pension system, the very low productivity and the culture that allowed Greece to lie their way into the EU all need to stop if they are going to be a successful part of Europe.

πŸ‘€threeseedπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> We need a way for countries that don't want to be in, to get out. It will act as a relief from a lot of populist pressure. If the UK want out, they should have an available option.

The EU has a well-defined mechanism for secession; it is what the "out" option on the UK referendum is about. Any country can get out of the EU within a couple of years if they really want that.

πŸ‘€rbehrendsπŸ•‘9yπŸ”Ό0πŸ—¨οΈ0