A Different Look at the EU
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 03:48:14 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  A Different Look at the EU
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: A Different Look at the EU  (Read 972 times)
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 10, 2006, 02:50:50 PM »
« edited: November 11, 2006, 10:01:39 AM by Bono »

A Different Look at the EU
by Miguel Noronha

It was celebrated this year the thirtieth anniversary of Portugal's accession to the then European Economic Community. Probably, only with a certain effort will we be able to recall that in the twelve years that passed between the revolution of 1974 and 1986, we went through a convoluted revolutionary period with the ruinous nationalization of several sectors of the economy, ten governments and two IMF agreements.

In this scenario, accession to the EEU gave us an excellent opportunity to credit and stabilize the discredited institutions of the young third republic, which many regarded as a failed state. We shouldn't also forget the importance the EU had in a more recent past, in the credibilization of our macroeconomic policy.

Once remembered the greatest benefits of our "European experience", we should turn a more critical eye upon the EU. Having begun as a costums union, the community evolved into an economic union, ambitioning now a politic union. In this process, the communitary institutions were permanently growing, not always in the best way, nor producing the most desirable results.

The most documented problem is probably the endless regulations emanating from Brussels at an alarming rate. Defying the limits of imagination, European legislators seem to intent to regulate every aspect of economic activity, creating an infernal mess of red tape. In the last month of October, commissioner Günter Verheugen revealed a study estimating the costs associated to respecting union law by businesses in about 600 billion euros per year (about four times the Portuguese GDP in 2005). Aside from the purely financial cost, this bureaucracy keeps businesses from what should be their main task: creating wealth by serving their costumers.

Another problematic issue is the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Initially conceived to make member countries self-sufficient in agricultural products, CAP has become one of the most controverse aspects of "European construction". By artificially setting prices, the CAP doesn't allow for rationalizing the production, keeping in business countless farms without any economic viability. By keeping prices above those that would be practiced in a free market (several studies give values between 10 and 80 percent, reaching 300% in some products) investors are lead to making wrong choices thus harming the consumer's pocket. To this is added the low efficacy of fiscalization that leads to recurrent and known frauds in the utilization of given subsidies.

Still in the CAP field, several tariffs were established in order to raise the prices of imported products to the level of the produced in the community area. These tariffs, together with the subsidies to the exportation of agricultural surpluses (originated significatively by subsidies to production), configure a flagrant case of unlawful competition, not allowing many third world countries to be competitive in the only products where they actually have competitive advantages. In 2005, 49 billion euros were destined to the CAP (about 46% of the union budget), while its beneficiaries are estimated to be about 4% of the EU population.

A third point to behold are the multiple appeals for harmonization of fiscal and social policies in the EU. Aside from configuring yet another step in the worrying loss of power by the member-states, one needs to take into account the economic effects of these initiatives, which give an even greater incentive to governmental waste and penalize investment and job creation, insisting in the defense of the bankrupt "European social model", regardless of costs or long term consequences.

Regardless of the benefits for Portugal from European integration, these three issues (regulatory overload, CAP and attempts of fiscal harmonization) should deserve greater attention among us, especially as the right of option, before granted to member-states, of not entering certain community policies, is increasingly denied.
Logged
Jens
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,526
Angola


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2006, 04:05:44 AM »

A Different Look at the EU
by Miguel Noronha

Another problematic issue is the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Initially conceived to make member countries self-sufficient in agricultural products, CAP has become one of the most controverse aspects of "European construction". By artificially setting prices, the PAC doesn't allow for rationalizing the production, keeping in business countless farms without any economic viability. By keeping prices above those that would be practiced in a free market (several studies give values between 10 and 80 percent, reaching 300% in some products) investors are lead to making wrong choices thus harming the consumer's pocket. To this is added the low efficacy of fiscalization that leads to recurrent and known frauds in the utilization of given subsidies.

Still in the CAP field, several tariffs were established in order to raise the prices of imported products to the level of the produced in the community area. These tariffs, together with the subsidies to the exportation of agricultural surpluses (originated significatively by subsidies to production), configure a flagrant case of unlawful competition, not allowing many third world countries to be competitive in the only products where they actually have competitive advantages. In 2005, 49 billion euros were destined to the CAP (about 46% of the union budget), while its beneficiaries are estimated to be about 4% of the EU population.

I couldn't agree more on this. The CAP is a constant drain on the European Union and we would be so much better of using the money on true job creation, not on subsidising obsolete farming. The inviroment would also benefit from this, since the CAP makes groving crops on marginal soils with the use of fertilisers profitable.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,837


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2006, 09:42:14 AM »

Most nations want CAP reform; the UK included (and even rural Poland) but France is the stumbling block.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2006, 09:04:18 PM »
« Edited: November 18, 2006, 09:07:56 PM by Gully Foyle »

Yet French farmers are among some of the strongest anti-globalization protesters.. Nice racket they have got going there. :rollseyes:

As for the European Union I will have to deviate somewhat for auto-Irish-opinions-on-the-EU which can be summed up in the phrase "EU = Awesome". While I'm all for a common market and open borders the EUs love of meaningless over-the-top bureaucracy (such as their legendary document on Duck eggs, not to mention the now thankfully defunct Constitution) and decidation to such tight standards while taking actual power away from elected goverments makes them a huge cumbersome and undemocratic body.

Plus, the EU must be the most boring topic of discussion in the history in the world.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.