25
   

FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

 
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 03:58 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
How, do you think, is this related to the EU in totaliter?

Timber can no doubt speak for himself. Speaking for myself I don't know what the relation to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ukraine is. The comparison seems very apples-to-oranges to me there. But there is something to learn from Timber's comparison with America, Australia, and Britain. (To which he could have added Ireland, Slovakia, and the Baltics, but hasn't.) It is that maybe, contrary to the dominant political philosophy in Western Europe, big government isn't giving the people their money's worth in welfare. And that maybe the European constitution, which casts the provisions of the big welfare state in the stone of its expansive bill of rights, deserves to die in the polls, as do the administrations that peddle it. I sure think they do. (Though I guess I would make an exception for Canada, which does seem to strike a reasonable balance between the free market and income security.)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:01 pm
Ireland as paragon of free-market orthodoxy?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:04 pm
This is exactly why some people of conscience are against socialist healthcare programs, like the one Hillary forwarded during Clinton's first term.

A welfare state cannot be sustained.

Unless it shrinks, rather than grows.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:07 pm
Lash, It's not that the US can't afford universal health care; it's a matter of correctly prioritizing what is good for our country. The money is there, but our government 'wastes' much of it on our "defense' and other give-aways we call "pork."
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:08 pm
Lash wrote:
This is exactly why some people of conscience are against socialist healthcare programs, like the one Hillary forwarded during Clinton's first term.

A welfare state cannot be sustained.

Unless it shrinks, rather than grows.


Germany is "a democratic and social federal state". That is what it says in Art. 20 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law, the German constitution.

Terms such as "social market economy", coined by the Federal Republic of Germany's first Minister of Economics, Ludwig Erhard, are not used in the Basic Law. Yet the welfare state is deeply anchored in German history.

I doubt, this can be changed within a short term.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:10 pm
nimh wrote:
Ireland as paragon of free-market orthodoxy?

The Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation, who both peddle free-market orthodoxy for a living, do seem to think so. At least in comparison to Germany and France. Would you disagree?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:11 pm
"Social Welfare" can work in any society that makes it their priority, and assures the long-term econony (taxation/interest rates) backed with the right demographics (population growth), and responsible spending plans.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:13 pm
Long-term economy includes that the government provide it's children with a good education and health care. In Malta, all education including college is free for its citizens.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:36 pm
Lash wrote:
This is exactly why some people of conscience are against socialist healthcare programs, like the one Hillary forwarded during Clinton's first term.

A welfare state cannot be sustained.

Britain has a National Health Service (Blair's reforming it, but there's no talk of ditching the principle of universal coverage).

Australia's got universal health insurance - called Medicare. All permanent Australian residents are entitled to free public hospital care, and it meets the bulk of costs for GP treatment, specialist consultations etc as well.

(No universal health insurance in Ireland it seems - but they've got a medical card, everyone under a certain income is entitled to one and it gets you free GP consults, medicines, hospital and out-patient services, dental, optical and aural services.)

All in all, if the economic success of Britain and Australia (alongside that of the US) was meant to prove that healthy economies require ditching Hillary-style "socialist healthcare programs", there's a bit of a definitional problem here. Seems they can be combined.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 04:38 pm
Thomas wrote:
nimh wrote:
Ireland as paragon of free-market orthodoxy?

The Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation, who both peddle free-market orthodoxy for a living, do seem to think so. At least in comparison to Germany and France. Would you disagree?

Dunno really. Never thought of Ireland as more libertarian than, say, Canada.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 05:00 pm
Nimh-- We have the same thing Ireland has. For the poor, elderly and disabled.

Blair does speak of the need to partially privatize. They can't sustain it as it is. And, it's horrible...from what I read.

I haven't looked into Oz, but Britain doesn't hold water. It must be working to count in the success column.

Will have to take a look at Oz' economy.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 05:14 pm
Odd. Oz is lily white.

92% White
6% Asian
1% aborigines and other.

Interesting factoid.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 07:22 pm
Well, well, well....The US dollar is now worth .55c to the GBP and .80c to the Euro. First time it's been this high since last year - now that our a2k European Gathering is over. You guys in Europe better plan another gathering while the going is good!
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 10:38 pm
http://images.scotsman.com/2005/05/31/31tonb.jpg
Blair: "Its thi-is dead, Jaques"
Quote:
The constitution is dead, Blair tells a chastened Chirac
FRASER NELSON
POLITICAL EDITOR


TONY Blair has started a behind-the-scenes attempt to kill the European Union constitution - defying growing international pressure to carry on with a British referendum.

The Prime Minister is heading for a battle with a series of EU leaders as a result of his insistence that the constitution has perished with France's No vote on Sunday, and that it cannot be revived by a British Yes.

He is facing angry calls from Greece, Ireland, Spain and Luxembourg to press ahead in the hope that French voters may change their minds in a second vote if the question is phrased differently.

Mr Blair learned of France's emphatic No result while on holiday in Italy. At lunchtime yesterday he spoke to Jacques Chirac, the French president, to tell him that he believed it is now time to draw a line under the constitution ...
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 11:27 pm
Lash wrote:
Nimh-- We have the same thing Ireland has. For the poor, elderly and disabled.


Health services in Ireland are (mainly) based on the residency, not on (other) social factors.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Mon 30 May, 2005 11:38 pm
Lash wrote:
Blair does speak of the need to partially privatize. They can't sustain it as it is. And, it's horrible...from what I read.


I know the NHS in the UK now since 42 years, both by personal experience as well as what I've noticed and heard there from patients, doctors and officials.

I've never thaught it to be horrible but at least equivalent, mostly even better to other free services in other countries.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 31 May, 2005 01:35 am
Quote:
Blair prepares for 'bruising battle' between rival visions of Europe

By Colin Brown and Stephen Castle
31 May 2005


Tony Blair was on a collision course with Jacques Chirac last night as the Government prepared to announce that the UK was shelving plans for a referendum after Sunday's overwhelming French "no" to the EU constitution.

Mr Blair broke a holiday in Tuscany to make it clear that he now intended to use the forthcoming British presidency to lead a bruising battle between "old Europe" and "new Europe" over the reform of the EU economies. The French vote has placed the EU at the crossroads of a historic dispute over the future direction of the European Union.

As the ripples of France's resounding rejection of the constitution continued to wash across Europe, the European Commission's president, Jose Manuel Barroso said the French had created a "very serious problem" for Europe, whose enlargement plans have now been stopped in their tracks. The Dutch are poised to reject the treaty tomorrow by an even larger margin than the French, in effect killing off the constitution.

President Chirac will announce a new government line-up today under a new prime minister who is expected to preserve the French "social model" - a response to the result in France.

Mr Blair said the French result had raised fundamental questions about the EU economies. "What's important now is to have a time for reflection," he said. "I think underneath all this there is a profound question about the future of Europe and the European economy, and how it deals with globalisation."

Senior ministerial sources confirmed last night that the UK's referendum was in effect dead. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, will tell the Commons on Monday that Britain wants to see economic reform agreed in Europe before the EU can return to ratifying the treaty by holding a series of referendums.

The Government is expected to insist it does not want to hold a referendum on the constitution until the French "no" has been overturned. The Government believes it is impossible to win a referendum in the UK on a document that cannot come into force as things stand - it must be ratified by all 25 states.

The Government's Bill to allow a referendum to go ahead has been shelved and while it was given a first reading, no date had been set for further progress. Ministers were careful to avoid being accused of influencing the Dutch vote by making plain their belief that the treaty was dead. Mr Blair said that the issue would have to be debated first at the Council of Ministers meeting in Brussels in June.

Sir Stephen Wall, the former adviser to the Prime Minister, said on BBC Radio: "It would not be sensible or even feasible to hold a referendum in Britain." Charles Kennedy, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "I don't think the Government can proceed on the referendum next year." A Downing Street source said: "There may be an impasse with one group of EU countries saying we won't go down that road and there will be quite a serious debate about the future of the European economy. That is a debate we are prepared to have." M. Chirac, the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schöder, and Mr Barroso show no enthusiasm for the UK campaign for economic reform. They argue that nine nations have ratified the treaty and the process should continue. They also point to a declaration under which, if four-fifths of the countries approve it, the heads of government would hold a summit to consider the next steps.

The Government, however, believes the ball is in the French court and it is up to Paris to explain how it will overturn the result. Downing Street believes several other nations due to hold such polls, including the Czech Republic, Poland, and possibly Ireland, may side with Mr Blair in the fight for economic reform. But there were rumours of an emergency summit being called on Friday to stop Mr Blair putting the referendum on ice. EU heads of government are due to meet on 16 and 17 June.
Source
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Tue 31 May, 2005 05:07 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
Well, well, well....The US dollar is now worth .55c to the GBP and .80c to the Euro. First time it's been this high since last year - now that our a2k European Gathering is over. You guys in Europe better plan another gathering while the going is good!

You just wait until Asia's central banks get scared enough by your long-term budget outlook to diversify their foreign reserves from Dollars-only to Dollars plus Euros plus Yens. We'll use your steenking dollars for papering our walls before you know it! Laughing
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Tue 31 May, 2005 05:14 am
Trust Le Monde to print comments from conservatives in the U.S.:

__________________________________________________________
"Dès samedi, le très conservateur George Will, du Washington Post, prévoyait que "les élites ­ politique, économique et médiatique ­ risquaient de mesurer la limite de leur habileté à imposer leurs marottes" . Dans le Los Angeles Times, un autre néo-conservateur de la première heure, Gary Schmitt, mettait aussi en cause un déficit démocratique en Europe. Il ne cachait pas qu'il ne pleurerait pas la Constitution : "Si elle meurt, c'est la vie."

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-631760,36-655995,0.html
_____________________________________________________________

How is it the European pro-socialist camp here got its predictions so wrong when it's been evident to U.S. conservatives that this "constitution" was a bureaucratic monstrosity about to meet its well-deserved fate?

As so many have said already: "Vive la France !"
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Tue 31 May, 2005 05:17 am
P.S. Anybody knows how to say "Vive la Hollande" in Dutch? I need it for tomorrow evening <G>
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/13/2025 at 05:43:04