Enropean Union
-
Davy Mitchell wrote: Emporer Palpatine does anyone remember if the Emporer was referred to as Palpatine in the Original StarWars trilogy or is it a name subsequently given to him in the New trilogy and in the followup books
Stupidity dies. The end of future offspring. Evolution wins. - A Darwin Awards Haiku
The original Star Wars book that I had back in 1978, refered to Sentator Palpatine in the "prologue" 'Journal of the Whills'. I can't recall any dialogue from the movies that refer to him as anything other than the Emperor. Michael Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
-
The original Star Wars book that I had back in 1978, refered to Sentator Palpatine in the "prologue" 'Journal of the Whills'. I can't recall any dialogue from the movies that refer to him as anything other than the Emperor. Michael Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
IIRC the movies referred to Senator Palpatine as well. I haven't seen the movies in a while (at least a year :|) so I might be wrong. Preferred storyline: - I am your father. Search your feelings and you'll know it's the truth. Together we can rule this galaxy like father and son. - Ok dad. Let's kick some butt!
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Brian Azzopardi wrote: Who cares about what the Euro needs? The politicians in France and Germany, obviously! Who cares about them? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Sovereingty! This is already being eroded little by little with or without any help from the EU. People say this alot but it seems that they have misunderstood the concept. Sovereingty today is taken to mean lots of stuff like interest rates, economic policy etc. These were added on to the meaning only later. The concept of sovereignty was invented after the 30year war in 1643 (IIRC) and the founders of the treaty (I forgot the names) basically agreed that the internal affairs of a country are it's own affairs and that no country had the right to intervene in the goings on of another. If a country today changes its interest rates in response to market conditions it does not mean it has lost some of its sovereingty. When countries sign up to treaties such as the Geneva Convention or EU or whatever they *chose* to do so. Their soveriengty was not eroded by some uncontrollable outside force but they gave it up in exchange for something else. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: All that matters is how much money you have - if you are a big enough company then you can steamroll over more or less anything in order to get your way It's always been like that, even in Caeser's days. Soverigty has little to do with who wields political power inside a country. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: I want to hear the ECONOMIC arguments If you care about the economics you've missed the point. The EU is a political project with huge political consequences. The EU elite use the economics to lure people. Does this sound like a consipiracy theory? If it does that's because it is. Going from the earliest stages of the EU and what the early writings it is clear that the eventual goal is a united europe X|. Economics will not really matter if you're country does not exist any more does it? For a socialist you're being very materialistic and cynical Robert :) What's changed? Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Going from the earliest stages of the EU and what the early writings it is clear that the eventual goal is a united europe And what's wrong with that? If it brings stability to Europe, then it's a good thing! And for the conspiracy theory: Get real! It's not like it's the continuation of Der dritte Reich. Of course the EU has a political agenda, just like the Union had before the US became the US. I don't see americans whining about their United States (if you ignore some southern hillbillies who still haven't let go of the confederation). If we keep up drawing lines between ourselves, we'll keep up getting pissed at eachother for stepping over the line. Then why not trim away the uneccesary lines? Preferred storyline: - I am your father. Search your feelings and you'll know it's the truth. Together we can rule this galaxy like father and son. - Ok dad. Let's kick some butt!
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Brian Azzopardi wrote: Who cares about what the Euro needs? The politicians in France and Germany, obviously! Who cares about them? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Sovereingty! This is already being eroded little by little with or without any help from the EU. People say this alot but it seems that they have misunderstood the concept. Sovereingty today is taken to mean lots of stuff like interest rates, economic policy etc. These were added on to the meaning only later. The concept of sovereignty was invented after the 30year war in 1643 (IIRC) and the founders of the treaty (I forgot the names) basically agreed that the internal affairs of a country are it's own affairs and that no country had the right to intervene in the goings on of another. If a country today changes its interest rates in response to market conditions it does not mean it has lost some of its sovereingty. When countries sign up to treaties such as the Geneva Convention or EU or whatever they *chose* to do so. Their soveriengty was not eroded by some uncontrollable outside force but they gave it up in exchange for something else. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: All that matters is how much money you have - if you are a big enough company then you can steamroll over more or less anything in order to get your way It's always been like that, even in Caeser's days. Soverigty has little to do with who wields political power inside a country. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: I want to hear the ECONOMIC arguments If you care about the economics you've missed the point. The EU is a political project with huge political consequences. The EU elite use the economics to lure people. Does this sound like a consipiracy theory? If it does that's because it is. Going from the earliest stages of the EU and what the early writings it is clear that the eventual goal is a united europe X|. Economics will not really matter if you're country does not exist any more does it? For a socialist you're being very materialistic and cynical Robert :) What's changed? Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: It's always been like that, even in Caeser's days ha ha. I know what's coming - I should be more pragmatic right? It's just the way it is? etc. etc. That goes against my nature unfortunately. Corruption, bribery and blackmail may well be the norm, but it still makes me fume. Anyway, I digress! Just remember that our ("the people") only enemy is APATHY. :) Brian Azzopardi wrote: If you care about the economics you've missed the point. I know the politics and I know the ultimate goal is a United States of Europa, but you'll never sell that to the British people. My point was (is) that if President Blair wants people to vote YES in any referendum then he'd better get his spin-doctors working overtime to convince people like me that the economic benefits are worth it. As I have said before, this is VERY unlikely. People in the UK have more important things to worry about than the bloody Euro. I don't think it'll happen here in the UK for a long time, if at all. It's probably more likely we'd end up using the US dollar. :-D
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Brian Azzopardi wrote: Who cares about what the Euro needs? The politicians in France and Germany, obviously! Who cares about them? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Sovereingty! This is already being eroded little by little with or without any help from the EU. People say this alot but it seems that they have misunderstood the concept. Sovereingty today is taken to mean lots of stuff like interest rates, economic policy etc. These were added on to the meaning only later. The concept of sovereignty was invented after the 30year war in 1643 (IIRC) and the founders of the treaty (I forgot the names) basically agreed that the internal affairs of a country are it's own affairs and that no country had the right to intervene in the goings on of another. If a country today changes its interest rates in response to market conditions it does not mean it has lost some of its sovereingty. When countries sign up to treaties such as the Geneva Convention or EU or whatever they *chose* to do so. Their soveriengty was not eroded by some uncontrollable outside force but they gave it up in exchange for something else. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: All that matters is how much money you have - if you are a big enough company then you can steamroll over more or less anything in order to get your way It's always been like that, even in Caeser's days. Soverigty has little to do with who wields political power inside a country. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: I want to hear the ECONOMIC arguments If you care about the economics you've missed the point. The EU is a political project with huge political consequences. The EU elite use the economics to lure people. Does this sound like a consipiracy theory? If it does that's because it is. Going from the earliest stages of the EU and what the early writings it is clear that the eventual goal is a united europe X|. Economics will not really matter if you're country does not exist any more does it? For a socialist you're being very materialistic and cynical Robert :) What's changed? Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: For a socialist you're being very materialistic and cynical Robert What's changed? Cynicism comes with age. Materialism? I'm not materialistic - all I need is my wife, cats and my Rickenbacker 330 6 string electric guitar. :laugh:
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
-
IIRC the movies referred to Senator Palpatine as well. I haven't seen the movies in a while (at least a year :|) so I might be wrong. Preferred storyline: - I am your father. Search your feelings and you'll know it's the truth. Together we can rule this galaxy like father and son. - Ok dad. Let's kick some butt!
I'm trying to recall a line in the movies that mentions Palpatine and can't think of any. Maybe in the attack briefing in Jedi but I think they all refer to "The Emperor". Oh well, it gives me an excuse to watch the movies again. Michael Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Who cares about what the Euro needs? The politicians in France and Germany, obviously! ;) Brian Azzopardi wrote: Even worse, it reduces your sovereingty ha ha. Sovereingty! This is already being eroded little by little with or without any help from the EU. Democracy? ROTFL. All that matters is how much money you have - if you are a big enough company then you can steamroll over more or less anything in order to get your way. Sigh. The problem is that the arguments from both sides are just so facile. The pro-Euros will wave shiny new notes and coins in peoples faces and hope that people will want to adopt them simply because they are new. The anti-Euros bemoan the fact that the Queens head won't be on our coins anymore - and this somehow means we lose our "national identity". ha ha ha. I want to hear the ECONOMIC arguments. Brian Azzopardi wrote: I'm just worried about what a united Europe will look like in 50 yrs time Perhaps a united Europe is inevitable. Perhaps a united World lies even further ahead - a single global currency and government. Shudder.
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: The pro-Euros will wave shiny new notes and coins in peoples faces and hope that people will want to adopt them simply because they are new. Couldn't agree more. I saw a programme on BBC a while ago (might have been a late night money one), anyway, they produced an entire segment following tourists on holiday given "shiney new notes". The problem was at the end when they interviewed the people and asked, should the UK adopt the Euro, the majority of people said (paraphrasing) "yeah, we might get overcharged initially, but it makes paying for things so much easier". Great, the average voter is going to decide whether or not it lets them buy their bread and shopping on holiday and if it does its got to be good! My real issue is that we get screwed royally by the EU. The whole idea is to remove protectionist trade barriers to allower freer movement of goods and services across member states. Anyone tried buying a car from France or Germany? How about purchasing alcohol in France and then driving back? Every time customs jump on us demanding we pay duty... why? We're not supposed to pay it!! (N.b. most of the time its because they argue its for re-sale, of course the burden is on the person driving to prove they're for personal consumption. How the hell am I supposed to prove that in the next 6 months I'll get through 8 crates of lager, or 20 bottles of wine etc.) I have no problem with Europe, however, the problem is there's no way you can expect the different economies to perform the same, as a result you cannot expect to set the same interest rates, taxes, social policy. We already pump too much cash into subsidising olive farmers in the middle of nowhere who over produce stuff the world doesn't want! I don't understand why people complain about their industry's dying, and expect the government to just purchase what they produce? Why should they? STOP FARMING IT :) Arrgh, rant :) I feel better for that. -- Paul "I need the secure packaging of Jockeys. My boys need a house!" - Kramer, in "The Chinese Woman" episode of Seinfeld MS Messenger: paul@oobaloo.co.uk Sonork: 100.22446
-
The EU is one of the most corrupt governmental bodies in the world. This kind of stuff is why I'll be voting no to joining the Euro. Michael Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
Michael P Butler wrote: The EU is one of the most corrupt governmental bodies in the world. This kind of stuff is why I'll be voting no to joining the Euro. It can't be more corrupt than the Romanian Government. Best regards, Alexandru Savescu
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Going from the earliest stages of the EU and what the early writings it is clear that the eventual goal is a united europe And what's wrong with that? If it brings stability to Europe, then it's a good thing! And for the conspiracy theory: Get real! It's not like it's the continuation of Der dritte Reich. Of course the EU has a political agenda, just like the Union had before the US became the US. I don't see americans whining about their United States (if you ignore some southern hillbillies who still haven't let go of the confederation). If we keep up drawing lines between ourselves, we'll keep up getting pissed at eachother for stepping over the line. Then why not trim away the uneccesary lines? Preferred storyline: - I am your father. Search your feelings and you'll know it's the truth. Together we can rule this galaxy like father and son. - Ok dad. Let's kick some butt!
Jorgen you're a swede. And IIRC, it's been a long time since sweden was involved in a war (even Hitler ignored you :) ). Meanwhile the rest of Europe has been unstable for at least the last 400 years. You seriously think that something like the EU will bring stability? You gotta be joking. Europe is inherently unstable. The EU is an attempt to impose peace but it won't work because peace only comes if there is stability which is an inherent property of a system. And Europe is definetly not such a system. Read some history and you'll know why. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Of course the EU has a political agenda, just like the Union had before the US became the US. But the 2 are fundamentally different. Each european country has a history going back hundreds of years and they've been fighting each other for just as long. That's a lot of historical baggage. The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. On the other hand the English don't like the French, the Germans don't trust the French and everyone fears Germany. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: If we keep up drawing lines between ourselves, we'll keep up getting pissed at eachother for stepping over the line. Then why not trim away the uneccesary lines? Yeah right! Obvious innit. As if redrawing some lines on a map will remove the underlying causes of war. Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2165767.stm Earlier development: - Martha Andreasen raises her voice against EU accounting standards. - Few months later Martha Andreasen loses her job. Tomaz
The EU is nothing but an attempt on the part of Europe to achieve economically what it was never able to achieve militarily. The Euro-Elites have always wanted a unified political/Economic system which they could control. The only difference now is that the evolution of economic systems has provided them with a strategy the never had in the past. The Brits would be insane to join. They would be much better served becoming part of a North American economic coalition. North America has much closer cultural affinity with Britain than does Europe.
-
Jorgen you're a swede. And IIRC, it's been a long time since sweden was involved in a war (even Hitler ignored you :) ). Meanwhile the rest of Europe has been unstable for at least the last 400 years. You seriously think that something like the EU will bring stability? You gotta be joking. Europe is inherently unstable. The EU is an attempt to impose peace but it won't work because peace only comes if there is stability which is an inherent property of a system. And Europe is definetly not such a system. Read some history and you'll know why. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Of course the EU has a political agenda, just like the Union had before the US became the US. But the 2 are fundamentally different. Each european country has a history going back hundreds of years and they've been fighting each other for just as long. That's a lot of historical baggage. The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. On the other hand the English don't like the French, the Germans don't trust the French and everyone fears Germany. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: If we keep up drawing lines between ourselves, we'll keep up getting pissed at eachother for stepping over the line. Then why not trim away the uneccesary lines? Yeah right! Obvious innit. As if redrawing some lines on a map will remove the underlying causes of war. Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Jorgen you're a swede. And IIRC, it's been a long time since sweden was involved in a war (even Hitler ignored you ). 2-300 years of peace or something like that (if you don't count the cold war which we were litteraly in the middle of!). I couldn't be more fortunate. I guess this is one of the reasons why I think war is not an option. Brian Azzopardi wrote: You seriously think that something like the EU will bring stability? You gotta be joking. I'm not joking. I swear! ;) Think about it. After the second world war many people realized that war is not an option. Europe was basically a pile of dirt in 1945. The price all countries involved had to pay was enormous in both human lives and money. I dare say that most europeans are not hot headed "holy crusaders" anymore. The only way you can change things without having to pay the ultimate price is by politics. And this is where the Union comes into play. Instead of having one doing propaganda about some other country(ies), you can send representatives to a parliament where each representative can have a debate. The tensions are considerably less if you debate in "our house" rather than over the hedge. Brian Azzopardi wrote: Europe is inherently unstable. I'd say was unstable. The only place where you find instability now are at the outer rims of Europe (balkans mostly). But I think that's going to change since: a) we're hunting down the people who commited serious war crimes and put them in a court to show everybody else that "prepare to pay the price before you act" b) surely, all the people in that area must be pretty fed up with wars. If we, the EU, help them in the peace process, i think they'll solve their issues without weapons. That's a lot cheaper solution than war! Brian Azzopardi wrote: But the 2 are fundamentally different. Yes. Europe and the US are fundamentaly different in one way, but at the same time very similar. Ignoring the fact that the native americans exists, america was mostly split between France, England and Spain. Now, I'm not a historian by any means, but IIRC there were constant territorial wars between these countries.. right? Brian Azzopardi wrote: The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. They shared the same history up until 1500-1600. And they shared
-
Michael P Butler wrote: This kind of stuff is why I'll be voting no to joining the Euro. I'd be surprised if Blair even dares take the isuue to the polls! Let's face it, with Rupert Murdoch in Fleet Street, there is little chance of your "average Joe" voting Yes - The Sun will start a massive "VOTE NO" campaign (along with The Daily Mail, Express, etc.) and that'll be that. If rumours are to be believed, New Labour will hold the referendum next Autumn ... if so, they have an uphill struggle on there hands convincing people it is in their interests. Just because people came back from their European holidays thinking "aren't the new notes and coins nice?" doesn't mean they'll vote for it. I am still in two minds - if joining the Euro really is in our best interests as a nation, then let's do it. I don't see New Labour trying very hard to win hearts and minds though. What will we get out it? Our economy is doing good, interest rates are rock-bottom and Sterling and the US Dollar are very strong currencies. Would the UK joining give the Euro the boost is obviously needs or would it f*** up our economy and leave us taxpayers subsidizing poorer EU countries? Big questions that need some answers - and soon!
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
leave us taxpayers subsidizing poorer EU countries? We already do. We also sponsor French Farming which is the biggest sponge of Common Agricultural Policy spend and Europe has the audacity to complain about recent subsidies to US farmers. The CAP budget dwarfs this amount. The truth of the matter is that the UK and the rest of the EU are totally different. Our economic cycle is more like the US than the EU, our social and economic policies are different, we are 'low tax' (would you belive it!!) compared to the rest of the EU. To top it all off the EU has to go adjusting its rules for Euro membership because the countries already in the Eurozone can't stick to it when we already do! Euro: nope. X| not my vote (at the moment anyway). "I spent a lot of my money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered" George Best.
-
Jorgen you're a swede. And IIRC, it's been a long time since sweden was involved in a war (even Hitler ignored you :) ). Meanwhile the rest of Europe has been unstable for at least the last 400 years. You seriously think that something like the EU will bring stability? You gotta be joking. Europe is inherently unstable. The EU is an attempt to impose peace but it won't work because peace only comes if there is stability which is an inherent property of a system. And Europe is definetly not such a system. Read some history and you'll know why. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Of course the EU has a political agenda, just like the Union had before the US became the US. But the 2 are fundamentally different. Each european country has a history going back hundreds of years and they've been fighting each other for just as long. That's a lot of historical baggage. The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. On the other hand the English don't like the French, the Germans don't trust the French and everyone fears Germany. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: If we keep up drawing lines between ourselves, we'll keep up getting pissed at eachother for stepping over the line. Then why not trim away the uneccesary lines? Yeah right! Obvious innit. As if redrawing some lines on a map will remove the underlying causes of war. Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: But the 2 are fundamentally different. Each european country has a history going back hundreds of years and they've been fighting each other for just as long. That's a lot of historical baggage. The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. But you can also look at that from another point of view and consider the different cultures of europeans countries and the different cultures and languages inside each country also as a richness. The US have a short history, culture mostly coming from the original countries of the immigrants, and a single language. That brought to a strong union, but also to a isolated country. I'm not stating that europeans are better than americans, africans, australians and any other people. I think that the EU is a great step to a peaceful Europe and it's a good chance to build a different and new model of society. -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: But the 2 are fundamentally different. Each european country has a history going back hundreds of years and they've been fighting each other for just as long. That's a lot of historical baggage. The US has no history to speak of. What's more the US shares a (reasonably) common language and culture. But you can also look at that from another point of view and consider the different cultures of europeans countries and the different cultures and languages inside each country also as a richness. The US have a short history, culture mostly coming from the original countries of the immigrants, and a single language. That brought to a strong union, but also to a isolated country. I'm not stating that europeans are better than americans, africans, australians and any other people. I think that the EU is a great step to a peaceful Europe and it's a good chance to build a different and new model of society. -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD
Vuemme wrote: That brought to a strong union, but also to a isolated country It's called American Exceptionalism. And yes, the immigrants wanted to leave Europe and all that it represents behind. Unfortunately for them it's not as easy as they think. Vuemme wrote: think that the EU is a great step to a peaceful Europe Maybe. A bunch of politicians with fat salaries and even fatter perks does not automagically lead to peace. Just higher taxes. Vuemme wrote: it's a good chance to build a different and new model of society Hehe :) You think so? The French are trying to turn the EU into their own model of society (look at the EU subsidies for farmers mostly going to France) using other peoples money, as are all the others. The countries don't want a new model - they want to protect their existing Social Democrat one. However as you are italian I can understand that your country needs a stable goverment (BTW, how's Berlusconi as a PM?) so the EU could help to provide one. Only Italy could survive, indeed flourish, amid all the political intrigue you have. I am very envious of you italians: fine wine, excellent food, beautiful women, fast cars and great culture : you have it all you bastards :) Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
-
Vuemme wrote: That brought to a strong union, but also to a isolated country It's called American Exceptionalism. And yes, the immigrants wanted to leave Europe and all that it represents behind. Unfortunately for them it's not as easy as they think. Vuemme wrote: think that the EU is a great step to a peaceful Europe Maybe. A bunch of politicians with fat salaries and even fatter perks does not automagically lead to peace. Just higher taxes. Vuemme wrote: it's a good chance to build a different and new model of society Hehe :) You think so? The French are trying to turn the EU into their own model of society (look at the EU subsidies for farmers mostly going to France) using other peoples money, as are all the others. The countries don't want a new model - they want to protect their existing Social Democrat one. However as you are italian I can understand that your country needs a stable goverment (BTW, how's Berlusconi as a PM?) so the EU could help to provide one. Only Italy could survive, indeed flourish, amid all the political intrigue you have. I am very envious of you italians: fine wine, excellent food, beautiful women, fast cars and great culture : you have it all you bastards :) Brian Azzopardi bibamus, edamus, cras moriemur
[eat, drink, for tomorrow we die]
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Maybe. A bunch of politicians with fat salaries and even fatter perks does not automagically lead to peace. Just higher taxes. I hope that the EU is not only a bunch of politicians, even if I should recognize that its government its not a model of efficiency. I think that the concept of an united Europe is growing among the people of my age (less than 35yr old). We take the idea of working, travelling and spending "our" money in other EU countries as granted, and I think that younger people will consider that as the "normal" way of living. People who lived the WWII or the years of the cold war could be more cautious and some of them could still look at people coming from other countries with suspect, but that's going to became past :) Hehe You think so? The French are trying to turn the EU into their own model of society (look at the EU subsidies for farmers mostly going to France) using other peoples money, as are all the others. The countries don't want a new model - they want to protect their existing Social Democrat one. Thinking in terms of French, English, Germans, Italian interest are the wrong way to see the EU (and I'm ashamed to say that this is the one that the italian goverment has). I have more things in common with a 30 yr old programmer living in France, Greece, Germany, Spain or with a 65 yr old multimillionaire living in Italy? Speaking the same language is good (and I swear I'm tring to improve my poor english :)) but it's not the only thing. I hope that being European will be more important than being Italian (and our president Ciampi always states that he's European then Italian). However as you are italian I can understand that your country needs a stable goverment (BTW, how's Berlusconi as a PM?) so the EU could help to provide one. We need a stable government of this kind just like a fish needs a bicycle :) An italian writer of the '70s said that the situation is difficult, but not serious, meaning that in Italy we may have problems but we take them in a funny way :) I don't like our current government, I think that berlusconi is just like peron or other famous politicians known more for their appeal on people and ability to promise and lie than for their moral qualities. I think that some of the parties that support the government are racist and that their ideas will lead to isolation. But the majority of italians voted for them and I've to respect their opinion. Only Italy could survive, in
-
Brian Azzopardi wrote: Maybe. A bunch of politicians with fat salaries and even fatter perks does not automagically lead to peace. Just higher taxes. I hope that the EU is not only a bunch of politicians, even if I should recognize that its government its not a model of efficiency. I think that the concept of an united Europe is growing among the people of my age (less than 35yr old). We take the idea of working, travelling and spending "our" money in other EU countries as granted, and I think that younger people will consider that as the "normal" way of living. People who lived the WWII or the years of the cold war could be more cautious and some of them could still look at people coming from other countries with suspect, but that's going to became past :) Hehe You think so? The French are trying to turn the EU into their own model of society (look at the EU subsidies for farmers mostly going to France) using other peoples money, as are all the others. The countries don't want a new model - they want to protect their existing Social Democrat one. Thinking in terms of French, English, Germans, Italian interest are the wrong way to see the EU (and I'm ashamed to say that this is the one that the italian goverment has). I have more things in common with a 30 yr old programmer living in France, Greece, Germany, Spain or with a 65 yr old multimillionaire living in Italy? Speaking the same language is good (and I swear I'm tring to improve my poor english :)) but it's not the only thing. I hope that being European will be more important than being Italian (and our president Ciampi always states that he's European then Italian). However as you are italian I can understand that your country needs a stable goverment (BTW, how's Berlusconi as a PM?) so the EU could help to provide one. We need a stable government of this kind just like a fish needs a bicycle :) An italian writer of the '70s said that the situation is difficult, but not serious, meaning that in Italy we may have problems but we take them in a funny way :) I don't like our current government, I think that berlusconi is just like peron or other famous politicians known more for their appeal on people and ability to promise and lie than for their moral qualities. I think that some of the parties that support the government are racist and that their ideas will lead to isolation. But the majority of italians voted for them and I've to respect their opinion. Only Italy could survive, in
Vuemme wrote: People who lived the WWII or the years of the cold war could be more cautious and some of them could still look at people coming from other countries with suspect, but that's going to became past I hope so. History teaches us differently unfortunately. Not to go back too far, although WW1 was devastating, less than 20 years later the world was once again awash with the blood of WW2 :( Vuemme wrote: Thinking in terms of French, English, Germans, Italian interest are the wrong way to see the EU Well if the countries themselves think in their own interest I think it makes alot of sense to see it from the same point of view for the simple reason that their actions/policiess will be informed from their point of view and thus to understand the actions a country takes we too must look at the situation as the country did. Anyway EU politicians are elected from within their own countries. A frenchman did not elect Blair. Therefore when the next election comes Blair (and all the others) will have to show something to their voters. Helping the people of other countries does not get u votes from people in your own country. Vuemme wrote: I have more things in common with a 30 yr old programmer living in France, Greece, Germany, Spain or with a 65 yr old multimillionaire living in Italy? I don't think so. Italy has differenet taxes, different immigration policies, different welfare state, different style of govt, different economy. The way you and an italian millionare think is still "italian" - you're the product of the same culture. A frenchman might not appreciate parma ham (or the new Ferrari: Enzo - very nice car) as much as you (or the italian millionare) do :) Vuemme wrote: An italian writer of the '70s said that the situation is difficult, but not serious, meaning that in Italy we may have problems but we take them in a funny way Typically italian :) Vuemme wrote: I don't like our current government I wouldn't call Berlusconi my fav politician. He's got too much control of the media. Look what's happening at Rai! Vuemme wrote: think that living here is not so bad I know. My gf has family living in Italy and we visit regularly (once a year at least). The norh of italy is the best :) I don't live far away: Malta. Ever heard of it? :) Vuemme wrote: P.S. your family
-
Vuemme wrote: People who lived the WWII or the years of the cold war could be more cautious and some of them could still look at people coming from other countries with suspect, but that's going to became past I hope so. History teaches us differently unfortunately. Not to go back too far, although WW1 was devastating, less than 20 years later the world was once again awash with the blood of WW2 :( Vuemme wrote: Thinking in terms of French, English, Germans, Italian interest are the wrong way to see the EU Well if the countries themselves think in their own interest I think it makes alot of sense to see it from the same point of view for the simple reason that their actions/policiess will be informed from their point of view and thus to understand the actions a country takes we too must look at the situation as the country did. Anyway EU politicians are elected from within their own countries. A frenchman did not elect Blair. Therefore when the next election comes Blair (and all the others) will have to show something to their voters. Helping the people of other countries does not get u votes from people in your own country. Vuemme wrote: I have more things in common with a 30 yr old programmer living in France, Greece, Germany, Spain or with a 65 yr old multimillionaire living in Italy? I don't think so. Italy has differenet taxes, different immigration policies, different welfare state, different style of govt, different economy. The way you and an italian millionare think is still "italian" - you're the product of the same culture. A frenchman might not appreciate parma ham (or the new Ferrari: Enzo - very nice car) as much as you (or the italian millionare) do :) Vuemme wrote: An italian writer of the '70s said that the situation is difficult, but not serious, meaning that in Italy we may have problems but we take them in a funny way Typically italian :) Vuemme wrote: I don't like our current government I wouldn't call Berlusconi my fav politician. He's got too much control of the media. Look what's happening at Rai! Vuemme wrote: think that living here is not so bad I know. My gf has family living in Italy and we visit regularly (once a year at least). The norh of italy is the best :) I don't live far away: Malta. Ever heard of it? :) Vuemme wrote: P.S. your family
Brian Azzopardi wrote: I hope so. History teaches us differently unfortunately. Not to go back too far, although WW1 was devastating, less than 20 years later the world was once again awash with the blood of WW2 After WWI Germany was in a very difficult economical situation and that helped nazism to gain support from desperate people. After WWII the Marshal plan helped the european countries to rebuild their infrastructures and reduce the impact of war on economy and living conditions. Well if the countries themselves think in their own interest I think it makes alot of sense to see it from the same point of view for the simple reason that their actions/policiess will be informed from their point of view and thus to understand the actions a country takes we too must look at the situation as the country did. But you've to consider that what a country does is decided by the government and a governement represents only a part of the population (and in non-democratic countries it represent only the interest of few people) and a decision could be made against the will of the majority of people. Today's european government are cold about EU. Berlusconi, Aznar, Chirac and Blair are not "euro-entusiasts", but I think that many people in the EU (mostly young people) would like to see a stronger union that could be more influent than what the today's EU is (the Kioto's agreement on environment is a good sample of that). I don't think so. Italy has differenet taxes, different immigration policies, different welfare state, different style of govt, different economy. The way you and an italian millionare think is still "italian" - you're the product of the same culture. A frenchman might not appreciate parma ham (or the new Ferrari: Enzo - very nice car) as much as you (or the italian millionare) do You're right. We are product of the same culture. I'm Italian, I speak Italian as mother tongue. I can't change it. It's a matter of facts, just like saying that I've got black eyes or that I'm 185 cm tall. But this didn't define me as an individual. I got something from the environment where I grew up, like everybody, but other things can influence you as well (being in a rich or poor, large or small family, grew in a small village or in a large city etc.) and those don't depend on the country where you were born. I think I share more ideas and interest with people of the same age, education and economic condition from other countries than with people of different age,
-
The EU is one of the most corrupt governmental bodies in the world. This kind of stuff is why I'll be voting no to joining the Euro. Michael Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
Another interesting thread. My guess is that Britain will not go for full monetary union. I don't know much about Euro politics, but I think Britain basically is more comfortable throwing in with the US, Canada, and other English speaking countries... than they are with full Euro integration. I remember when Canada had that problem with Spaniards fishing in Canadian territorial waters, and they impounded a boat or something. Anyway, I remember the British representative wouldn't vote to condemn Canada along with the rest of the Euro nations. You get the sense that when push comes to shove, the US, Britain, and Canada have a bond that is stronger that the political/financial bonds that are being forged in the EU... and that amongst all the shifting alliances... they are basically in this together. Just my guess... JM