Uh oh, if the Germans get pissed of enough its the end of the Euro.
-
Germany has been paying for the CAP, which benefited France at Germanys expense, since the inception of the EU. The EU is all about Germany paying, it always was.
"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s." climate-models-go-cold
fat__boy wrote:
The EU is all about Germany paying, it always was
That's bullshit, and you probably know it. The EU was supposed to be all about creating so many economic ties between the major nation states that it was impossible for any of them to start any kind of major conflict again as they could be financially strangled very simply. The EU in it's current form has gone away from that to some major degree and, as others have said, Germany and France, (largely), gambled on the ability of the Euro to become the most significant common currency available. They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along and unfortunately with the global economic downturn it appears they gambled and lost. However, given the size of their economies they have greater power to protect their electorate from the negative effects of this unlike countries such as Greece and Ireland. Quite frankly the article is just a case of minor xenophobia, (its the bloody foreigners fault!), much as is more often seen in the UK, and France. It's a means of picking anexternal scapegoat simply to protect a political party of choice and much of the comment merits about as much as the many, many wonderfully appalling articles printed in the Daily Mail in the UK in recent years.
Rhys "I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees"
-
fat__boy wrote:
The EU is all about Germany paying, it always was
That's bullshit, and you probably know it. The EU was supposed to be all about creating so many economic ties between the major nation states that it was impossible for any of them to start any kind of major conflict again as they could be financially strangled very simply. The EU in it's current form has gone away from that to some major degree and, as others have said, Germany and France, (largely), gambled on the ability of the Euro to become the most significant common currency available. They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along and unfortunately with the global economic downturn it appears they gambled and lost. However, given the size of their economies they have greater power to protect their electorate from the negative effects of this unlike countries such as Greece and Ireland. Quite frankly the article is just a case of minor xenophobia, (its the bloody foreigners fault!), much as is more often seen in the UK, and France. It's a means of picking anexternal scapegoat simply to protect a political party of choice and much of the comment merits about as much as the many, many wonderfully appalling articles printed in the Daily Mail in the UK in recent years.
Rhys "I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees"
goblinTech wrote:
They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along
From this side of the puddle it appeared that country after country begged and pleaded to be allowed to use the Euro, except, of course, for Switzerland and the UK. Are you saying that Germany and France encouraged the PIIGS to spend wildly, in excess of the agreements they made when they joined the EU, by promising to bail them out?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
fat__boy wrote:
The EU is all about Germany paying, it always was
That's bullshit, and you probably know it. The EU was supposed to be all about creating so many economic ties between the major nation states that it was impossible for any of them to start any kind of major conflict again as they could be financially strangled very simply. The EU in it's current form has gone away from that to some major degree and, as others have said, Germany and France, (largely), gambled on the ability of the Euro to become the most significant common currency available. They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along and unfortunately with the global economic downturn it appears they gambled and lost. However, given the size of their economies they have greater power to protect their electorate from the negative effects of this unlike countries such as Greece and Ireland. Quite frankly the article is just a case of minor xenophobia, (its the bloody foreigners fault!), much as is more often seen in the UK, and France. It's a means of picking anexternal scapegoat simply to protect a political party of choice and much of the comment merits about as much as the many, many wonderfully appalling articles printed in the Daily Mail in the UK in recent years.
Rhys "I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees"
-
goblinTech wrote:
They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along
From this side of the puddle it appeared that country after country begged and pleaded to be allowed to use the Euro, except, of course, for Switzerland and the UK. Are you saying that Germany and France encouraged the PIIGS to spend wildly, in excess of the agreements they made when they joined the EU, by promising to bail them out?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
Are you saying that Germany and France encouraged the PIIGS to spend wildly
He said nothing of the sort and you know it. He just pointed out that it was a gamble, they knew before they adopted the Euro the risks, they also knew what they stood to gain. Every possible eventuality would have been assessed and evaluated and they decided it was worth the risk, and if it wasn't for the Credit Crunch, it probably would have been. The more countries that took it up from the start, the more chance it had of success (remember these were prosperous times). I know they really wanted the UK to be in from the start. When he says they pushed and cajouled countries into going along, you know he means, joining it from the start and making sure their markets met the criteria, in order to give it the best chance of maturing. To beleive a German papers whine, that it is all to do with punishing Germanys past, reminds me of when people play the 'its only because I'm black card.'
-
Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Sweeden, Czech republic, Spain, Portgual, Ireland, Malta, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Hungary and Slovenia? :)
"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s." climate-models-go-cold
-
That doesn't answer the question. Was Germany forced into the Euro against its will, or did it join freely in the knowledge that if the Euro succeeded, it would benefit greatly but if it failed, it would be one of the biggest losers. Afterall when it comes to gambling, which is essentially what it did by ditching a perfectly good Mark for the unproven Euro, the one with the biggest stake has the most to lose, aswell as the most to gain. To link it to what happened 70 years ago is ludicrous.
What do you think this statement means: "Germany is was always the "scapegoat" when the IMF and EU are were looking for more money. Germany's "dark past" played a special role in this case as in many others" The dark past being refered to here is 70 years ago. The historical roots of the European Union lie in the Second World War. Europeans are determined to prevent such killing and destruction ever happening...Based on the Schuman plan, six countries sign a treaty to run their heavy industries – coal and steel – under a common management. In this way, none can on its own make the weapons of war to turn against the other, as in the past. [^] The very essence of the EU, and hence the Euro are beased on events 70 years ago. Now, as for Germany paying. It has always been a net contributor to the EU, with France receiving the most benefit through the Common Agricultural Policy. This is in part what the Bild alludes to when it says Germany has always been the scapegoat when the EU wanted money. The CAP is often explained[3] as the result of a political compromise between France and Germany: German industry would have access to the French market; in exchange, Germany would help pay for France's farmers. Germany is still the largest net contributor into the EU budget[^] So can you see how through a system of trade Germany has been made to pay over the decades for its "dark past" in a way it was after the First World War but without the same devastating impact of those reparations. Did the Germans want the euro? Here is some interesting background: France and the UK were opposed to German reunification, and attempted to influence the Soviet Union to stop it.[7] However, in late 1989 France extracted German commitment to the Monetary Union in return for support for German reunification.[8]...Germany was cautious about giving up its stable currency...However Germany had opposed previous moves to strengthen the euro group[^] Interesting eh? <
-
fat__boy wrote:
The EU is all about Germany paying, it always was
That's bullshit, and you probably know it. The EU was supposed to be all about creating so many economic ties between the major nation states that it was impossible for any of them to start any kind of major conflict again as they could be financially strangled very simply. The EU in it's current form has gone away from that to some major degree and, as others have said, Germany and France, (largely), gambled on the ability of the Euro to become the most significant common currency available. They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along and unfortunately with the global economic downturn it appears they gambled and lost. However, given the size of their economies they have greater power to protect their electorate from the negative effects of this unlike countries such as Greece and Ireland. Quite frankly the article is just a case of minor xenophobia, (its the bloody foreigners fault!), much as is more often seen in the UK, and France. It's a means of picking anexternal scapegoat simply to protect a political party of choice and much of the comment merits about as much as the many, many wonderfully appalling articles printed in the Daily Mail in the UK in recent years.
Rhys "I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees"
goblinTech wrote:
That's bullsh*t, and you probably know it. The EU was supposed to be all about creating so many economic ties between the major nation states that it was impossible for any of them to start any kind of major conflict again as they could be financially strangled very simply.
Yes, that as well. But if it wasnt about Germany paying why was it the biggest contributor and net loser to the EU? As the Bild sais, financially, Germany has always been the scapegoat because of its dark past. I will let you argue with a German Newspaper if you like, I am sure it knows far more than I do about the subject. :)
goblinTech wrote:
They poked, pushed, persuaded and cajoled others into going along
Yes, because they wanted more than one heavy hitter in the club, but the UK and other werent interested.
goblinTech wrote:
Quite frankly the article is just a case of minor xenophobia
Yes, it certainly has that ellement, but it is portraying a very real sentiment in Germany. A sentiment that could lead to the abandonment of the Euro.
"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s." climate-models-go-cold
-
I was limiting it to members of the EU since thats what Oakman stated. :) http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/index_en.htm[^]
"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s." climate-models-go-cold
-
Oakman wrote:
Are you saying that Germany and France encouraged the PIIGS to spend wildly
He said nothing of the sort and you know it. He just pointed out that it was a gamble, they knew before they adopted the Euro the risks, they also knew what they stood to gain. Every possible eventuality would have been assessed and evaluated and they decided it was worth the risk, and if it wasn't for the Credit Crunch, it probably would have been. The more countries that took it up from the start, the more chance it had of success (remember these were prosperous times). I know they really wanted the UK to be in from the start. When he says they pushed and cajouled countries into going along, you know he means, joining it from the start and making sure their markets met the criteria, in order to give it the best chance of maturing. To beleive a German papers whine, that it is all to do with punishing Germanys past, reminds me of when people play the 'its only because I'm black card.'
Ᵽompey wrote:
and you know it
If I knew the answer, I wouldn't have asked the question. It appeared, and still appears to me, that exculpating the guilt (however much it might be) of the PIIGS when they obviously violated the agreements they made when the joined the Eurozone and the EU, and accusing folks of Xenophobia because they point out that the consumers were now expecting the producers to bail them out (along, I might add with U.S. dollars via the IMF) was a bit harsh.
Ᵽompey wrote:
When he says they pushed and cajouled countries into going along, you know he means, joining it from the start and making sure their markets met the criteria, in order to give it the best chance of maturing.
It's entirely possible that what you say is true. I have often thought that Chirac was infected with Napoleon's dream of a united Europe under France's leadership.
Ᵽompey wrote:
To beleive a German papers whine, that it is all to do with punishing Germanys past
That wasn't the entire thrust of the article and you know it. ;)
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Sweeden, Czech republic, Spain, Portgual, Ireland, Malta, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Hungary and Slovenia? :)
"The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s." climate-models-go-cold
fat__boy wrote:
Denmark, Holland, Belgium,...Sweeden, Czech republic, Spain, Portgual, Ireland,Malta, Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Hungary, and Slovenia
Wrong on all of the above counts (but not Austria (though the Indians rioted in Austria) or Luxembourg) I know you won't believe me so try Googling the country name followed by the word, "riot." I think the problem is that riots are becoming such a part of the daily life over there, that you guys don't notice them. That's not quite true over here, though I wouldn't be surprised if we caught up in a year or so.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
What do you think this statement means: "Germany is was always the "scapegoat" when the IMF and EU are were looking for more money. Germany's "dark past" played a special role in this case as in many others" The dark past being refered to here is 70 years ago. The historical roots of the European Union lie in the Second World War. Europeans are determined to prevent such killing and destruction ever happening...Based on the Schuman plan, six countries sign a treaty to run their heavy industries – coal and steel – under a common management. In this way, none can on its own make the weapons of war to turn against the other, as in the past. [^] The very essence of the EU, and hence the Euro are beased on events 70 years ago. Now, as for Germany paying. It has always been a net contributor to the EU, with France receiving the most benefit through the Common Agricultural Policy. This is in part what the Bild alludes to when it says Germany has always been the scapegoat when the EU wanted money. The CAP is often explained[3] as the result of a political compromise between France and Germany: German industry would have access to the French market; in exchange, Germany would help pay for France's farmers. Germany is still the largest net contributor into the EU budget[^] So can you see how through a system of trade Germany has been made to pay over the decades for its "dark past" in a way it was after the First World War but without the same devastating impact of those reparations. Did the Germans want the euro? Here is some interesting background: France and the UK were opposed to German reunification, and attempted to influence the Soviet Union to stop it.[7] However, in late 1989 France extracted German commitment to the Monetary Union in return for support for German reunification.[8]...Germany was cautious about giving up its stable currency...However Germany had opposed previous moves to strengthen the euro group[^] Interesting eh? <
fat__boy wrote:
What do you think this statement means: "Germany is was always the "scapegoat" when the IMF and EU are were looking for more money. Germany's "dark past" played a special role in this case as in many others"
You are quoting direct from a newspaper, a German one at that. I would have thought that you, especially as you are English, would know better than that. Have you been away so long that you have forgotten about the sort of shit papers such as 'The Sun' and 'The Daily Mail' write about. At the end of the day the sole purpose of a newspaper is to sell copies, thye do this by targeting certain section of the population with stories that fuel their specific traits. If I beleived everything I read in the Daily Mail, I would be writing this in Arabic in between prayers to Allah, here is todays daily propaganda scaremongering installment[^]. I am sure The Bild has better than average sales today, as it panders to the its not our fault sentiment its them unforgiving foriegners fault. If I were German I would probably buy the Bild today, but doesn't mean it's an unbiased account of true hard facts.
-
thrakazog wrote:
awwww poor Germany. What did they ever do to anyone?
Funny and Cruel. I admire that about you.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Malta had riots, Belarus had riots, Moldova had riots. But your batting average is better than Fat_Boy's. ;)
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
fat__boy wrote:
Germany is paying reparations for the second world war. It is the only profitable working country in Europe which by being shackled to the EU is supporting all the rest.
No they are shackled to it because they wanted the Euro. They pushed for it, because they thought it would benefit them. Now it has gone pear-shaped, they have to pay the consequenses. If it had been a success they would have reaped the benefits. Or do you think Greece and thr rest of Europe forced them too ditch the Mark? Saying that Germany has too foot the Bill because of WW2 is utter Bollocks, it is because they have the largest economy at this moment in time, if France was doing as well as Germany are, they too will be expected to dig deep.
Ᵽompey wrote:
Saying that Germany has too foot the Bill because of WW2 is utter Bollocks, it is because they have the largest economy at this moment in time, if France was doing as well as Germany are, they too will be expected to dig deep.
If I understand, you are saying that because Germany has pursued sounder financial practices and has more worker-bees and fewer drones than many other EU countries, they are expected to transfer their wealth to cover for the unsound economic practices of the countries that have consistently violated the agreements they made when they joined the EU? Why exactly would they want to do that?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
fat__boy wrote:
What do you think this statement means: "Germany is was always the "scapegoat" when the IMF and EU are were looking for more money. Germany's "dark past" played a special role in this case as in many others"
You are quoting direct from a newspaper, a German one at that. I would have thought that you, especially as you are English, would know better than that. Have you been away so long that you have forgotten about the sort of shit papers such as 'The Sun' and 'The Daily Mail' write about. At the end of the day the sole purpose of a newspaper is to sell copies, thye do this by targeting certain section of the population with stories that fuel their specific traits. If I beleived everything I read in the Daily Mail, I would be writing this in Arabic in between prayers to Allah, here is todays daily propaganda scaremongering installment[^]. I am sure The Bild has better than average sales today, as it panders to the its not our fault sentiment its them unforgiving foriegners fault. If I were German I would probably buy the Bild today, but doesn't mean it's an unbiased account of true hard facts.
Ᵽompey wrote:
it panders to the its not our fault sentiment its them unforgiving foriegners fault
But, as far as I understand what is going on, it isn't Germany's fault and it is the fault of the PIIGS. Am I wrong?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Ᵽompey wrote:
Saying that Germany has too foot the Bill because of WW2 is utter Bollocks, it is because they have the largest economy at this moment in time, if France was doing as well as Germany are, they too will be expected to dig deep.
If I understand, you are saying that because Germany has pursued sounder financial practices and has more worker-bees and fewer drones than many other EU countries, they are expected to transfer their wealth to cover for the unsound economic practices of the countries that have consistently violated the agreements they made when they joined the EU? Why exactly would they want to do that?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
Why exactly would they want to do that?
They don’t, at least not any more. That’s the whole point of the discussion. Don’t forget they had to bailout the eastern half of their own country some 20 years ago.
There is only one Ashley Judd and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Ᵽompey wrote:
Saying that Germany has too foot the Bill because of WW2 is utter Bollocks, it is because they have the largest economy at this moment in time, if France was doing as well as Germany are, they too will be expected to dig deep.
If I understand, you are saying that because Germany has pursued sounder financial practices and has more worker-bees and fewer drones than many other EU countries, they are expected to transfer their wealth to cover for the unsound economic practices of the countries that have consistently violated the agreements they made when they joined the EU? Why exactly would they want to do that?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
they are expected to transfer their wealth to cover for the unsound economic practices of the countries that have consistently violated the agreements they made when they joined the EU
In Greece's case, it is a little worse than that. Essentially, they lied to get into the Euro Zone. The entire accrued pension plan fund had been spent, but it was not declared as such in their financial submissions to the EU. In fact, this was the main reason that the EU established a procedure to 'audit' the books of countries wishing to join the Euro Zone.
-
Oakman wrote:
Why exactly would they want to do that?
They don’t, at least not any more. That’s the whole point of the discussion. Don’t forget they had to bailout the eastern half of their own country some 20 years ago.
There is only one Ashley Judd and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
Deyan Georgiev wrote:
They don’t, at least not any more. That’s the whole point of the discussion.
We have here a failure to communicate[^]
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Oakman wrote:
they are expected to transfer their wealth to cover for the unsound economic practices of the countries that have consistently violated the agreements they made when they joined the EU
In Greece's case, it is a little worse than that. Essentially, they lied to get into the Euro Zone. The entire accrued pension plan fund had been spent, but it was not declared as such in their financial submissions to the EU. In fact, this was the main reason that the EU established a procedure to 'audit' the books of countries wishing to join the Euro Zone.
Obviously you are another one of those xenophobic Germans.
Chris C-B wrote:
In fact, this was the main reason that the EU established a procedure to 'audit' the books of countries wishing to join the Euro Zone.
That's a good example of locking the barn door after the horse is stolen.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.