Posted on 10/06/2012 1:51:04 PM PDT by presidio9
CATALONIA may be the catalyst for a renewed wave of separatism in the European Union, with Scotland and Flanders not far behind. The great paradox of the European Union, which is built on the concept of shared sovereignty, is that it lowers the stakes for regions to push for independence.
While a post-national European Union may be emerging out of the euro zone crisis, with a drive for more fiscal union and more centralized control over national budgets and banks, the crisis has accelerated calls for independence from member countries’ richer regions, angry at having to finance poorer neighbors.
Artur Mas, the Catalan president, recently shook Spain and the markets with a call for early regional elections and promised a referendum on independence from Spain, although Madrid considers it illegal. Scotland is planning an independence referendum for the autumn of 2014. The Flemish in Flanders have achieved nearly total autonomy, both administrative and linguistic, but still resent what they consider to be the holdover hegemony of the French-speakers of Wallonia and the Brussels elite, emotions that will be on display in provincial and communal elections Oct. 14.
There are countless things that hold unhappy countries, like marriages, together — shared history, shared wars, shared children, shared enemies. But the economic crisis in the European Union is also highlighting old grievances.
Many in Catalonia and Flanders, for example, argue that they pay significantly more into the national treasury than they receive, even as national governments cut public services. In this sense, the regional argument is the euro zone argument writ small, as richer northern countries like Germany, Finland and Austria complain that their comparative wealth and success are being drained to keep countries like Greece, Portugal and Spain afloat.
The crisis has also produced a loss of
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I would love to see globalism take a nose dive beginning with Europe. Globalists suck. It’s a nasty ideology.
I guess any elitist group dreaming of ruling the whole world and controling the wealth of the world is bad news. Whether it is based in Russia, Germany or a “diversity” of elitists from Saudi Arabia, Europe and America, the same outcome of mass murder, oppression and suffering is guarenteed.
Let every nation have it’s own native culture and struggle for it’s own well being as the people of that Nation see fit. Ditch the “citizen of world” elites’ dreams of controling the globe.
No, silly. Caber tossing.
Scotland would be better off in the long run, forced to stand on their own.
I was going to mention the poached [ ;-) ]salmon, but didn’t know how much was exported.
The distilling industry is in trouble at the moment.
Manufacturing and mining have long since gone to the dogs. No one in the developed world makes much any more - there just simply isnt any money in it.
The Fishing industry is in steep decline. So is the principal luxury items (scotch). Mostly through over fishing, rising costs and EU regulations.
Tourism is fine, but it isn't going to keep the country afloat. Scots can't survive by selling each other postcards and whiskey.
Basically they want to be a independant nation-state with full membership in an organisation dedicated to replacing all national governments with a European super state.
And Americans try and persuade me that Joe Biden is the most mentally challenged politician on the planet...
Haggis is a luxury???????
Doesn’t delicacy = luxury?
“...socialist states like NY and CA to fend for themselves instead of leaching off others..”
Believe it or not, NY State sends more money out to the federal government than it receives back in funding.
Amazing but true.
More like hideous, unhealthy, low-cost bulk foodstuff = delicacy (if you are an advertiser)
Show me the stats on that.
From a reliable source of course.
Show me the stats on that.
From a reliable source of course.
socialism is great ‘til you run out of other peoples’ money. amen maggie!
The reason is obvious: Consider the income levels necessary to pay for the expensive real estate here. Those high incomes pay higher income taxes, as do all the fabulously successful high tech companies out here. That high cost of living sends people elsewhere to retire. Hence, high net revenue transfer.
Most online sources don't go back very far, but if you need an example try the numbers from 1990-98 from the Statistical Abstract of the United States. Be sure to compare them with other States which you think so frugal. There are quite a few surprises in that listing.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then Senator from New York, is the guy who got the Federal Gov’t to start measuring the net contribution to/benefit from the federal treasury. Bill payers and beneficiaries.
Who benefits the most? Puerto Rico, New Mexico, Mississippi and West Virginia (2 to 1 ratio)
Who pays the bill? Delaware and Minnesota (1 to 2).
California was long a bill payer, but has recently slipped to being a net recipient. New York is still a big bill payer.
“From a reliable source of course.”
What will you take as reliable?
Because usually whenever somebody puts it that way, what they are really saying is “I am not going to believe you no matter what just because I say so”
But for starters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state
Socialist, in a debate with Milton Friedman:” In Sweden there are no poor” upon which Friedman replied “In America, there are no poor Swedes.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.