The European Union, and Euro-socialism in general, is a failed experiment

CNN (iReport) ^ | December 5, 2011 | Sahit Muja

[Qbert]

Time to let the whole thing slither down the sewer of history. First of all it is more and more clear that Europe should have let Greece default and instead of pumping bank money via Greece, they should simply have shored up those banks that would take losses.

The banks would still take a haircut, but come out on the other side w/o Greece.

Naturally this would remove Greece from the Eurozone and it would have to use the Euro or the US $ (without policy control over them) or renew its own currency.

Secondly, setting up an emergency fund is akin to a field of dreams Build it and they will come to dip into it. Instead, each country should build its own emergency funds, not depend on other countries.

Thirdly, you cannot trust other countries, esp. those in the south, to be fiscally responsible.

[Olog-hai]

None of their neighbors are mooches. None of them wanted to be bailed out (i.e. have bailout loans foisted on them), so that's why in the countries that did have the bailout loans foisted on them, every last government fell and was replaced with a compliant government that took the loans along with their draconian terms—two countries having their new governments appointed by the European Union rather than elected. All Germany's doing is biding their time until they can squeeze the rest of the eurozone for even more power in exchange for Germany's help; they don't care whether or not they'll cause a recession in countries outside their imperial nucleus.

[Qbert]

“None of their neighbors are mooches.”

Well, that’s good to hear- I’m sure the austerity measures will be welcomed with open arms then...

[Olog-hai]

You could have refrained from using a nonsequitur. The austerity measures are a power play to gain control over those countries and nothing else besides. If you think that Germany was doing this with an eye towards allowing those countries to remain independent, think again. One country couldn’t keep it secret that the Bundestag was reviewing their national budget before its home government got to see it; how many more countries are successfully keeping that secret?

[Qbert]

“If you think that Germany was doing this with an eye towards allowing those countries to remain independent, think again.”

No, I don’t believe at all that they have a goal to keep those countries independent- that’s the point. The other countries got themselves into this mess through failed socialist policies- so what other options do they really have?

They either submit to greater control, or they get out. Either way, they will have to adopt different spending policies to survive.

[Olog-hai]

Germany is also continuing to exercise those selfsame "failed socialist policies". Do you really think they turned themselves around from "sick man of Europe" to its economic overlord within less than a decade through practicing capitalism? No they did not. They instead used the European Central Bank, which manipulated interest rates in Germany's favor while simultaneously weakening states that needed to keep interest rates lower to maintain their economies' health. Lest you forgot, those selfsame ECB interest rate hikes also resulted in the USA's financial meltdown.

The "social market economy" is something that is pushed on every EU member state via the treaties (currently Article 3 Section 3 of the Treaty of Lisbon), so it's not like any country could avoid such socialist policies if they wanted to be in the EU.

[Qbert]

You’re making over-generalizations, and cherry picking facts- but even so, how does any of what you argue counter the point of the article, that the EU, and eurosocialism has been a failure?

[Olog-hai]

---

You’re making over-generalizations, and cherry picking facts

---

Funny how you can't demonstrate how. Especially in the face of your own overgeneralizations.

---

how does any of what you argue counter the point of the article, that the EU, and eurosocialism has been a failure?

---

Who said I was countering it? Germany is still practicing eurosocialism, and the only way it can be continued is via dictatorial means, which means that it is a means to an end after all. Germany is not where it is today via practicing capitalism.

[Qbert]

"Funny how you can't demonstrate how. Especially in the face of your own overgeneralizations."

Yeah, it has nothing whatsoever to do with absurd debt-to-GDP levels in the other nations, the fact that they lag in exports and making products that people want to purchase, the fact that they have a ridiculous retirement age for certain employees, and so on. It's all due to "manipulated" interest rates to favor one nation so they can finish their quest to conquer all of Europe and re-impose the Third Reich, or whatever the h-ll it is that you're driving at...

One nation put a gun up to the heads of all the others and forced all those things to happen....

[Olog-hai]

---

Yeah, it has nothing whatsoever to do with absurd debt-to-GDP levels in the other nations

---

You're mistaking Germany for a capitalist free-market nation again; they're an anti-capitalistic social-market country. Germany is a consistent violator of that unattainable Stability and Growth Pact (about time we got around to discussing that; thanks for reminding me). They are insisting that everyone else in Europe cut themselves to the bone to attain a spending level of 3 percent of GDP and under, and meanwhile they've been at 6 percent consistently. That's called a double standard.

---

It's all due to "manipulated" interest rates to favor one nation

---

Those quotation marks must not be around the word manipulated. It's already a matter of record as to what the ECB has done. There can be no other way that a "sick man of Europe" can dig itself out from under while clinging to the social market economy.

Are you defending the very socialism that you claim to decry? because by this consistent defense of anti-free-market Germany, you make yourself appear to champion socialism indeed.

[FW190]

""Anglo-Saxon capitalist model" is to them what failed—even though it was the ECB's manipulation of interest rates that caused the big financial crisis of 2008. (Since we are Anglo-Saxons, that's racism against us, BTW.) "

Anglo-Saxons, that's rich. Do you even know who the Anglo-Saxons are or where they came from? You rail against Germans and get this, Anglo-Saxons are/were GERMAN. AND presently there are three German Saxon Länder (states) Niedersachsen, Freistaat Sachsen, und Saxony-Anhalt.

Didn't they teach you European geography/History in your Irish schools? Oh, by the way Ireland was historically dominated the English Germanic Anglo-Saxons.

Since we are Anglo-Saxons

NEWS FLASH! The Irish are Celts!

[Olog-hai]

---

Anglo-Saxons are/were GERMAN

---

Nope. Bloodlines are way different. Try again. And that sure doesn't make it unracist to talk about Anglo-Saxon capitalism that shows how the social market economy pushers despise it. Modern Germans certainly don't see themselves as the brethren of the former Angles.

Not to mention, German ancestry goes back to ancient Assyria. Have a look at who founded Trier, particularly.

Kindly stop lying. I do not "rail against Germans".

[wolfman23601]

Olog,

Do you know if the UK has a safeguard in their constitution that treaties cannot supercede their constitution?

The scary thing is, the US does not. Case law has set the precedent that the US Constitution supercedes treaties, but it isn’t clear and all it would take is 5 Elana Kagens to overturn it.

[Qbert]

"Are you defending the very socialism that you claim to decry? because by this consistent defense of anti-free-market Germany, you make yourself appear to champion socialism indeed."

There are two types of socialist countries: There are the tiny handful, that for a variety of reasons, are relatively prosperous- but would be a lot better off if they were pure capitalist (Sweden, Germany), and then there are the overwhelming majority that are complete disasters. Don't confuse the two.

And it seems really telling that you evaded addressing any of the factors that I mentioned that account for the differences between Germany and most of their flailing EU neighbors. (But when you're only on some kind of European nationalist kick, I guess that sort of thing happens).

[Olog-hai]

So you are defending socialism then. There are no "two kinds"; there is only one kind, and only through aggression, whether militaristic or economic, can it be propped up. Germany's not too far behind France and Italy when it comes to their debt problems, you know (or maybe you don't—in which case, you heard it here first); their ace in the hole is their ability to control the ECB. The "variety of reasons" for socialist countries to succeed are all draconian, protectionist, imperialistic, centralizationistic (sic) reasons. (Which makes me wonder: if you accuse me of being on a "nationalist kick" for no reason at all, does this mean you're admitting to being on an imperialistic kick? I evaded nothing; you cited false reasons, while I cited the truth.)

[Olog-hai]

Yes, Article 6 clause 2 is very tricky. For a treaty to not supersede the entire Constitution, the bit about "on the authority of the United States" would have to be invoked in the sense of any treaty being designed to undermine the Constitution. That and clausula rebus sic stantibus where it applies there as well.

Of course, clausula rebus sic stantibus if invoked could make all the treaties on European Union et cetera fall down like a house of cards, because most of the countries involved in those treaties never foresaw these changes in circumstance. Problem is, most of the elites of those countries are bought and paid for; it'd have to be the people taking authority for themselves to achieve that result.

[Qbert]

“So you are defending socialism then... I evaded nothing.”

Don’t they teach reading comprehension over there?...

[Olog-hai]

I can understand phrases like "nationalistic kick" very well, yes. Those are usually uttered by those on an imperialistic kick, which made me ask.

"Prosperous" socialist countries are just the same economic disaster as those that are foundering; what makes one succeed and the other fail is the naked exploitation of the failed by the successful. It's got nothing to do with how hard the population of one works versus the other—otherwise, you're vindicating Red China (another imperialistic socialist power) by comparison.

[Qbert]

Well, I can assure you I have no “imperialist kick” for a foreign country.

[Olog-hai]

Thanks for clarifying that. Germany’s elites have quite the opposite in mind, regrettably.