Opšti topik o EU (ex kriza Evrozone)

[Anduril]

 

U Holandiji Vildersov PVV izgleda ostaje van vlasti prema exit pollovima...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBlQZyTF_LY

Edited March 18, 2017 by Anduril

[namenski]

1 култура, финоћа, једном речју 1 идила, пева се и свира Бетовен, а не ова стока балканска, западнобалканска нарочито.   

 

 

Едит: Андурил се разнежио 

Edited March 18, 2017 by namenski

[Friend]

Dobro primeceno ovo za civilizovane

[Dagmar]

Vilders je davao podršku vladi pre neku godinu.

Naravno da je super što sad neće ni prići vladi, ali minus je što nemaju nijednog jakog lidera stranke koji bi bio državnik/premijer ranga recimo Merkelove.

Realno da plaču od sreće da su imali kandidata ranga Saše Jankovića.

[eumeswil]

Vilders je davao podršku vladi pre neku godinu.

Naravno da je super što sad neće ni prići vladi, ali minus je što nemaju nijednog jakog lidera stranke koji bi bio državnik/premijer ranga recimo Merkelove.

Realno da plaču od sreće da su imali kandidata ranga Saše Jankovića.

Kako da imaju političara ranga Merkelove kad holandski kapital nije jak kao nemački. Denacifikovali su se al' zamalo.  -_-

 

 

Today each of the three daughters of the IG Farben is 20 times bigger than IG Farben was at its height in 1944, the last year of the Second World War.

 

More importantly, for almost three decades after the Second World War, BASF, Bayer and Hoechst (now Aventis) each filled its highest position, chairman of the board, with former members of the Nazi, NSDAP:

• Carl Wurster, chairman of the board of BASF until 1974 was, during the war, on the board of the company manufacturing Zyklon-B gas
• Carl Winnacker, chairman of the board of Hoechst until the late 70's, was a member of the Sturm Abteilung (SA) and was a member of the board of IG Farben
• Curt Hansen, chairman of the board of Bayer until the late 70's, was co-organizer of the conquest of Europe in the department of "acquisition of raw materials." Under this leadership the IG Farben daughters, BASF, Bayer, and Hoechst, continued to support politicians representing their interests.

During the 50's and 60's they invested in the political career of a young representative from a suburb of the BASF town of Ludwigshafen , his name: Helmut Kohl.

From 1957 to 1967 the young Helmut Kohl was a paid lobbyist of the "Verband Chemischer Industrie," the central lobby organization of the German pharmaceutical and chemical cartel. Thus, the German chemical and pharmaceutical industry advanced one of its own as a political representative, leaving the German people with only the choice of final approval.

 

The result is well known: Helmut Kohl was chancellor of Germany for 16 years and the German pharmaceutical and chemical industry became the world’s leading exporter of chemical products, with subsidiaries in over 150 countries, more than IG Farben ever had. Several billion people will now die prematurely, if the pharmaceutical industry gets its way. Germany is the only country in the entire world in which a former paid lobbyist for the chemical and pharmaceutical cartel was head of the government. To sum up, the support of German politics for the global expansion plans of the German pharmaceutical and chemical companies has a 100-year-old tradition.

Edited March 19, 2017 by miki.bg

[Dagmar]

Kako da imaju političara ranga Merkelove kad holandski kapital nije jak kao nemački. Denacifikovali su se al' zamalo.  -_-

 

Koliko gluposti u tako malo slova.

[eumeswil]

EU – deficit demokratije
by Social Europe

 

Posle referendumske odluke o izlasku Britanije iz EU i novog suočavanja grčke vlade sa mogućim prinudnim napuštanjem zajednice, problemi upravljanja EU postaju očevidni. Umesto da se sa setom oproste od Britanije i požele joj sretan put, neki od EU lidera su rešeni da joj naplate najvišu moguću cenu. U sličnom tonu, ministri finansija EU na čelu sa nemačkim ministrom Wolfgangom Schäubleom grčku krizu uporno rešavaju na iti način – primenom mera koje daju loše rezultate uz očekivanje dobrih ishoda.

 

Sada već izvesni brexit i mogući grexit jasno ukazuju na probleme vođstva i upravljanja EU. Unija je nastala kao dobrovoljna zajednica zemalja čije vlade su želele da osiguraju mir i saradnju u Evropi vekovima razdiranoj unutrašnjim sukobima. Deluje neverovatno, ali njeni današnji lideri kao žele da kazne vlade zemalja članica koje se usude da dovedu u pitanje loše prakse upravljanja ugrađene u EU sporazume i prete osvetom onima koji požele da izađu iz EU.

Neko je predvideo sranje pre 7 godina.
 

Europe is a dead political project
by Étienne Balibar

 

We are witnessing a transition from one form of international competition to another: no longer (mainly) a competition among productive capitals, but a competition among national territories, which use tax exemptions and pressure on the wages of labour to attract more floating capital than their neighbours.

Now, clearly, whether Europe works as an effective system of solidarity among its members to protect them from "systemic risks", or simply sets a juridical framework to promote a greater degree of competition among them, will determine the future of Europe politically, socially, and culturally.

But there is a second tendency: a transformation of the international division of labour, which radically destabilises the distribution of employment in the world. This is a new global structure where north and south, east and west are now exchanging their places. Europe, or most of it, will experience a brutal increase of inequalities: a collapsing of the middle classes, a shrinking of skilled jobs, a displacement of "volatile" productive industries, a regression of welfare and social rights, and a destruction of cultural industries and general public services. This will precipitate a return to the ethnic conflicts which the European construction wanted to overcome forever.

 

We cannot, accordingly, but ask the question: is this the beginning of the end for the EU, a construction that started 50 years ago on the basis of an age-old utopia, but now proves unable to fulfil its promises? The answer, unfortunately, is yes: sooner or later, this will be inevitable, and possibly not without some violent turmoil. Unless it finds the capacity to start again on radically new bases, Europe is a dead political project.

In this part of the world, such forces were traditionally called "the left". But the European left is also now bankrupt. In the broader political space, stretching across borders, that is now relevant, it has lost every capacity to express social struggles or launch emancipatory movements. It has surrendered to the dogmas and rationales of neoliberalism. Consequently it has been ideologically disintegrated. Deprived of any strong popular support, those parties which represent it nominally are now powerless spectators of the crisis, for which they offer no specific or collective response.

 

[Lord Protector]

Angela Merkel’s blunder, Donald Trump and the end of the west

 

Chancellor’s speech was irresponsible and risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy

 

Gideon Rachman, FT

 

Donald Trump’s first visit to Europe was awkward. Its aftermath has been explosive. Speaking at an election rally in Munich, shortly after the US president had returned to Washington, Angela Merkel came close to announcing the death of the western alliance.

 

The German chancellor warned that: “The times in which we can fully count on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past few days. We Europeans must really take our destiny in our own hands. Of course we need to have friendly relations with the US and with the UK and with other neighbours, including Russia. But we have to fight for our own future ourselves.”

 

Ms Merkel’s remarks swiftly made headlines. Richard Haass, who as president of the Council on Foreign Relations is the doyen of the US foreign-policy establishment, tweeted: “Merkel saying Europe cannot rely on others & needs to take matters into its own hands is a watershed — & what US has sought to avoid since WW2.”

 

It is easy and appropriate to blame President Trump for this state of affairs. But despite her cautious phrasing, Ms Merkel has also behaved irresponsibly — making a statement that threatens to widen a dangerous rift in the Atlantic alliance into a permanent breach.

 

The case against Mr Trump is easiest to make. His performance in Europe was disastrous. In a speech to Nato, the US president failed to reaffirm Article 5, the alliance’s mutual defence clause.

 

This was not an accidental oversight and sent a clear message that America’s commitment to the defence of Europe can no longer be taken for granted. That, in turn, risks encouraging Russia to test Nato’s defences.

 

At a G7 summit, Mr Trump stood alone in his failure to endorse the Paris climate accord. And he was also widely quoted as calling Germany “bad, very bad” for the sin of selling too many cars in the US.

 

Faced with all this, and with Brexit Britain, Ms Merkel may feel that she is merely stating the obvious in suggesting that Germany can no longer count on its American and British allies. Nonetheless, her speech was a blunder for at least five reasons.

 

First, it is a mistake to allow four months of the Trump presidency to throw into doubt a Transatlantic alliance that has kept the peace in Europe for 70 years. It may come to that. But it is also possible that Mr Trump is an aberration and will soon be out of office.

 

Second, the US president actually had a valid point to make about the failure of most European countries to meet Nato targets on military expenditure. Mr Trump’s behaviour in Europe was crass. But his argument that it is unsustainable for the US to account for almost 75 per cent of Nato defence spending is correct — and was also made by Robert Gates, defence secretary for President Obama. Given that Germany has been freeriding on American military spending, it is a little cheeky to blame the US for being an unreliable ally.

 

Third, by implying that the western alliance is now coming apart, Ms Merkel has compounded the error that Mr Trump made when he failed to endorse Article 5.

 

Both events will have encouraged the Russian government in its hope of breaking up the western alliance. That, in turn, makes Europe’s security situation more dangerous.

 

Fourth, Ms Merkel was unwise and unfair to bracket the UK with Trump’s America. In the climate change discussions, Britain sided with the EU — not the US. Similarly, the government of Theresa May has been at pains to stress Britain’s commitment to Nato.

 

However, if Ms Merkel’s government pursues the Brexit negotiations in the current confrontational spirit — demanding that the UK commit to vast upfront payments, before even discussing a trade deal — she risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy and a lasting antagonism between Britain and the EU.

 

It is hard to see how the UK can be expected to see the same countries as adversaries in the Brexit negotiations and allies in the Nato context. So a really hard Brexit could indeed raise questions about Britain’s commitment to Nato — particularly if the US is also pulling back from the western alliance.

 

The final flaw in Ms Merkel’s approach is that it displayed an uncharacteristic deafness to the echoes of history. One of the truly impressive things about modern Germany is that, more than any other country I can think of, it has thought hard about the lessons of history, and learnt them with thoroughness and humility. So it is baffling that a German leader could stand in a beer-tent in Bavaria and announce a separation from Britain and the US while bracketing those two countries with Russia. The historical resonances should be chilling.

 

None of this is meant to suggest that Ms Merkel is on the same moral and political level as Mr Trump. The US president has repeatedly displayed contempt for core western values — from freedom of the press to the prohibition on torture and the support of democracies around the world.

 

As a result, some have even proclaimed that the German chancellor is now the true leader of the western world. That title was bestowed prematurely. The sad reality is that Ms Merkel seems to have little interest in fighting to save the western alliance.

 

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by slow

[Venom]

In North Korea, they control all of the series of tubes

 

 

A Council of the European Union document leaked by Statewatch on 30 August reveals that during the summer months, that Estonia (current EU Presidency) has been pushing the other Member States to strengthen indiscriminate internet surveillance, and to follow in the footsteps of China regarding online censorship. Standing firmly behind its belief that filtering the uploads is the way to go...

 

 

https://edri.org/leaked-document-eu-presidency-calls-for-massive-internet-filtering/

[Venom]

https://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21729965-luxembourgs-comfort-letter-amazon-was-illegal-says-eu-after-bite-apple-margrethe

 

 

 

MARGRETHE VESTAGER’S assault on technology firms she deems to have improperly massaged down their tax bills continued this week with a tilt at Amazon. The internet retailer faces a bill of €250m ($293m) for back taxes over what the European Union’s competition commissioner considers to have been an illegal sweetheart deal with Luxembourg.

[Simon]

Како мени ова ЕУ са својим директивама иде на нерве с времена на вријеме. Специјално када притишћу земље које нису чланице. Сада би по њиховом ми требали усвојити да је рекламација на производе који су у принципу праве да мало дуже трају спусти на двије године, умјесто пет као што је овдје увијек било. Баш нас брига за потрошаче, главно је да ми имамо коме утрапити нове производе.

[jms_uk]

 Специјално када притишћу земље које нису чланице. 

 

To je cena pristupa jedinstvenom trzistu.

[Sestre Bronte]

eh ne želim da počinjem na temu reach-a, čista monopolizacija

[Roger Sanchez]

Како мени ова ЕУ са својим директивама иде на нерве с времена на вријеме. Специјално када притишћу земље које нису чланице. Сада би по њиховом ми требали усвојити да је рекламација на производе који су у принципу праве да мало дуже трају спусти на двије године, умјесто пет као што је овдје увијек било. Баш нас брига за потрошаче, главно је да ми имамо коме утрапити нове производе.

To je minimalna zakonska garancija na sve. Komercijalna garancija i dalje može biti 5 ili deset ili 15 godina. Može biti i jedna godina, ali onda drugu godinu važi zakonska garancija pa im na isto dođe.

[Tribun_Populi]

To je minimalna zakonska garancija na sve. Komercijalna garancija i dalje može biti 5 ili deset ili 15 godina. Može biti i jedna godina, ali onda drugu godinu važi zakonska garancija pa im na isto dođe.

Zanimljiva je lokalizacija pomenute direktive iz 1994; kad se šćaše po zemlji Srbiji, po Srbiji zemlji da prevrne, i da druga postane sudija.

 

Ovde je to odrađeno linearno, pa je dvi godine i na lebac i mleko, teoretski. Kanda je negde tamo recepcija u nacionalni pravni poredak urađena malo pismenije i smislenije? Ili sam ja i nji' preozbiljno shvatio...

 

Poslato sa HUAWEI VNS-L21 uz pomoć Tapatoka