You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Europe
Europe wants to share cost of terrorism aftermath
2005-02-16
All 25 European Union countries would share the costs of a huge terrorist attack on a single member state under plans being drawn up in Brussels. The European Commission believes that such an act of "solidarity" would help Europe cope with the aftermath of a September 11-style atrocity. It plans to publish details of its scheme, which would involve the EU sharing multi-billion pound costs, later this year.

But the Home Office has already signalled its opposition to the proposal, with ministers condemning it as impractical. In a report published yesterday, the Commons European scrutiny committee claimed the commission's plan was "unrealistic". Graham Brady, the Tory Europe spokesman, urged the Government to come out firmly against the idea. "In the event of a major terrorist attack in Europe, all European countries, and others, would want to do everything possible to help," he said. "But there is no need for the creation of a new funding mechanism."
But it's damned useful if it fits your agenda.
Posted by:Bulldog

#7  Clearly Europe cannot trust any one country to handle this fund - perhaps the UN could do it for them. That way at least the money when the money is looted it will end up back in Europe (though Switzerland is not part of the EU).
Posted by: DMFD   2005-02-16 10:38:42 PM  

#6  The EU has been pushing its socialist redistribution of wealth agenda on a variety of fronts. A Utopian New Math apparently makes it all add up neatly. Compute the monies needed for just the three instances I list below (if you can-it's so astronomical, I can't.) These proposals seem to be high on the agenda of the guilt-ridden EU. Make it work in real money. Don't forget to factor in other rich nations, accounting for how their economies could emerge intact after this shakedown:

Reduce WORLD, that's WORLD poverty. How many poor people are there in the world. How much is it expected that their poverty will be reduced/what standard of living is the goal. How does that improved standard of living for poor nations affect the standard of living of people in richer countries. Would a dollar more per month be enough, and who would get it. Who would distribute it. Do the math, provide the hard numbers.

Fund Aids relief in Africa. Fund medical treatments for how many people at what price per person, how often.

Assent to Kyoto Protocol. How many industries will need how much money to replace/purchase equipment. How many individuals will need to upgrade their vehicles in the US and how much will that cost.

Those three examples should give STARK evidence of how the best intentions from the EU (and I am sure many of them are) are based on a complete lack of financial realism.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-02-16 5:39:17 PM  

#5  The EU has been dealing with real money for a very long time now.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2005-02-16 5:09:54 PM  

#4  BAR-I doubt it would even do that.

It's fun playing with play money (America's) but if the EU ever has to foot such a bill themselves, it'll be strangely quiet and deserted on that side of the ocean. All talk, once again, is my take.
Posted by: Jules 187   2005-02-16 12:33:11 PM  

#3  All 25 European Union countries would share the costs of a huge terrorist attack on a single member state under plans being drawn up in Brussels. The European Commission believes that such an act of "solidarity" would help Europe cope with the aftermath of a September 11-style atrocity.

The monetary aftermath, yes, but that's about it.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-02-16 10:56:18 AM  

#2  Sounds reasonable until it hits you: some group wants to invent yet another pot of money - and "Don't you worry - we'll take really good care of it and we promise the overhead will not consume more than 50%... annually..."

Funders: so many pots to watch.

Schemers: so many pots to loot.

Others: so many cousins and nephews to employ.
Posted by: .com   2005-02-16 9:52:30 AM  

#1  "In the event of a major terrorist attack in Europe, all European countries, and others, would want to do everything possible to help," he said. "But there is no need for the creation of a new funding mechanism."

There is if you plan to offer terrorists money to not attack.
Posted by: gromgorru   2005-02-16 5:28:47 AM  

00:00