Article

2005-06-16 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2005-06-16 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 the WAPO never disappoints. Here is the lie buried within the truth... (Wouldn't be WAPO without it)

In reality, the new E.U. constitution wasn't radical; neither adoption nor rejection would much alter everyday life.

Posted by 2b 2005-06-16 00:12|| 2005-06-16 00:12|| Front Page Top

#2 Me so dizzy! I need to sit down...

WaPo.

I nominate: Worthless Agenda Pushing Onanists

Posted by .com 2005-06-16 02:14|| 2005-06-16 02:14|| Front Page Top

#3 Long overdue.

Posted by gromgoru 2005-06-16 06:48|| 2005-06-16 06:48|| Front Page Top

#4 .com -

Worthless Agenda Pushing Onanists

Ewww.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2005-06-16 07:28|| 2005-06-16 07:28|| Front Page Top

#5 Unwilling to address their genuine problems, ~~Europeans~~ Democrats become more reflexively critical of ~~America~~ Republicans. This gives the impression that they're active on the ~~world~~ national stage, even as they're quietly acquiescing in their own decline.

Yeah, that works!

Posted by Bobby 2005-06-16 08:42|| 2005-06-16 08:42|| Front Page Top

#6 2b notes one lie. I think this is another, and more telling of the author's mindset:

"This is the classic dilemma of democracy: Too many people benefit from the status quo to change it; but the status quo isn't sustainable."

Classic dilemma of democracy? Not from where I am standing.

Posted by Whiskey Mike 2005-06-16 09:01|| 2005-06-16 09:01|| Front Page Top

#7 "Classic dilemma" isn't quite what the author meant, I think. "Famous pitfall" would be better. And it is a problem, here and abroad. Too many people want their industries protected, their jobs secured by law, and so on. But it isn't sustainable. Why aren't we moving on immigration control? Too many people benefit from the status quo.
Does " 'democratic behavior' mean(s) the behavior that democracies like or the behavior that will preserve a democracy"? (Screwtape)

Posted by James">James 2005-06-16 10:31|| http://idontknowbut.blogspot.com]">[http://idontknowbut.blogspot.com] 2005-06-16 10:31|| Front Page Top

#8 "...A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury..." -- Alexander Tyler. One of the reasons that the US is so successful is because it understands the value of the republican-democracy. Democracy balanced in several ways by "the concerned minority". For example, the more democratic House is balanced against the less democratic Senate. The more democratic Congress is balanced by the less democratic Presidency, and the undemocratic Judiciary. The President is not popularly elected, but elected by the Electoral College. This means that "populists" will rarely be able to ride the tide of public emotion to real power. Even to some extent, there is a balance between State and federal power. All told, it is very difficult to muster the illusion of government control, which is craved by all governments, unless you both consider what the majority want *and* what the "concerned minority" want.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-06-16 10:48|| 2005-06-16 10:48|| Front Page Top

#9 2b,

I have to agree with the writer. The EU Constitution wasn't radical in the sense that it merely got all of the idiocy going on in Europe stuffed into one (very large) sock. The EU Constitution did not invent onerous regulations, economic micro-management, stifling freedom of expression, ridiculous politically correct platitudes, utopian environmental rules and a codification of sloth, indifference and laziness on the part of the citizenry.

That's been going on for years over there.

Posted by Dreadnought 2005-06-16 11:02|| 2005-06-16 11:02|| Front Page Top

#10 Europe survived the Huns, the Plague, the 30 Year War, Napoleon, WW1, WW2, 1000 nukes pointed at it 20years ago.
It will survive Brussels, too.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-06-16 16:37|| 2005-06-16 16:37|| Front Page Top

#11 TGA, Europe's cutting it pretty close with that birth rate thing.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-16 17:45|| 2005-06-16 17:45|| Front Page Top

#12 TGA

You obviously don't know the old russian joke: tIn the yearly parade of the Red Army on the Red Place. Everything is in it: missiles, artillery tanks, planes, infantry. And suddenly appaers a cohort of people in plain clothes, with beer bellies, quite aged, with no visible weapons. A westerner diplomat asks: "Who are those people?" His neighbour answers: "these are the apparatchiks. You have no idea of their capacity of destruction."

Brussels bureaucrats are still more fearsome.

Posted by JFM">JFM 2005-06-16 18:08|| 2005-06-16 18:08|| Front Page Top

#13 Mrs Davis, have a look at Japan's birthrates. Or, funny enough, those of Mexico.
We'll probably need more immigration, just not from Muslim countries. And Europe will remain attractive enough for those immigrants. Life ain't bad here.
The future has many unknowns. And the bureaucrats just reveived their first warning from "we the people".
Sorry, for someone who has seen Europe in ruins and survived on a few hundred calories a day, doom is not around the corner just yet.
We can make it.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-06-16 18:17|| 2005-06-16 18:17|| Front Page Top

#14 And JFM there's probably no Russian joke I haven't heard of..lol

Posted by True German Ally 2005-06-16 18:18|| 2005-06-16 18:18|| Front Page Top

#15 TGA, Japan can prosper for many years with a declining birth rate precisely becuase it doesn't have significant immigration or emigration. In contrast Europe is losing a significant proportion of its scientists and professionals to emigration (especially from the UK) and replacing them with largely unemployable immigrants. I realize Germany has not gone as far down this path as other European countries, but I am still astonished you think this a recipe for anything other than disaster.

Posted by phil_b 2005-06-16 18:49|| 2005-06-16 18:49|| Front Page Top

#16 And, the argument a declining population is somehow a serious problem that has to be fixed through immigration is nonsense. A declining population usually leads to greater material wealth and an improved quality of life (Check out Upstate New York or Tasmania). The declining workforce in relation to the retired and non-working population is easily fixed by delaying retirement.

Posted by phil_b 2005-06-16 18:56|| 2005-06-16 18:56|| Front Page Top

#17 phil_b, the immigration of young skilled people is the "quick fix".
Of course fixing the economy leads to optimism and optimism leads to more kids. Creating a kid friendly environment, investing in education etc helps, too.

Posted by True German Ally 2005-06-16 19:08|| 2005-06-16 19:08|| Front Page Top

#18 TGA, Gotta love that perspective and optomism!

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-16 20:44|| 2005-06-16 20:44|| Front Page Top

#19 Yet another one of these tedious 'death of europe' articles based on highly selective and misleading data. Amazing that a country so in love with the idea of a self sustaining, self correcting market should produce so many journalists who fear any and all competition (the EU, China, India), alternating wildly between macho sabre rattling and sneering condemnations. Anyway to take just one example from this mess of an article

But Europe's economy is already faltering. In the 1970s annual growth for the 12 countries now using the euro averaged almost 3 percent; from 2001 to 2004 the annual average was 1.2 percent.

well perhaps so, but this merely reflects a global trend and is not solely applicable to the 12 eurozone countries. The IMFs May 2000 report 'The World Economy in the 20th Century' highlights the fact that the period 1950 to 1973 was by far the most successful of the 20th century. During that time global per capita real GDP growth was 2.9%, precisely double what its been since then; in Latin America and the caribbean per person GDP growth averaged 75% between 1960 and 1980 but fell to only 7% between 1980 and 2000, sub-saharan africa grew 34% between 1960 and 80 but fell 15% in the next 20 years, even in south east asias Tiger years average groth was half what it was in the previous 20 years.

Posted by Shineth Cheager5054 2005-06-16 20:46|| 2005-06-16 20:46|| Front Page Top

#20 SC, it helps growth to start from a small base. Perhaps we should have another World War so we can eliminate, say, 1/3 the world'sÃÂ industrial capacity so we can get great percentage growth numbers again. Oh, and let's have the U. S. be a petroleum exporter again too. Oh, and funny how robust American and British growth have been since 1980.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-16 20:54|| 2005-06-16 20:54|| Front Page Top

#21 SC, I suggest you check out some more recent data. The world economy has grown faster in the last 10 years than at any time in history. Overall economic growth is around 4.5%pa. The stand out exception has been Europe which up until 1995 was moreorless pacing world economic growth, since then it has fallen badly behind as the USA/UK/Australia have kept pace and Asia, especially China has surged ahead. This year in Europe growth will be lucky to exceed 1%. In contrast the USA and Australia will achieve at least 4%.

Posted by phil_b 2005-06-16 21:17|| 2005-06-16 21:17|| Front Page Top

#22 True German Ally: Do you know the one about the Hedgehog that will live with us?

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-06-16 21:38|| 2005-06-16 21:38|| Front Page Top

#23 Sure do... joke about drunks...they got too many of those

Posted by True German Ally 2005-06-16 22:13|| 2005-06-16 22:13|| Front Page Top

23:59 RJSchwarz
23:58 macofromoc
23:55 3dc
23:52 ed
23:43 Phil Fraering
23:19 Barbara Skolaut
23:16 SteveS
23:10 Pappy
22:56 Flavins Flineque6690
22:55 bgrebel9
22:51 bgrebel9
22:41 ed
22:31 ed
22:24 Asedwich
22:24 ed
22:19 Dar
22:13 True German Ally
22:13 Jan
22:12 ed
22:11 Darth VAda
22:07 True German Ally
21:50 muck4doo
21:48 Hupomoque Spoluter7949
21:47 Eric Jablow