Sweden is larger than a lot of European countries...Scandinavians tend to think in terms of heads, not area. According to that worldview, Canada and Australia are also smallish countries.
But the really astonishing/outstanding feature part is that Sweden among the very few European countries dont have a constitutional court so in practice any civil servant who abuses the system goes entirely free, which has been proven many many times. And in the latest parliament voting to decide if such a court should be implemented the environmentalists and socialists vote no, no wonder!
Sweden is a tiny country.Tiny? Have you looked at a transverse mercator projection map recently?
... As some 'mericans are saying here, California might as well be broken up in smaller states. You can keep breaking things up until you only have 1 person kingdoms, which would be the same as anarchy, which most people agree isn't a good way to organize things.
http://www.seekfind.net/Logical_Fallacy_of_Appeal_to_Extremes.html
... As some 'mericans are saying here, California might as well be broken up in smaller states. You can keep breaking things up until you only have 1 person kingdoms, which would be the same as anarchy, which most people agree isn't a good way to organize things.
http://www.seekfind.net/Logical_Fallacy_of_Appeal_to_Extremes.html
That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient.
But who decides that the individual action of countries is not sufficient?
I'd put money on it being the greatest centre of power in the EU - the democracy dodging Commission.No, it's the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg. And ultimately if a member state doesn't like a directive they can ignore it (the only thing EU can do about it is give them a fine) and/or they can leave the union.Ah, the court with no appeal that always finds in favour of the commission.The judges are appointed by the member states. And they do not always judge in favour of the commission. For example the court found the data retention directive invalid in 2014.
... As some 'mericans are saying here, California might as well be broken up in smaller states. You can keep breaking things up until you only have 1 person kingdoms, which would be the same as anarchy, which most people agree isn't a good way to organize things.
http://www.seekfind.net/Logical_Fallacy_of_Appeal_to_Extremes.htmlThe argument is valid whether you take it to the extreme or not. The more you divide an area into smaller and smaller autonomous regions the more conflict and problems you will have. And there will be a need for cooperation on a higher level to solve the problems that affect all the kingdoms in larger and larger areas. So the argument is valid, I did take it to the extreme to make the evolution of the pattern clearer and easier to see, that is not a fallacy.
So, I suspect most people also agree that different levels of cooperation/organization are necessary, but it's important decisions are made at the right level, and that is what the principle of subsidiary is about. So EU is actually very good in that regard.
no influence at the top level.
Quoteno influence at the top level.
Sounds like a revolution is needed, every 200 or so years?
So, I suspect most people also agree that different levels of cooperation/organization are necessary, but it's important decisions are made at the right level, and that is what the principle of subsidiary is about. So EU is actually very good in that regard.
That is exactly the point! It's pretty easy to go down to City Hall and get things done. It's a little harder at the County level, nearly impossible at the State level and completely impossible at the Federal level. We have the most direct input to the organizations at the very bottom of the hierarchy and no influence at the top level.
It is the unreachable top level that makes the most burdensome regulations.
So, I suspect most people also agree that different levels of cooperation/organization are necessary, but it's important decisions are made at the right level, and that is what the principle of subsidiary is about. So EU is actually very good in that regard.
That is exactly the point! It's pretty easy to go down to City Hall and get things done. It's a little harder at the County level, nearly impossible at the State level and completely impossible at the Federal level. We have the most direct input to the organizations at the very bottom of the hierarchy and no influence at the top level.
It is the unreachable top level that makes the most burdensome regulations.
That is the issue. Those responsible for societies ills are too far removed and are thus protected from those directly affected by the adverse consequences of their actions. The masses have no easy means to redress the wrongs. Globalist political and corporate power destroys freedom, democracy and local economies. We will re-localize eventually one way or the other- but the process with be painfull. Brexit is just a first shot across the bow...
Trump is riding similar sentiments; I wonder what his position on such things is today.
That is the issue. Those responsible for societies ills are too far removed and are thus protected from those directly affected by the adverse consequences of their actions. The masses have no easy means to redress the wrongs. Globalist political and corporate power destroys freedom, democracy and local economies. We will re-localize eventually one way or the other- but the process with be painfull. Brexit is just a first shot across the bow...
TTIP (and presumably TTP) are the clearest example of this. It will give multinational corporations the ability to sue governments if the local services aren't opened up to competition/exploitation. The mere fear of the lawyers fees associated with being sued will kowtow civil servants into surrender.
It is unclear whether Brexit will help/hinder that process. Certainly the right-wing politicians tend to be in favour of TTIP, and the UK might "get to the front of the queue" w.r.t. trade agreements if it bends over and accepts being shafted by the TTIP.
Trump is riding similar sentiments; I wonder what his position on such things is today.
That is the issue. Those responsible for societies ills are too far removed and are thus protected from those directly affected by the adverse consequences of their actions. The masses have no easy means to redress the wrongs. Globalist political and corporate power destroys freedom, democracy and local economies. We will re-localize eventually one way or the other- but the process with be painfull. Brexit is just a first shot across the bow...
TTIP (and presumably TTP) are the clearest example of this. It will give multinational corporations the ability to sue governments if the local services aren't opened up to competition/exploitation. The mere fear of the lawyers fees associated with being sued will kowtow civil servants into surrender.
It is unclear whether Brexit will help/hinder that process. Certainly the right-wing politicians tend to be in favour of TTIP, and the UK might "get to the front of the queue" w.r.t. trade agreements if it bends over and accepts being shafted by the TTIP.
Trump is riding similar sentiments; I wonder what his position on such things is today.
TTI P was indeed one of the reasons I voted out. I don't believe for 1 minute voting out will get us out of such agreements but if we were negotiating them as the British government and not the European government so we the people will get to hear more about what is going on and be able to get our voices heard. I can go and visit my MP and give him a piece of my mind but my MP does not even know what is in TTI P.
The fact that something like TTI P could even be conceived and discussed in the EU parliament is enough from me to decide that it has become a monstrosity that is uncontrollable and not very useful. The whole concept should have been thrown out at its inception instead they have been talking about it seriously for years.
The argument is valid whether you take it to the extreme or not. The more you divide an area into smaller and smaller autonomous regions the more conflict and problems you will have. And there will be a need for cooperation on a higher level to solve the problems that affect all the kingdoms in larger and larger areas. So the argument is valid, I did take it to the extreme to make the evolution of the pattern clearer and easier to see, that is not a fallacy.
The argument is valid whether you take it to the extreme or not. The more you divide an area into smaller and smaller autonomous regions the more conflict and problems you will have. And there will be a need for cooperation on a higher level to solve the problems that affect all the kingdoms in larger and larger areas. So the argument is valid, I did take it to the extreme to make the evolution of the pattern clearer and easier to see, that is not a fallacy.
I don't understand your conclusion. The EU is the only entity large enough to stand up to the corporations.
United we stand, divided we fall.
I don't understand your conclusion. The EU is the only entity large enough to stand up to the corporations.
But who will stand to the EU (or to our monopolistic centralized bureaucracy for that matter)?United we stand, divided we fall.
... and independent we go where we want.
The fact that something like TTI P could even be conceived and discussed in the EU parliament is enough from me to decide that it has become a monstrosity that is uncontrollable and not very useful. The whole concept should have been thrown out at its inception instead they have been talking about it seriously for years.
Or where we are allowed to go. We aren't independent any more.
If the Argies invade again, we have to beg the French to let us borrow their carrier.
We have to ask the Chinese to lend us money so the French can build us a nuke to keep the lights on. And the Chinese haven't forgotten how we got our hands on Hong Kong.
Let's hope foreign powers continue to buy our family silver (or continue to lend us money) to finance our trade gap. And that has become more expensive to service, of course.
Nope, we are in a weak(er) position, and no amount of posturing will cover that up.
How did your Country get to the state it is in now?
Apis I googled Sweden and the fourth return is "Sweden: Rape Capital of the West". How are your women liking the new multicultural Sweden?
Having a world without borders is a nice dream, maybe in another 1000 years or so it may even be realistic, assuming we don't kill ourselves first. There is to much cultural difference, economic disparity and mistrust for it to be practical now. You can continue with your experiment though, just don't include my Country in it, particularly after seeing what has been going on over the pond, thank you very much.
(Oh lord, I can get references but my cider level is too much tonight! maybe tomorrow when I get ripped a progressive new one! )