EuroBillTracker

and of course our jan peter balkenende.

The public appeal of the little-known CDA leader has been heightened by the good nature with which he has taken jokes about his resemblance to JK Rowling's boy wizard, Harry Potter.
"Now everyone knows what the new leader of the Christian Democrats looks like," he said, but added that the problems of the Netherlands were too complex for a magic wand.
The Guardian, 17/05/2002

wouter wrote:and of course our jan peter balkenende.

The dutch government resigns today, doesn't it?

Yup, new elections in December / January....

BossaNova wrote:

Olivier wrote:

BossaNova wrote:

PS: what we need is an European LULA DA SILVA!

VAI LULA! VAI BRASIL!

He has already a lots of things to do in Brazil, hasn't he?

Yes he has, but what i said, or tried to, is that we need someone like him here in Europe.

but this new generation of European politicians just sucks (Blair, Aznar, Chirac, Durão, Portas, Fortuyn, Berlusconi...etc)...

Seeing this kind of names, please
give us the pope or a dictator. Or is this pleonastic

You know in Belgium we have a king. His ancestors came from Germany. So he has no Flemish roots and no Walloon roots. For Belgium that's very good. What I am trying to say is that I think that a president for Europe is no good solution. Let's say the president comes from Belgium. Is he going to work for all Europeans or only for the Belgians? And what if the president comes from a big country? If we have elections by the people than we will have a president from a big country. I think most of the people will vote for candidates from their own country. I think we are better with a strong and powerful European government and parliament in which we can find people from all over Europe.

I've got an idea! Since william would have to wait for both is grams and charlie to drop over to become king of england...
Why not make him King William I of Europe?

hehehe

querty wrote:You know in Belgium we have a king. His ancestors came from Germany. So he has no Flemish roots and no Walloon roots. For Belgium that's very good. What I am trying to say is that I think that a president for Europe is no good solution. Let's say the president comes from Belgium. Is he going to work for all Europeans or only for the Belgians? And what if the president comes from a big country? If we have elections by the people than we will have a president from a big country. I think most of the people will vote for candidates from their own country. I think we are better with a strong and powerful European government and parliament in which we can find people from all over Europe.

Okay.. This is most probably not going to happen, but.. Let's make it impossible to vote someone from your own country. This of course would have gazillions of drawbacks, like that German people could get the president's place quite exactly no how. But anyway. Whenever I get an idea, I say it. Because even the worst ideas often include a seed for something better :)

Maybe it's better to let the Parliament elect one candidate from the biggest countries and one candidate from the smaller countries. After that the people can vote between those two.

querty wrote:Maybe it's better to let the Parliament elect one candidate from the biggest countries and one candidate from the smaller countries. After that the people can vote between those two.

Yes, but what about the policital program of these people?
I don't want to choose between Berlusconi (big country) or his twin of a small country... I want our politicians to tell us what kind of Europe they want. Then, I vote...

That's the problem because most of these politicians don't have a European program. They all look for what is good for their country. I don't think that this kind of politicians will be working for all Europeans. Nowadays there is now one who can be known as a real European politician. Maybe we have to go back to the founding fathers like Robert Schuman to find a real European politician. So if we do have to elect a president than we will need someone who is standing above his country and maybe that will be someone from a small country.

querty wrote:That's the problem because most of these politicians don't have a European program.

It's a necessity, though! We don't still realize that 75% of the income of our states come from the tax on consumers (TVA in France). The level of this tax is fixed in Bruxelles! Today, the french government wishes to reduce this tax for the restaurants, but Europe said "not yet".

Jean-Michel Jarre (popular french musician) asked for a lower tax for music. He has not gone to Paris, but directly to Bruxelles and Strasbourg!

It has become a reality that if a boat sinks in Spain, the french coasts may be ruined. If France stops its nuclear plants, there will be consequences in Italy. If Germany and France do not respect the Maastricht criteria, it concerns people of Helsinki, Athens and Lisbon...
If a illegal worker passes trough the border of Estonia, it can have consequences on the british or german economy...

It's high time some responsible politicians tell us what they plan for us. And I am speaking about current problems! I don't even speak about a common foreign policy. Just about problems that we are already sharing!

For the moment, the decisions are taken by non-elected people. This must change.

Olivier wrote:We don't still realize that 75% of the income of our states come from the tax on consumers (TVA in France).

Where did you find this figure? It seems far too high.

Olivier wrote:The level of this tax is fixed in Bruxelles!

This is wrong. The EU fixes the minimal rates of 15% (regular rate) and 5% (reduced rate) in order to avoid that one country could gain advantages in economical competition by, e.g., abolishing the sales taxes (value-added taxes, VAT). It is apparently not even planned to aim at uniform rates.

Olivier wrote:Today, the french government wishes to reduce this tax for the restaurants, but Europe said "not yet".

Not knowing this particular initiative I'll guess. For buying food in a store, the reduced rate applies. For eating in a restaurant, the regular rate applies. The idea behind this is that everyone (even the poorest people) need food which they can buy in a supermarket. This is why there is made an exception from the regular rate. Since I don't belong to the gastronomy lobby I don't see why restaurants would need this exception, too.

Olivier wrote:Jean-Michel Jarre (popular french musician) asked for a lower tax for music. He has not gone to Paris, but directly to Bruxelles and Strasbourg!

Which shows that he knows who is responsible for the decision about the application of reduced and regular rates.

Olivier wrote:It has become a reality that if a boat sinks in Spain, the french coasts may be ruined.

This is rather a consequence of geography than of the European Union.

Olivier wrote: If France stops its nuclear plants, there will be consequences in Italy. If Germany and France do not respect the Maastricht criteria, it concerns people of Helsinki, Athens and Lisbon...

That's right, and Helsinki, Athens, Lisbon are right. However, (see next paragraph) the decision not to respect the Maastricht criteria are not taken by the European Union or Commission but by the elected governments of France and Germany.

Olivier wrote: For the moment, the decisions are taken by non-elected people. This must change.

In itself, elections are neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition to get a competent government. Schwarzenegger got elected...

I don't want monarchy neither eu-president!!!

BossaNova wrote:PS: what we need is an European LULA DA SILVA!

VAI LULA! VAI BRASIL!

Yeah!

But: We won't get one

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote:We don't still realize that 75% of the income of our states come from the tax on consumers (TVA in France).

Where did you find this figure? It seems far too high.

That was the rate I learned at school in the 90's... It has changed.
The current rate in France is 59,1%, which remains the most important income for the french government.

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote:The level of this tax is fixed in Bruxelles!

This is wrong. The EU fixes the minimal rates of 15% (regular rate) and 5% (reduced rate) in order to avoid that one country could gain advantages in economical competition by, e.g., abolishing the sales taxes (value-added taxes, VAT). It is apparently not even planned to aim at uniform rates.

So, if there is a minimal rate, it shows that there are european rules.

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote:Today, the french government wishes to reduce this tax for the restaurants, but Europe said "not yet".

Not knowing this particular initiative I'll guess. For buying food in a store, the reduced rate applies. For eating in a restaurant, the regular rate applies. The idea behind this is that everyone (even the poorest people) need food which they can buy in a supermarket. This is why there is made an exception from the regular rate. Since I don't belong to the gastronomy lobby I don't see why restaurants would need this exception, too.

I don't ask for a lower VAT for restaurants... I just say that most of the fiscal decisions are now taken in Bruxelles, no more in the national capitals. Jacques Chirac promised a reduction of the VAT, but he can't do it unless Europe agrees.

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote:Jean-Michel Jarre (popular french musician) asked for a lower tax for music. He has not gone to Paris, but directly to Bruxelles and Strasbourg!

Which shows that he knows who is responsible for the decision about the application of reduced and regular rates.

Yes!

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote:It has become a reality that if a boat sinks in Spain, the french coasts may be ruined.

This is rather a consequence of geography than of the European Union.

Of course, but each country can benefit from a european solidarity when such catastrophes happen.

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote: If France stops its nuclear plants, there will be consequences in Italy. If Germany and France do not respect the Maastricht criteria, it concerns people of Helsinki, Athens and Lisbon...

That's right, and Helsinki, Athens, Lisbon are right. However, (see next paragraph) the decision not to respect the Maastricht criteria are not taken by the European Union or Commission but by the elected governments of France and Germany.

True, but what I wanted to show is: our national governments are linked by all the european treaties. The decisions can't be taken alone, but inside the european era. I all wish is more democracy in that era.

Anyway, Gauss, you can't deny the important power (or at least influence) of the European Union in our lives.

Gauss wrote:

Olivier wrote: For the moment, the decisions are taken by non-elected people. This must change.

In itself, elections are neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition to get a competent government. Schwarzenegger got elected...

Fortunately, we are not Californians...