Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[mainiac]

Your point?

It is generally a very, very bad idea to decide that property rights and contract laws dont apply to assholes.

[Sheb]

Except it's not only property right and contract law, except in the general sense that Mexico gave out its sovereignty in a treaty which could be seen as a form of contract.

[mainiac]

Except it's not only property right and contract law, except in the general sense that Mexico gave out its sovereignty in a treaty which could be seen as a form of contract.

Well in the case with Ecuador they most certainly were in violation of contract law.  I don't know about the mexico one because I don't know what specific case you are talking about.

Maybe it sucks as you put it but that is a far cry from showing that nations are giving up their independence.

[Erkki]

Meanwhile the second humanitarian convoy has already returned to Russia after emptying all of their 245 trucks in Lugansk.

Professor of Cyber security: "Finland is a target of a hybrid warfare attack"

http://yle.fi/uutiset/kyberturva-asiantuntija_limnell_suomi_on_hybridisodankaynnin_kohteena__tata_ei_pida_hyssytella/7371020

I hope google translate can make it understandable. While I still think that Ukraine, Poland and Baltics(at least, possibly Canada as well) are the targets a much higher effort propaganda/hybrid warfare campaign, I wouldnt understate that.

Its like if Russia is making sure that Russia makes the headlines in every one of their neighbors daily.

[Sheb]

This case. Mexico's HFCS tax "destroyed the value" of Cargill's investment in HFCS facilities in Mexico. Similar cases have been made against Quebec's anti-fracking law.

By this logic, any regulation that impose a cost on any industry could be attacked under ISDS. Plus, European courts are perfectly able to defend investors without using ISDS.

[10ebbor10]

First of, you murdered the quote.

The Council of the European union, operates, de facto, by unanimous Consensus. So if something is passed by the Council , it was agreed upon by your country.

While technically true, this says nothing about why they agreed. Having the ability to disagree does not mean a small country have the possibility to disagree. In a system designed around bargaining-until-concensus smaller, less powerful nations with less to bargain with will inevitably always get the bad end of the deal.

Considering that, for a significant amount of the decisions, there is in fact a veto right, they absolutely have the ability to disagree. In fact, you could easily argue that the smaller countries are overrepresented, as the entire system is set-up to avoid repression of smaller entities.

Please explain how none of these institutions are democratic. You can throw buzzwords all you want. So far, your argument is little more than: "I don't like the EU."

I used "undemocratic" in the sense of meaning "not good democracy". I'm not saying it's "not democratic". I'm saying it's bad democracy.

Ok then.

Please adapt your statements such that they fit the oxford dictionary definition of the words used, then explain why it is a bad democracy.

Honestly, it seems like all of you have the idea that there's some kind of mythical, mysterious entity in Bruxelles that controls everything. There really isn't. The EU is nothing more than your politicians. And obviously, they blame the EU for the decisions they themselves made.
 

Do you want to talk down to me some more, of can the rest of us continue now?

Honestly, any of you have failed to come up with any actual argument. The only thing you have done is calling the EU Undemocratic, neoliberal, and accusing it of various things that have nothing to do with the EU in the first place.

[WarRoot]

On democracy and EU.
I regard having a Constitution an essential component of any democratic form of power. The EU has no Constitution. It was put up for vote in a referendum, and voted out.
Some time after, a completely undemocratic process ratified a Treaty that was essentially the same as the voted out Constitution.
Ever since, we have had to bear the whips and scorns of a neo-liberal plague that even has the insolence of proclaiming it's actions democratic.

Having a constitution means nothing without the people taking it seriously and upholding it. The EU itself isn't really considered to be important as far as your average voter is concerned, you can see this in the turnout, so a constitution at this point will be just a piece of paper.

[mainiac]

This case. Mexico's HFCS tax "destroyed the value" of Cargill's investment in HFCS facilities in Mexico. Similar cases have been made against Quebec's anti-fracking law.

By this logic, any regulation that impose a cost on any industry could be attacked under ISDS. Plus, European courts are perfectly able to defend investors without using ISDS.

"Initiated some four years ago, Cargill’s claim centered on a 20% tax Mexico imposed on any drink which used High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener. As the HFCS tax was not imposed on beverages that used sweeteners made from sugar cane"

No by this logic you can't strike down any regulation that hurts any industry.  What you can do is go against protectionist measures that violate the trade framework that your nation entered into freely.  A free trade framework that has massively benefited Mexico, btw.

International law is a complicated subject.  If you take any complicated subject and strip away the complexities that dont suit you then it's very easy to make it look stupid.

[Sergarr]

Meanwhile the second humanitarian convoy has already returned to Russia after emptying all of their 245 trucks in Lugansk.

Professor of Cyber security: "Finland is a target of a hybrid warfare attack"

http://yle.fi/uutiset/kyberturva-asiantuntija_limnell_suomi_on_hybridisodankaynnin_kohteena__tata_ei_pida_hyssytella/7371020

I hope google translate can make it understandable. While I still think that Ukraine, Poland and Baltics(at least, possibly Canada as well) are the targets a much higher effort propaganda/hybrid warfare campaign, I wouldnt understate that.

Its like if Russia is making sure that Russia makes the headlines in every one of their neighbors daily.

Don't you worry, the Russian propaganda, for the last 6 months, has been concentrated on Ukraine, and Ukraine only.

Besides, why would we even want to invade Finland?

[Erkki]

Absolutely no idea. But then again, fascist nations have never needed one.

[MonkeyHead]

Why would Russia want to invade Ukraine? *shrugs*

[Helgoland]

Meanwhile the second humanitarian convoy has already returned to Russia after emptying all of their 245 trucks in Lugansk.

Professor of Cyber security: "Finland is a target of a hybrid warfare attack"

http://yle.fi/uutiset/kyberturva-asiantuntija_limnell_suomi_on_hybridisodankaynnin_kohteena__tata_ei_pida_hyssytella/7371020

I hope google translate can make it understandable. While I still think that Ukraine, Poland and Baltics(at least, possibly Canada as well) are the targets a much higher effort propaganda/hybrid warfare campaign, I wouldnt understate that.

Its like if Russia is making sure that Russia makes the headlines in every one of their neighbors daily.

Don't you worry, the Russian propaganda, for the last 6 months, has been concentrated on Ukraine, and Ukraine only.

Besides, why would we even want to invade Finland?

Why did you? And why did you wish to repeat the experience?


@Trade agreement stuff: There's two conflicting goals here:
1) Letting states create sensible legislation
2) Giving foreign entities security about their investment
I'm fuzzy on the details, but it appears that currently too much focus is put on 2), and the judicial process is about as kosher as a bacon&ham sandwich. What's really needed is an supernational entity to create comprehensive legislation and jurisdiction. Hm, what entity could serve as an example?

[da_nang]

Besides, why would we even want to invade Finland?

"To correct historical mistake" or another one of Putin's favorites. Border too close to St Petersburg again, Finland should become grand duchy again, because Dugin said so, yada yada...

[Sergarr]

Besides, why would we even want to invade Finland?

"To correct historical mistake" or another one of Putin's favorites. Border too close to St Petersburg again, Finland should become grand duchy again, because Dugin said so, yada yada...

You realize that Putin is actually a sane guy and his real motivations are not this stupid? The USSR has somehow dealt with the Finland being close to Leningrad without attempting to conquer it, I believe Putin can do that, too.

[Sheb]

Well, weren't you stating earlier that Putin had not intention to invade Ukraine?