Wait, what? EU is doing better than ever and it looks like after Brexit we will enjoy greater integration, and hopefully a full financial and political union in the future. If this is what a "fall" looks like to you, then I don't really know what to say to you - but from the rest of your sentence it seems like you don't like EU as an institution, so I guess it's unlikely you share my enthusiasm for it.

GDPR is too little too late, and may even be counterproductive[1]. It would have been vastly preferable to have healthy European competitors to Microsoft / Apple / Google / Facebook. But we don't, and probably will never have.

The situation with Microsoft in the 90's should have made it obvious of what was to come. Our politicians ignored it entirely. They are now making grand statements about democracy that leave me less than impressed.

[1] Some say that GDPR will cement Google / Facebook's advertising monopoly as they are in a much better position to gather data sharing consent from their users than their smaller competitors.

It's easy in the US because they have a large, wealthy and boundary free market with almost no access cost beyond marketing.

English, their mother tongue and the language of the country where they are actually living on.

A few speak even more.

Only when the giants started translating their offerings to reach an even wider audience in non-anglophone countries did end users start to expect a web in their home language and the potential audience of non-anglophone-based companies dropped (because they usually address their home language first).

Now the most inhibiting cost of multi-language offerings is usually not the act of translation itself, but the resulting quality which is rarely high.

EDIT: I think actually it speaks very much to how european unity is about so much more than just the EU. By extension how culture and national identity is about so much more than what the Westphalian paradigm provides.

The Brits.

It's never too late to start investing in the tech sector.

As for the elections: Orban used lots of tools (cheating) to make sure that they win again. Migrants/illegal border crossers are not a problem here at this time here actually (they prefer Germany with a better economy).

Most of us Hungarians want to stay in the EU, but we have a dictator who would prefer to be outside if the money stops flowing from EU to them.

The EU has massive structural problems - sure most of them are not a direct fault of the EU but it certainly weakens the union.

Just look at youth unemployment in Spain for example. There is an entire generation growing up out of work and not building any skills. They can't compete in a global market.

What happens when Spain falls on actual hard times?

Or for example a small number of refugees have caused a huge shift right in politics and a lot of friction between member states. What will happen when there is a serious refugee crisis?

If only most people out of Europe, and most certainly Spain, would take a glimpse of the standards of living people take for granted in Western Europe, in particular Americans, they’d be demanding their governments at least the same.

Please get a passport, visit Europe, and then have an informed opinion.

I can't speak personally for the eastern or southern states but here in central europe things are quite peachy.

The central/west/northern parts of Europe are the most stable in the world, I doubt that will change soon, regardless of what happens elsewhere.

Come on over and have a look! I invite you to coffee and cake, and a stroll in my garden

Greetings from Frankfurt

Go figure.

The fact that there have no longer been wars between the participants?

After thousands of years of endless strife, wars & massacres.

Ask people from my great-parents generation (who lived throught WW2) if this is not a HUGE benefit...

The only 'win' I can think of of the top of my head was the UK referendum, which was 52/48 in favour of leaving. Polls taken now suggest that people are now mostly against leaving but the referendum result still stands.

Poland was one of the most pro-EU countries in the union, and it will be again. It has seen the benefits firsthand, regardless of a vocal minority of xenophobes.

Le Pen had big gains yes, and still lost because the country decided to vote tactically, together to stop a fascist getting any power. She lost.

Hungary I'll give you, because it has been hardcore right-wing for a long while and massively corrupt.

His policies and speeches bring definite reminders of nationalistic policies past, of using immigrants as refugees and scapegoats for everything wrong in a society, as well as appealing to traditionalist values, the "things were much better in the old days" rose-tinted glasses mentality.

It is a symptom of being stuck in the past, a wish to bring society back to the imagined "good old days", which never actually existed in the first place. There are also the obvious calls to maintaining traditions and cultural identity that is "under attack" and in many cases were actually imported from other cultures and assimilated over decades. It's the exact same story with every other nationalistic politic party, in every European country.

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/straight-cucumbers/

This was to make it clearer across all Markets what products you buy to make a single market easier on everyone. This is just FUD that really shouldn't be part of this conversation.

Yes i know this regulation is no longer in place, thats not the point. The point is that the EU is a overblown bureaucracy that should not be in charge of regulating every silly little aspect of life across the various member states.

And yes, they are STILL passing laws like this. Recently they passend regulation that limits the power consumption over regular vacuum cleaners.

[1] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:319...

https://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/cucumber-grades-an...

https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trade/agr/standard/fresh...

1) You get a single definition of cucumber class 2C for every country, rather than a bunch of definitions that make trade more complex 2) It's (num_countries_in_EU) times cheaper to do it once than to do it seperately for every single country.

It has become quite clear to me that anyone who brings up the shape of bananas or cucumbers in the EU is either just spreading FUD because they've decided they're against the EU for other reasons, or believes anything the papers tell them without applying critical thinking to the matter.

So why do you think laws like this are irrelevant?

And are you aware that when you create money, the value of that currency drops to reflect that? If it didn't any country could become infinitely wealthy by just printing money endlessly. Obviously printing money doesn't increase the amount of stuff, and printing enough creates inflation that pushes down currency values.

The fact that you took this trivial statement and described it as propaganda is very worrying. It seems to me that people have lost the ability to evaluate the EU objectively.

As for illegal "refugees" (many of them come from countries that aren't at war), in 2017 204,219 people crossed an EU border illegally compared to 511,074 in 2016 and 1.8 million in 2015.

And straight cucumbers - the EU does in fact regulate the straightness of cucumbers. The page you link to says bendy cucumbers aren't banned, they just fall into a different grade. But the OP didn't claim they were banned, he claimed these laws were 'silly' and a waste of time - a subjective evaluation but not propaganda.

> euro QE

A lot of shaky implications without much grounding in economic theory or reality. Please study:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquidity_trap http://eur.exchangeconversions.com/usd/charts (10y chart)

There was drop in 2014-2015, but ever since Euro has not moved down, rather in opposite direction... So both facts and theory contradicts your continuously-deprecated-currency theory.

> refugees

Now quote the numbers for following years please.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_migrant_crisis

No wonder all refugee scaremongers quote numbers only up to 2015.

But hey, it is worrying! . . . that people on HN spread such lame propaganda.

I did. Go back and try again. You are so eager to defend the EU you can't even be bothered reading what I wrote and immediately dived for the insults: scaremonger, propaganda, lame.

Now for your misunderstanding of basic supply and demand.

Look. Let's say there's a million euros in circulation, total. People are using these million euros to buy and sell things. Suddenly the ECB awards itself 9 million euros and starts spending them. Eventually the currency equalises out and those 10 million euro total are spread over the entire economy. But the total amount of stuff being bought and sold hasn't changed, so the prices must have done - they will have gone up by 10x. Likewise, an external currency will now buy 10x more euros than before.

If you understand that you will understand what I was talking about.

Your confusion about the USD/EUR rate is fairly basic I'm afraid. USD was also engaged in huge money printing during the same period. Despite that the ECB still managed to depreciate the currency. The reason the value started dropping at the start of 2015 is that this is when Mario Monti began huge monthly printing runs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing#Europe

on 22 January 2015 Mario Draghi, President of the European Central Bank, announced an 'expanded asset purchase programme': where €60 billion per month of euro-area bonds from central governments, agencies and European institutions would be bought

I had the same wonder after I read the first few paragraphs of the ridiculous article that this thread is about!

It defines a standard for the quality classification of cucumbers. It doesn't require cucumbers to be straight, it just requires them to meet certain criteria to be declared a certain class of cucumber. It didn't prevent anyone from selling bent cucumbers as long as they were classified accordingly.

In fact, what I just said is exactly what the blog post linked in the comment you're responding to is said and which you're completely ignoring.

The EU didn't pass a law requiring cucumbers to be straight. The EU passed a standard for classifying cucumbers. Exactly the kind of standard that would have been passed by each country individually if the EU didn't exist (as evidenced by non-EU countries having such standards).

I certainly do. Wait, there is no equivalent discussion of power draw of vacuum cleaners in the US? Well, then the EU might be at the forefront of consumer electronics regulations and in the end, that's very good for me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/11/boris-johns...

Boiling down what you have actually said in this thread I'm left with "but the EU spends money on things that _I_ wouldn't have". Is that the gist of what you are trying to convey here? Or are you opposed to EU as a concept?

So, cucumber regulation seems very silly indeed. Hopefully we have gotten to the stuff that matters now.

Don't get me wrong, you have the right to express that opinion - but everyone has the right to form an opinion about you based on it.

- opinions are never the equivalent of spreading FUD

- classifying an opinion as FUD is a slippery slope that will lead to an Orwellian dystropy

Here's an opinion:

- Linux is a terrible operating system, because it is open-source. Open-source software does not allow you to capitalize on the work you put down. Anarchy will arise when all software is open-source.

Just like cameras had a megapixel war, vacuums had a power war. In reading electricity consumption without increasing actual air throughput.

At its height there were 3500W vacuums with less than 10% effectivity. Billions of euros every year were wasted on electricity for this.

Just like the laws encouraging LEDs, the vacuum laws had a major effect, manufacturers could easily switch to brushless motors and did.

I have a vacuum from before and after the regulation here.

2400W vs 900W.

The 900W one creates a stronger vacuum than the 2400W one.

The regulation has not just been necessary, it's also been an amazing success.

Every European saves money on electricity, the environment is damaged less and we have more efficient and powerful vacuums.

And similar with the incandescent light ban. It led manufacturers to new innovation, which in turn meant LEDs quickly became popular and over the years better.

By now 1200lm 8W E27 leds are in every IKEA for 10€.

As a result of these two policies electricity usage could be significantly reduced, helping the environment and your electricity costs.

There's absolutely no way you can declare these policies a failure.

Just like the cucumber regulation, which, after it ended, stores started enforcing on their own, because they need that regulation.

You may recall that they banned some conventional wolfram based light bulbs and instead tried to force compact fluorescent lamps (CFL) to the consumer, not LEDs. This has actually lead to a huge recycling problem. The CFLs contain mercury, the plastic parts are hard to recycle and the glass can not be recycled because it is contaminated.

Its not EU regulation that made the LEDs popular, it was consumer demand.

They actually did the most sensible thing possible. They set a target efficiency, and let the manufacturers figure out which technology to use in order to meet those requirements. The alternative would have been to make a specific energy-efficient technology mandatory, which would have unfairly benefited manufacturers focusing on that specific technology, and would have made the law outdated when a better technology inevitably comes along.

Nobody forced CFLs on people. They were simply the best option at that time, until LED bulbs improved.

It was absolutely possible.

Post advertising funded internet/24*7 news we just have a system for propping up attention cravers, by the attention merchenants, off everyone elses attention and resources.

After creating such an environment do you really believe any of the issues you point out become easier to solve?

Fuckerberg is going to go down as the guy who turned the info age into the age of reactions and noise. Nothing else.

I'd suggest that in future discussions, you back your claims with sources. Then people would not simply downvote you for expressing a 'populist' opinion.

I find it pathetic. Verhofstadt and people like him are one of the things that turned me off the EU and turned me into a Brexit voter. They routinely describe almost anything they don't like as "destroying democracy" or "violating democratic norms" regardless of the facts of the matter. In reality they couldn't give a rats ass about what the people want. Just compare cross-Europe opinion polls asking people what they think the top priorities of government should be (hint: immigration, terrorism) vs what the EU actually chooses to do.

This is an age-old strategy of "make sure those who have less fight each other for scraps instead of asking the rich to pay their fair share."

They were massive problems before, i agree, but adding more than 1 million refugees over the course of 2 years (in the case of Germany) adds a very real problem to the housing market and we should be honest about that. You can not blame so called right wing populists for hoping on this issue if other parties fail to even talk about it.

There's plenty of vacant housing in Germany. It's just not in the places people want to live anymore (i.e. mostly rural East Germany). Housing is scarce in the urban areas but that didn't really change.

The 1 million number sounds scary in isolation but it's really just a drop in the bucket. The real problem is our attitude to refugees and our immigration laws: a lot of people are stuck in a legal limbo where they are forced to live off welfare because they're not allowed to seek employment or attend craft schools or universities, many who are technically allowed to do those things only have temporary visas that get extended quarter-to-quarter but could be discontinued at any point. This creates a lot of unnecessary uncertainty while also isolating them socially, hindering "integration", which in turn increases frustration and all kinds of social ills.

Additionally, our welfare system is based on the assumption of a growing population but our birth rates are too low, so immigration is actually necessary. There's a lot of untapped potential in the refugee crisis, our attitudes just need to change to see it as an opportunity rather than a problem.

I do find your argument for Brexit to be a bit better than the average but employing the same logic London should just be a separate city state because there are ppl outside who vote against London’s values (openness and inclusion). I’d be the first to admit that in that vote if asked I would vote for an independent London from the U.K. and this is exactly why general population should not be making these descions.

The MPs are the ppl claiming to know best so you should trust them

Hmmm. But I also claim I know best. Now who do you pick?

And I do agree with some of the concerns. (See Corbyn downplaying grooming gangs, antisemitism, etc and see the current gov ignoring the economic impact of Brexit)

Meanwhile the current government isn't ignoring the economic impact. So far there has been none - the economy is growing and has little spare capacity, if you believe the 4-5% unemployment lower bound. As for future economic impact when the EU inevitably tries to block UK companies and trade, that's pretty much all the Tories are talking about these days. Very much not ignoring it. So I'm not sure I agree that the government is downplaying the concerns of the people.

I'd also point out that last year in the first 3Qs the UK grew its economy, true, but at by far the slowest rate of any of the G7 countries indicating we are lagging behind. Not all of that can be definitively put at the feet of Brexit of course. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-economy-performanc...

I don't think the government is actively ignoring the economy, I just think they are hamstrung by the clear divisions in the nation (and indeed their party) as to whether we pursue a hard Brexit, or a Brexit in name only.

BoE and the profession of economics in general has a long history of failure to make correct economic predictions. Carney in particular has a catastrophically bad track record of predictions with respect to Brexit and has been publicly and repeatedly slated for it.

He can pull some figures out of the air to claim that the UK has "lost" economic performance compared to some model he won't reveal, if he likes. Those of us who understand the limitations of macroeconomics will roll our eyes and ignore his biased pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

FTFY

> when the EU uses border/customs rules for countries they don't have an agreement with

Dear God, no. Those are primarily external problems, we should (and are, thankfully) focused on fixing internal problems and making ourselves better.

But many politicians of the European elite and European national elites live in a fantasy world where privatization, austerity, competition, unconditional support of the USA and Israel, wars, bombs, islamic rebels, sanctions and brazen lies and propaganda against Russia (e.g. Skripal, panama papers, referendum in Crimea) and Syria (after Libya after Iraq after Yugoslavia after Iraq after ...) create peace, democracy, friendship and prosperity.

I was pleasantly surprised that aggressions against Iran were even a topic among politicians and in the mainstream media in Europe instead of just following the USA and Israel and Saudi Arabia into the next disastrous conflict. But this reluctance has more to do with business than with morality and wisdom.

The EU is in my opinion a great success, way greater than what most people realize. Previous generations, who still remember WW2 or its effect from their childhood, recognize what kind of monumental achievement the EU was - which is based on unanimous votes by member nations with varying governments from all political sides!

Unfortunately, younger generations have lost sight of this, some of them erroneously believe that wars could not start again in Europe without the EU. That's very short-sighted, historically, Europe has been torn by wars almost all the time.

Although the EU is certainly not a warrant for peace, it makes a peaceful future overall much more likely in the long run. Take the cordial relations between Germany and France as an example, without the EU these would not look nearly as good as they do now.

Besides that, there are also economic reasons for the EU, of course, but I just wanted to mention this perspective which is all too often forgotten today.

So what about different cultures? Does the EU "destroy" local culture? About that I have to unfortunately point out the sad truth that nationalists generally tend to lack culture. Few outliers aside, the people who actually advance culture have practically always been international cosmopolitans and humanists. And there is a reason why we all don't speak Latin any longer. So I don't buy the "culture" argument from nationalists, it tends to be very hypocritical.

Finally, as for the priorities you mention, sadly there is a case for technocracy to make here. The impacts of terrorism and immigration are minuscule and almost neglectible in comparison to the impact of, say, advances in technology, and the public's fear tends to be badly aligned with reality.

I don't think the EU is a recipe for peace or is making Europe more peaceful. Far from it. The EU looks a lot like a bunch of very unhappy neighbours kept in line by the threat of wildly over the top retaliation from the federalist core if they even think about stepping out of line.

Look at Brexit. The EU is talking about grounding all flights, banning British firms, insisting on obedience, suggesting that the UK be split up to convenience them and demanding huge ransom payments (and don't argue with me about this, these are my perceptions). Then you look at eastern Europe, Catalonia and so on.

I do not perceive the EU as a happy peaceful entity. If it looks peaceful it's only in the sense that a successfully dominated population doesn't fight back. True peace comes from understanding, collaboration and compromise. The EU sucks at all three.

Also bear in mind that the vast majority of all British politicians were "Stay", because they knew what's at stake.

It is also mysterious to me what makes you think that the EU would "suck" at understanding, collaboration and compromise. These are central pillars of the EU, without those three factors the EU could not have possibly been founded by unanimous votes of all 28 member states. All I can say to people like who - who genuinely leave me baffled - is that you could inform yourself better about the EU structure and what EU programs and institutions are actually doing and, most importantly, how incredibly cheap the EU is in comparison to the respective national budgets.

Last but not least, there is either peace or no peace. People, states, and nations will always disagree about certain matters. Your idea of a "true peace" is naive and unrealistic.

We live in different times today. 2018 is not 1918. I would be worried if younger generations could imagine to waste their lives and their wealth for war.

The problem is that too many of the younger generations trust the older generations (current politicians) which trust in lies and wars as solutions. E.g. Syria, Libya, Iraq, Israel.

US, and to a lesser extent European countries, have had little difficulty finding bodies to send to war in the last 50 years.

That claim is hard to square with the literary canons of a number of European peoples, the creations that these people consider the bedrock of their culture and which are exported around the world as what that respective people has to contribute to humankind. You'll find that these canons are to a large extent dominated by nationalists, especially in the wake of 1848. Sándor Petöfi, Mihai Eminescu, Taras Shevchenko, and Elias Lönnrot were not international cosmopolitans, at least not in their literary activity.

As opposed to every other central bank that also has low interest rates because inflation is still terrible? Sweden has negative interest rates for example and we're off the Euro.

"Stop the influx of illegal refugees into the welfare states"

How do you know if an individual refugee is lying about their refugee status? We can't collectively punish groups of people, the right to asylum is a human right that looks at the need of an individual. Everyone has the right to plead their case individually, no matter what country we're talking about.

"Stop passing silly laws regulating the form of cucumbers"

This is a myth, those are WTO and OECD regulations not voted on by the EU but by individual countries. However, instead of each EU member enforcing these regulations separately the EU enforces it centrally. If a country leaves the EU it still has to enforce these regulations to follow the WTO and make sure the countries they trade with enforces them as well.