The first policy of the last 20 years by this gerontocratic, bureaucratic, and corrupt institution, that makes sense.
> The objective is to enable innovative companies to operate under a single, harmonised set of EU-wide rules, covering relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, labour and tax law.
Especially the last two topics are the nitty gritty details, subject to day-to-day populism by local politicians. It’s why „relevant aspects“ dampens my hopes.
Sometimes I wonder if we should just reduce the EU to a non-geographical sovereign state with which EU countries have a shared agreement. I‘d the incorporate within this state, have it taxed and regulated there. Sort of like a mixture of the City of London and the Holy See.
Unfortunately the foundational thinking behind this runs deep in German culture, stemming from the social upheaval of the early 1800s when a foreign colonizer introduced the (already natively sought) end of the estate system as a way to pit Germans against each other (and gain loyalists). The resulting loss of privileges agitated the heirs towards successful entrepreneurs: Labeling them as Traitors, Jews, and people that didn’t deserve it. As modern Anti-Semitism was born out of this so was the tendency to see success of others with contempt and failure with glee. Though things have improved, you can still notice it.
Apart from that: How is that de-facto locking in of individuals compatible with the EU‘s foundational freedom of movement?
Yes, they were free to leave. No one stopped them from leaving the free trade area and having the exact same status as any other random country in the world. Or did you mean that Uk wanted to leave EU but keep all the good benefits? Like canceling Netflix and bitching about not being able to watch the latest series.
After the referendum, the EU and Bremainers made the 2 following nation-wide elections into single-issue elections. And they burned themselves justifiably from it.
You know that is the problem with the pro EU camp, they tout their opposition as science deniers and worse, yet conveniently pretend hard numbers (ie. election results) don't exist or didn't happen - if it hurts their feelings. It's just intellectual dishonesty through and through.
The EU made UK elections into single-issue ones? Obviously that didn't happen.
I think you're just projecting, to be honest. The "leave the EU" side won; unexpectedly, with no clear vision of what that involved. And then the UK's internal inability to agree resulted in a tumultuous period of internal politics, the result of which is pretty much the outcome we'd've all expected.
It seems like you haven't, why else would you deny the facts?
The EU tried to bully the Brits multiple times into staying [1] while its politicians made many thinly veiled threats [2], hoping they were veiled enough so that Bremain could make use of them. Luckily they overstepped with their arrogance.
The Brits noticed and the results were clear:
- The Torys won the UK parliament in a historic landslide in 2019, they broke "red wall" with their main campaign slogan being "Get Brexit done"
- in the European Parliament election in the United Kingdom prior to that the Brexit Party won almost half of all seats, >30% of the vote, the highest percentage of any party for the last 20 years
The EU could have handled this differently, but their behavior made Bremain so toxic that even Labour essentially gave up on it. As indicated by the breach of the "red wall"
Get over it
------
[1] The EU threats:
- The EU insisted on a strict sequencing of talks: citizens' rights, financial settlement ("divorce bill"), and the Irish border before any discussion of a future trade relationship. This was a deliberate pressure tactic
- The "Divorce Bill" – The EU demanded roughly €39-100 billion (estimates varied wildly) as a financial settlement – "leaving has a price." Michel Barnier (EU Chief Negotiator) insisted that this was non-negotiable.
- Irish Border / Backstop – designed to be a near-inescapable commitment if no trade deal was reached. This killed Theresa May's deal in Parliament three times.
- Granting Article 50 Extensions: Each extension (April 2019, October 2019) came with conditions and public EU reluctance — framed as a favor to the UK. This had a soft public opinion effect domestically in the UK
- No "Cherry Picking" Doctrine: Designed to make voters understand that a "soft Brexit" was not actually on offer, pressuring the Remain camp's argument.
[2] Key EU officials made pointed public statements:
- Jean-Claude Juncker (Commission President): Repeatedly warned the UK was underestimating the complexity. Said the negotiations would be "very, very, very difficult." Also warned in 2016 that there would be no informal negotiations before Article 50 was triggered — a rebuff to UK hopes for a soft start.
- Guy Verhofstadt (EU Parliament Brexit coordinator): Was openly confrontational, frequently stating the UK was living in "a fantasy world" regarding what Brexit could deliver.
- Donald Tusk (European Council President): Made the famous 2019 comment about a "special place in hell" for those who promoted Brexit without a plan — widely seen as a deliberate provocation to harden British public debate.
- Emmanuel Macron: Repeatedly said the UK could reverse Brexit at any time, keeping "Remain" psychologically alive as an option.
- Michel Barnier: "I am not hearing any whistling, just the clock ticking." July 2017 — A sharp comeback after Boris Johnson told the EU to "go whistle" over the divorce bill.
Still, amazing how Meta (and Luxottica?) massaged the media to have the wearers of its dystopian goggles not labeled how they ought to be labeled: Glassholes.
Just for fun I maxed out the specs in the configurator. I remember doing that 10 years ago and paying 4K just to be delivered an infamous embarrassment of a laptop (yes the one with the hilarious display issues), which got me this close (pinching my fingers) to leave apple entirely. Today, maxing out yields me 8K and I gotta say, I‘m done. I‘m not paying Apple‘s insane surcharge. The temporary delta is not worth it. Already I‘m seeing corporations buying the lower/lowest tier laptops possible for their devs. Most of their compute is happening outside of the machine anyways.
The US is doing what Russia did 2022 – Act before the window of opportunity closes. Not just vis-a-vis China. Russia being entangled in Ukraine leaves extra opportunities on the menu. Temporarily.
So like instead of hiring by merit doing it via DEI?
reply