The Washington Post: Anne Applebaum: 'Greece is a Turning Point For The European Union'

Source:The Washington Post- Greek money is looking more like Monopoly money everyday.

Source:The New Democrat

Anne Applebaum talking about Greece and the European Union, at The Washington Post. Her column is apparently unavailable to read right now.

From The Washington Post

“The resounding rejection of the bailout referendum by the Greek people has caused shouts of joy across the nation, but will it cause ripples throughout the rest of the eurozone? Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, tells Manila Chan about how the ‘No’ vote might be more detrimental to the Greek people than they imagine.”

From RT America

Source:RT America-  “RT is funded in whole or in part by the Russian government. Wikipedia." 

Wow! I actually agree with Anne Applebaum on something. I tend to see her as a Neoconservative, at least when it comes to foreign policy and national security. But she’s damn right in most if not her entire piece about Greece and Europe.

The problem with the Euro, the European currency, is that you have a large developed country like Germany of eighty-plus million people, thats economy looks more like America and Canada, than it does Sweden. Germany, is not a socialist state, they can’t really afford to be one. They invest heavily and education, energy and infrastructure. They promote free trade and private economic development in their country. They require people who can, to work and take care of their health care through their private health care system. And as a result, they are now the power in Europe. Economic, but have real political and defense as well and are the fourth largest economy in the world. With living standards, that are equal, or better than America’s.

But then you have a small semi-developed country like Greece. Where the average Greek, makes about 1/3 of the average German, or American. That is dependent on other countries for its defense, energy and economy. They’re drowning in debt right now. That has one of the largest socialist state’s in the free world. As far as how much their national government spends for its people. Socialists, don’t believe there’s a limit to what government can do for their people. Or how much government can spend for their people. They don’t believe debts and deficits matter and even now as Greece is drowning in their own debt, they still don’t believe that they should have to tighten their belts and cut back on their services. And expect others like Germany, that is very successful economically, to bail them out.

When the Euro was created in Europe in the late 1990s, the idea was that instead of having 25-30 small to medium-sized markets in Europe, you would create one huge market of three-hundred plus million people. That the whole world would want to invest in. On paper, that sounds like a very good idea. And they had strict requirements on debt and deficits. That each member couldn’t let those things reach like four-percent of their economy. And had to manage their financial affairs and not run up high debt and deficits. But again, Greece is one of the members of the Euro and is a socialist unitarian state. That doesn’t believe debt and deficits matter and that there’s no limit to what the state can do for their people. And that they can run up debts and deficits, because their socialism will make their economy stronger. Or someone, like Germany, will bail them out. And Greece, is paying a heavy price for their socialism right now.

A united currency amongst several different countries, doesn’t work very well, unless you have strong rules and rule enforcement and similar economies and economic systems. Which is one of the reasons why Sweden isn’t part of the Euro, because they have a similar economic system as Greece, but are energy independent and can afford their socialism. The idea of having a single market in Europe, makes sense, but the best way to do that is to have a single state, a federal state. With one economy and economic system. With a federal authority to manage the currency and economy. Manage the debt and deficit, negotiate trade deals with other countries, encourage economic investment in the country. From domestic and foreign business’s. As well as defend and secure the country.

A federalist, not federal, but a Federalist Europe, a united European country, that would go from lets say Portugal in the Southwest, to Italy in the Southeast and Belgium in the Northwest and Poland in the Northeast, would benefit all of these Euro States in several ways. You would be talking about the first, or second largest developed economy and country in the world. That could replace NATO with a united European defense, that would be more than capable of defending itself and become a great strong ally of the United States and the United Kingdom and serve as a deterrent to the Russian Federation. With one president, one administration, one Assembly, or Parliament and federal court system all under one federal government. But where the Euro States, would have autonomy over their state and domestic affairs. With the federal government being in charge of interstate and national affairs.

Not saying a Federal State of Europe will ever happen and certainly not happen soon. But for a Euro, or Eurozone to work as well as it possibly can, you need the member states to have either similar economies and living standards, or agree not to let the government spending get out of control. You can’t afford to have a Greece, or a Portugal, or big states like France and Italy, to drown themselves in debt and watch their economies sink and drive down the worth of the Euro. Which makes thinks tough for the rest of the states in the Union. Because they lose customers and investment opportunities when one, or several of their trading partners sinks in debt and depression.

Lew RockWell Blog: A United Europe? by Alexander Jousse

A United Europe? by Alexander Jousse

This idea that a United Europe could come together and form some new super Federal Republic, perhaps going. As far as Portugal in the West to Italy in Eest and perhaps South Ireland in the Northwest to Germany or Poland in the Northeast. Has been thrown around several times especially in the last fifteen years since they started the European currency and the European Central Bank. Especially with China on the rise across the board, as well as India and Brazil and with Russia back on the rise, Europeans have. Been wondering how do they with twenty seven or so fairly small Federal Republics compared with those. Huge countries that I just named, how would they be able to compete with not only America and Japan in the future. But with China, India, Brazil, Russia and even Mexico in the future and if Europe East of Eurasia were to become. One United Federal Republic, you would be talking about a country of 350-400M people, with perhaps an economy as big or larger then the United States.

Personally as far landmass and population, politics and culturally, racially and ethnically and everything else. Where a United Europe would essentially be dominated by Caucasians as far as in numbers but very diverse ethnically. With Germans, Italians, French and may others living in this country, there would be some cultural differences, as well as linguistic differences. But America and Canada have that and have functioned very well and if Europe could overcome this, Europe would become a superstate that could compete. With anyone in the World, economically, politically, militarily and everything else, it would be country that. Foreigners would want to visit and even immigrate to in the long term short term they are two messed up economically but long term this would be an option to look at.

Rob Bluey: Lou Dobbs Tonight- 'The Rise of the European Superstate'

Source:Rob Bluey- Sally McNamara, is a foreign policy analyst for the Washington based right-wing political action network The Heritage Foundation.

"Lou Dobbs Tonight, CNN, June 18, 2007"  

From Rob Bluey

Europe in some ways at least East of the United Kingdom West of the Slavic states and perhaps South of Scandinavia (and this will be the end of the geography segment of this post) have been somewhat at least moving to a United Europe (whether its called the European Union or something else) for about sixty years now. 

After World War II with the creation of the European Union (Europe's own version of the United Nations) partially in response to the Soviet Union and the Cold War but also for economic reasons, Mainland Europe East of the United Kingdom and West of the Slavic states (I'm sorry) is a region of around 400M people with a total GDP approaching the United States with similar living standards. 

So Europe 60 years ago figured they would be better off working together including a single currency that started around 2000. Instead of several countries that are small compared with the biggest countries in the world both physically and population working by themselves. 

Europe figured if they worked together and traded they as a union would have a bigger say in the world, then if they were all by themselves. France, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc could all be states or provinces in America, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, China, Russia etc,  but together they would be a huge country both physically about the size of Mexico. And in population, together they would be bigger than America. And by in-large the European Union has been a huge success. 

Europe does have a bigger more influential say in the world united than they would separately. And all of the large States in the European Union are all Economic powers. The question is how far down this road of unifying would the European Union go. 

I personally would like to see them come up with a unified defense force that could take a lot of pressure off the U.S. Military as well as a unified foreign ministry and see both of these organizations run by the E.U. Executive for the same reasons. But how much farther down this road of unification would Europe go, because they already have a President, an executive branch, and an elected legislature, as well as a high court. 

Personally I don't see the United Kingdom ever becoming part of the European Union as one Nation. I believe they'll always hold on to their independence. But I could see France, Germany, perhaps Ireland and economic boost they would get out of that as being a state instead of a tiny country of around 4M people. I could see Spain, Italy and a lot of the smaller European nations. 

Another issue would be borders, how far would a United Europe go, economically most if not all the Slavic states aren't ready to be in the European Union. And they all have questionable human rights records that the EU takes seriously, which is why Turkey has never made it into the European Union. 

I could see a United Europe that lets say included South Ireland, but not Britain and then went from western mainland Europe to the Baltic States, perhaps even Poland thats moved quickly down the road of being a liberal democracy or a social democracy. And then going as far south from Portugal to Italy, with the Balkan States not ready for the EU yet. 

European unification would make Europe a super state of 400M people or so and about the size of Mexico physically. And perhaps the largest economy in the world. But if this were to happen, it shouldn't be forced on Europeans and they should have to approve it. 

Personally a United Europe would be great for the United States when it comes to our foreign policy and national security, because we would have another strong partner on our side that could take a lot of pressure off of us. But we would also have another economic competitor with a lot of money that would be able to invest it all over the world. This wouldn't be for us to decide but the European people to deal with and decide one way or the other.