There is a lot written by now about Greece and the other black sheep of Europe Portugal, Spain, Ireland and perhaps Italy. What is interesting is why these countries accumulate so much debt that they risk to fail? Is the reality that they can't live the same as their more affluent countries in the EU but have done this anyhow? This should not be a big problem. Greece only has 2% of the EU GDP.
We then seem to have reached the point where populations of countries are taken care of but countries in the EU are not taken care of by more affluent countries. In my humble opinion this would mean that EU has failed to become united and that states are going to start a process of secession. Most probably without a civil war to follow. There is simply no Abe Lincoln around. That people talk about an expansion of the EU under these circumstances is not understandable other than from individual countries perspective.
As a layman of economics I must ask myself is these potential failures are caused by the monetary union or would have occurred anyhow? Are we living in an impossible world? Neither Union neither Member Countries. A half way house. Charlemagne of The Economist trashed and demoted Lady Ashton to a Low Representative and it is questionable if she ever rises again.
Now, this breaking point occurs as the US is silently distancing itself from Europe. Another thought comes to mind. The European project was possible due to the protection afforded by the US and NATO? It gave the European states an air of supranationality.
Now the French cadets ask questions in French after the speech of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State! The FAQ page on the web for the EU does not include the US as a factor giving peace to Europe after World War II! I guess the next point in the development is when it would have been the Red Army that liberated Europe--and kept it free.
Carl Bildt made changes in the number of embassies that Sweden has and closed many in the EU. Are we talking about foreign policy between member states or is it internal affairs? More and more people are silent in blogs on international affairs and intra-European news are rare in the newspapers and other media. If it wasn't for the Anglo-American press and internet we would be quite in the dark. Free news and opinions on the internet is apparently slowly closing down as a further step in the world localization process. I hope it will not be a "fatal mistake" to not keep the US as a leader.
I read today about a new book Jämlikhetsanden, or The Spirit of Equality in DN. Someone apparently is trying to provide proof that equality makes us healthier. Magnus Andersson, the CUF leader, wrote on his blog that the Left Party in Göteborg is trying to make it illegal to earn more than four times another person in the commune. I guess we simply are not interested in Microsofts and Googles in Sweden.
So what are we interested in? Hearing the views of Kurds in Uppsala on Studio Ett, a radio program, that were against erecting a statue of Fadime that was shot by her father, an honor killing, it occurred to me that what we fail to do here in Sweden is to make people leave such ideas behind and move into the future. There has then to be a future to speak about. Being known for your welfare system is not to be preferred compared to being known for your Microsofts and Googles and the internet. Not to mention Wikipedia. That would inspire people to become Europeans. A viable society must tolerate exceptional people. It will never work with a stipulated course in Swedish values.
So when the political election debate focus on the part of the population with problems, no job, bad health and not the healthy 90% it is bound to become quite uninspiring.
Kanske vänder det nu? För en värdig samtalston på nätet
3 timmar sedan