Forfatter: germanicunity

Countries like Spain, Poland and Romania has more votes than Netherlands.

Greece, Portugal, Czech Rep. and Hungary has more votes than Sweden and Austria.

Bulgaria has more votes than Denmark.

Why do these freeloaders have more influence than those who contribute the most?

Which Countries Are the Biggest Boost or Drag on the EU Budget?

Image result for VikingLifeBlog

The voting system of the Council as defined in the Treaty of Nice entered into force on 1 February 2003. The voting weights of the member states according to this treaty are shown in the table on the right. The voting system was replaced by the Treaty of Lisbon, effective 1 November 2014.

After the accession of Croatia, on 1 July 2013, at least 260 votes out of a total of 352 by at least 15 member states were required for legislation to be adopted by qualified majority. Croatia had 7 votes (the same as Denmark, Ireland, Lithuania, Slovakia and Finland).^[24]

From 1 July 2013, the pass condition translated into:

At least 15 (or 18, if proposal was not made by the Commission) countries,
At least 260 of the total 352 voting weights,
At least 313.6 million people represented by the states that vote in favour.

*Population in millions as of 1 January 2003 (Treaty of Nice)*
Member state	Population		Weights		Penrose
Germany	82.54m	16.5%	29	8.4%	9.55%
France	59.64m	12.9%	29	8.4%	8.11%
UK	59.33m	12.4%	29	8.4%	8.09%
Italy	57.32m	12.0%	29	8.4%	7.95%
Spain	41.55m	9.0%	27	7.8%	6.78%
Poland	38.22m	7.6%	27	7.8%	6.49%
Romania	21.77m	4.3%	14	4.1%	4.91%
Netherlands	17,02m	3.3%	13	3.8%	4.22%
Greece	11.01m	2.2%	12	3.5%	3.49%
Portugal	10.41m	2.1%	12	3.5%	3.39%
Belgium	10.36m	2.1%	12	3.5%	3.38%
Czech Rep.	10.20m	2.1%	12	3.5%	3.35%
Hungary	10.14m	2.0%	12	3.5%	3.34%
Sweden	8.94m	1.9%	10	2.9%	3.14%
Austria	8.08m	1.7%	10	2.9%	2.98%
Bulgaria	7.85m	1.5%	10	2.9%	2.94%
Denmark	5.38m	1.1%	7	2.0%	2.44%
Slovakia	5.38m	1.1%	7	2.0%	2.44%
Finland	5.21m	1.1%	7	2.0%	2.39%
Ireland	3.96m	0.9%	7	2.0%	2.09%
Lithuania	3.46m	0.7%	7	2.0%	1.95%
Latvia	2.33m	0.5%	4	1.2%	1.61%
Slovenia	2.00m	0.4%	4	1.2%	1.48%
Estonia	1.36m	0.3%	4	1.2%	1.23%
Cyprus	0.72m	0.2%	4	1.2%	0.89%
Luxembourg	0.45m	0.1%	4	1.2%	0.70%
Malta	0.40m	0.1%	3	0.9%	0.66%
EU	484.20m	100%	345	100%	100%

The Making of the United States of Europe

Post author Af germanicunity
Post date 30. juni 2020
Ingen kommentarer til The Making of the United States of Europe

As you know, one accident rarely comes alone. The Coronavirus has triggered a huge bill, especially in countries already plagued by poor public administration and government debt. Therefore, the countries of the Euro zone, led by the governments of France, Spain and Italy, have convinced Germany to go along with the idea of borrowing €750 billion and provide them directly to the sectors, regions and industries in the euro zone most affectedisla by the crisis.

Who should administer the multibillion ‘recovery instrument’? Correct, that is the job of the geniuses in the European Commission. In Denmark, the idea has been promoted by the left, which since March has been pushing to get the Social Democratic government to agree to joint debt with the euro zone countries to show what they call ‘solidarity’.

Two questions arise. One is pecuniary: should the Danes really jeopardize their relatively good creditworthiness for German carmakers, the French oil industry, the Italian and Spanish tourism industries or all sorts of other sectors here and there, which are naturally affected by draconian shutdowns and their governments’ lack of health emergency systems? Are we to be held accountable for what Emmanuel Macron’s government did or what the Socialist government in Spain didn’t do? It seems a bizarre rationale.

Read more here from Mikael Jalving at Nexit Denktank

Image result for VikingLifeBlog

Denmark is one of the four countries nicknamed the ‘Frugal Four’ – along with Austria, Sweden and the Netherlands – which had opposed grants as opposed to loans under the recovery fund, and also insisted on a seven-year EU budget not exceeding 1.0 percent of the blocs gross national income.

Source: EU Observer

Billedresultat for the eastern europe burden eu is a sinking ship

WHAT IS THE MFF?

The MFF sets the limits for EU spending over seven years, as a whole and for different areas of activity.

It is spent on a raft of areas ranging from farm subsidies and regional development, to security projects, Erasmus student exchanges, research, fighting climate change, managing migration, security and defence.

WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT TO AGREE?

Poorer countries always argue that richer net contributors to the budget should pay more, and there is inevitably an acrimonious stand-off. A failure to agree by the start of 2021 risks a spending freeze on many critical projects.

The 2021-27 MFF is even harder because Britain’s exit from the EU means there is less money in the pot: the departure of the EU’s second-biggest net payer will leave a 75 billion euro hole in the seven-year budget.

SIZE MATTERS

The first nut to crack is just how big the budget should be.

European Council President Charles Michel has proposed a figure of 1.094 trillion euros, equivalent to 1.074% of the 27 countries’ gross national income (GNI). The European Commission has sought a bigger budget equivalent to 1.11% of GNI.

Net beneficiaries – mostly southern and eastern states that get more from the MFF than they put in thanks to cohesion funds and support for their farmers – like the Commission number. They stick together in a group called “The Friends of Cohesion”.

Net contributors frown even on Michel’s lower number, and an alliance known as “The Frugal Four” – Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden – insist the budget must not exceed 1.0%.

Germany, the MFF’s biggest net contributor, is sometimes clubbed with these four but is expected to be more flexible.

France, the number two contributor, wants to safeguard CAP funding for its farmers but is uneasy about the fiscal impact of a budget at the upper end of the range.

Net contributors are also fighting to keep a system of “rebates”, reductions to their contributions based on a complicated corrections system. Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher pioneered the rebate in the 1980s, but net beneficiaries say it must now be scrapped.

Source CNBC

Why You Should Root for the “Frugal Four”

Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Austria need not only to keep up their opposition, but to gather additional support for the status quo. It is thoroughly irresponsible to condition southern European nations to continuous bailouts from the north in every crisis, while failing to pressure for any significant reforms in the absence of crises.

The “Frugal Four” are a blessing in this time of great irresponsibility.

Source: Austrian Center

Merkel, Macron Back $543 Billion Fund for EU Crisis Recovery

Which Countries Are the Biggest Boost or Drag on the EU Budget?

A 1994 view on “the incumbent poor four” and “the eastern enlargement”.

Eastern Europe is our Mexico!

Spain and Coronavirus | The WORST Recession in EUROPE?

–

European Defence Agency

Tags Austria, Denmark, EU, General Information, Germanic People, Germany, Netherlands, POC, Sweden

Ikke kategoriseret

Normalcy bias

Ikke kategoriseret

Extermination of Eastern European Germans: An Overview

Post author Af germanicunity
Post date 22. juni 2020
2 kommentarer på Extermination of Eastern European Germans: An Overview

The expulsion of Eastern European Germans resulted in the largest exchange of population in European history. It ended close to 1,000 years of German presence in areas now considered to be parts of Poland, the Czech Republic, Russia and other Eastern European states, forever changing the ethnic face of Europe. Alone, the expulsion of millions of Prussian Germans from their native land between 1944 and 1947 was accomplished in an immensely sinister jewish manner, yet it is an event that has been ignored, minimized or rationalized by the jewish mainstream media.

Senator Homer Capehart’s remarks to the US Senate on February 5, 1946:

“Since the end of the war about 3,000,000 people, mostly women and children and over-aged men, have been killed in Eastern Germany and south-eastern Europe; about 15,000,000 people have been deported or had to flee their homesteads and are on the road. About 25% of these people, over 3,000,000 have perished. About 4,000,000 men and women have been deported to Eastern Europe as slaves. It seems that the elimination of the German population of Eastern Europe – at least 15,000,000 people – was planned in accordance with decisions made at Yalta. Churchill had said to Mikolakczyk when the latter protested during the negotiations to Moscow against forcing Poland to incorporate eastern Germany; ‘Don’t mind the five or more million Germans. Stalin will see to them. You will have no trouble with them; they will cease to exist.’”

“The fact can no longer be suppressed, namely, the fact that it has been and continues to be, the deliberate policy of a confidential and conspiratorial clique within the policy-making circles of this government to draw and quarter a nation now reduced to abject misery…”

“In this process this clique, like a pack of hyenas struggling over the bloody entrails of a corpse, and inspired by a sadistic and fanatic hatred, are determined to destroy the German nation and the German people, no matter what the consequences…”

“At Potsdam the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Socialist Republics solemnly signed the following declaration of principles and purposes: ‘It is not the intention of the Allies to destroy or enslave the German people.’ Mr. President, the cynical and savage repudiation of these solemn declarations which has resulted in a major catastrophe, cannot be explained in terms of ignorance or incompetence. This repudiation, not only of the Potsdam Declaration, but also of every law of God and men, has been deliberately engineered with such a malevolent cunning, and with such diabolic skill, that the American people themselves have been caught in an international death trap…”

“For nine months now this administration has been carrying on a deliberate policy of mass starvation without any distinction between the innocent and the helpless and the guilty alike…”

“The first issue has been and continues to be merely humanitarian. This vicious clique within this administration that has been responsible for the policies and practices which have made a madhouse of central Europe has not only betrayed our American principles, but they have betrayed the GI’s who have suffered and died, and they continue to betray the American GIs who have to continue their dirty work for them…”

“The second issue that is involved is the effect this tragedy in Germany has already had on the other European countries. Those who have been responsible for this deliberate destruction of the German state and this criminal mass starvation of the German people have been so zealous in their hatred that all other interests and concerns have been subordinated to this one obsession of revenge. In order to accomplish this it mattered not if the liberated countries in Europe suffered and starved. To this point this clique of conspirators have addressed themselves: ‘Germany is to be destroyed. What happens to other countries of Europe in the process is of secondary importance.’”