Slashdot Mirror

Here is a primary source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/...

And here one more news article: https://www.eubusiness.com/new...

or [the US could] compete on quality like the Germans

Does that mean the US will get to impose hundreds of anti-dumping duties on Chinese imports like Germany?

EU extends China anti-dumping duty for barium carbonate
EU levies stiff anti-dumping tariffs [on ceramic tiles]
Chinese exporters regret EU anti-dumping duties on Chinese-made screws, bolts
Germany's SolarWorld expects anti-dumping complaints vs China
EU Hits China with Anti-Dumping Duties on Paper
EU greenlights anti-dumping duties on Chinese light bulbs
EU Extended Anti-Dumping Duties on Chinese Bicycle Imports

You see, while German manufacturers and workers are busy competing 'on quality', as you say, the German government is actively protecting domestic industry from competition with China throughout the EU. German manufacturers and German workers do not have to compete with disposable Asian workers and indifferent health/safety/labor/environmental regulation.

The 'oh-noes trade war' sentiment that we get from pro-business types and Chinese ministers is a farce. We're in a trade war. We're getting our clocks cleaned. That is the real reason we have thousands of 'business' degree graduates in their late 20s shuffling around trying to 'occupy' Wall Street. The US no longer provides the real growth necessary to accommodate them. They are surplus people; their futures went to China.

And it isn't just the media. A retarded politicial from Germany, made the EU Energy commissioner (Guenther Oettinger) said he thought the word 'apocalypse' was well-chosen to describe the situation at the plant. In Europe, some give these politicians quite a lot of respect.

I believe that diesel fuel is cheaper in Europe because it attracts less tax. Its one of their famous farming subsidies which keep farmers happy.

The Chinese government *wants* American values, but cafeteria style. They want free exchange of information so long as it is information leaving America and entering China. They don't want information leaving China or worse yet circulating within China. The Chinese government wants America to be open and pursue classical liberal trade policy while it remains closed and pursues mercantilist policies. It wants America to be true to its respect of sovereign nations, but to forget about every individual's sovereignty over his own opinions. It demands the American not interfere in free markets while the Peoples Liberation Army operates businesses and party official parlay their connections into business wealth.

You know, I'm no expert on international relations so this might just be the media doing a number on me, but what you've written here looks remarkably similar to how the US treats the rest of the world.

The US had a unilateral information flow coming from Europe for years until the EU stopped it last year. It still maintains trade embargoes against a variety of countries whilst persuing a policy of protectionism for it's own trade. And the fact that you even have the concept of a "Free speech zone" speaks volumes about the individual's sovereignty over their opinions.

I'm not saying the US is better or worse than China, just that a lot of the things that USians appear to think differentiate them from the Chinese actually don't.

While China seems to be the boogeyman du jour for America, people should keep in mind that the Euro is competing very successfully against the greenback.

Don't be too sure about the Euro

Another link with the famous Milton Friedman comment about the Euro and a currency crisis.

It will be interesting to see what happens to Greece

About half of 369 websites selling electronic goods checked in an EU crackdown were found to have exactly these sorts of problems.

Of course, 99% of those websites weren't run by Apple, so they don't get singled out in the press. Fair do's I guess - 99% of companies don't get every product launch reported by the BBC, either.

The EU "distance selling" regulations (which include the UK) are fairly tight and comparatively recent.

What should the Austrian government cancel to pay for this research? Roads? Schools?

How about bailing out their banks less? They apparently spent 100 billion Euros on this which would pay their CERN membership for the next 5,000 years.

Obviously, like everyone else, they needed to stabilize their banks to prevent their economy from short term disaster. It's just a shame that they can't see the long term disaster for their economy of encouraging all their future scientists to emmigrate. It's ridiculous to think that if they can afford 100 billion euros to bail out the banks that they cannot afford 20 million euros for CERN.

Only if the company getting a lot of influence is a non-EU company. If that company is an EU company, this would not happen.

Nope, the EU is happy to take on EU companies, for example it took on Nokia last year: http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1206717427.67

We might have the same system in Europe soon. So if you are from the EU, don't gloat too much.
http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1213633044.87

The latest for the EU region is to *uck us over like the US! http://www.eubusiness.com/Telecoms/termination-rates-guide In the UK for sure, we have a system called caller pays. Yes US folks - it's really simple, we don't pay for people cold calling us from third world countries trying to sell us rubbish, and we do not pay for the privilege of being sold to! This is the reason why the UK and many other countries are so far ahead of mobile phone uptake usage. My call plan is £31.50 with Orange UK, unlimited calls to UK numbers and UK mobiles, oh free basic broadband over my BT PSTN line. But the EU politicians are being lent on by US telcos to roger us, just the way you are in the states. Great for the telcos, crap for customers. Paying to receive cold calls - it's incredible!

Naaah, I think that this is not intentional. It's just the typically polish manner of doing things: let them drown in the chaos. Do you know that our former prime minister stated recently (http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/03/official-polish.html) that he opposes the idea of voting over internet because people use internet mostly to watch pornography while drinking beer and voting should be a serious issue? And our president doesn't want to sign a treaty that he himself has designed a few months ago? (details:http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1205847121.22/)

I mean, come on. Don't take them seriously. The person responsible for distributing the e-mails will be sacked (just in a few months).

But they do:

Lift cartel: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/lifts-cartel-eu.33
Zippers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/1190197926.91/
Dutch brewers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/beer-cartel.09/

All hundred million dollar fines or more...

But they do:

Lift cartel: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/lifts-cartel-eu.33
Zippers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/1190197926.91/
Dutch brewers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/beer-cartel.09/

All hundred million dollar fines or more...

But they do:

Lift cartel: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/lifts-cartel-eu.33
Zippers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/1190197926.91/
Dutch brewers: http://www.eubusiness.com/Competition/beer-cartel.09/

All hundred million dollar fines or more...

The EU recently raided several Classification Societies belonging to IACS for the same reason. Could they be flexing their muscles? How long has this agency been active?

Many posters seem to think this is a US-only problem. This issue is much bigger. For example, the EU has a large trade deficit with China. Since the EU and US economies are about the same order of magnitude, and their trade deficits with China are similarly sized. I would argue that their economies have similar issues. All this discussion about exporting jobs, exporting factories, etc. needs to consider this.

Why does the EU always seem to come down on US-based companies that control a large portion of specific markets?

Because

• US media, including /., rarely report on cartels involving no US-based companies: for example, for some reason people in the US don't seem to be well-informed about the beer, paper, banana, gas switchgear, and rubber cartels (from just the first two Google pages on 'european commission cartel').
• US-based companies sell lots of stuff in Europe, and therefore have plenty of opportunity to do illegal or suspect things: there is a reason North-Korean companies are rarely sued.

FYI: major part of Poland being part of Russia as long as since 1772, Russia is no way the ``3-rd country'' to Poland.

You just forgot to say, that Russia together with Prussia and Austria had split Poland (and Lithuania and Belarus) among them right in 1772. Before, those "parts" of Russia belong to Poland since 996. Yes for almost 800 years. And Russia is just 3-rd part country to Poland exactly the same way it is for any any other country in Europe, including Your one (unless You live in Russia).

You see, history does not matter much in questions like this. It is the power to declare sovereignty and to maintain it that matters.

Come on, how Poland is different from the other Europen countries like Germany, whose have huge camps like Rammsau? Agin, this is up to Poland if we decide to "sell" Our land to someone or not. Russia has nothing to say here, fortunately.

• Poland is a sovereign (as of 2007-06-04).
• Polish government may decide which military forces may use its land and for what purpose.
• Permit from the Poland does not necessary render the deployment of the military forces or weapons legit, as it may violate agreements and pacts between third parties.
• In particular, Russian goverment may be unhappy about deployment of american rockets next to its borders.
• Tension does not help stability.
• Putin uses the tension to boost his power internally (both because population now feels like their country is being endangered, and because it is a good point to distract attention from the real problems). It might be worse also for Poland in long term (remember Stalin?).
• ???.
• Don't be surprised that Russia suddenly bans Polish products.

It is a no-win situation: neither for Europeans in general, nor for Polish people in particular, nor for Russians (except for Putin and the elite).

Really?

Europe has its own share of problems with meat smuggling:
http://www.deutsche-welle.de/dw/article/0,2144,180 8099,00.html
http://www.eubusiness.com/Food/bonemeal-foodwatch. 92/

Also, not only Russia banned Polish meat:
http://english.people.com.cn/200611/10/eng20061110 _320195.html

I can't find good references in English. Lots of links in Russian. Here are few about meat smuggling in Europe: http://www.eubusiness.com/Food/bonemeal-foodwatch. 92/ http://www.deutsche-welle.de/dw/article/0,2144,180 8099,00.html Besides, Russia is not in WTO and have all rights to ban import of some goods for whatever reasons. US does this for Russian steel (heavy tariffs), for example.

Chirac is know to beer drinker. What's kind of Beer is another debate ( some rumor and humorist say corona ). http://www.eubusiness.com/news_live/1174842013.19/

Europe want gass because it is bether for the enivoronment than coal.
The voters of Europe might demand more nuclear power if the gass supplier is fucking up the planet even more than the coal was.

Europe do have the know how of nuclear power, but it is not a poppular choise when we can use gass. But it is a trade of that might change if dictator Putin goes nuts.

There is also gas in other parts of Europe: "Gas-hungry Europe looks north to Norway" - http://www.eubusiness.com/Energy/061029030842.vl1d iai1

You have got to be kidding. Microsoft is the only one _you_ see on the news probably. The EU is very strict on this sort of things. Have a look at the EU vs Alitalia or the EU vs Olympic Airlines, or the EU vs BMW and GM. The EU even goes against its own country members if they fail to comply with EU law. No matter how people want to see it, microsoft is not the innocent victim here...

[Offtopic]Congrats to Italy for Barrying Germany 'Squadra Azzurra' Style! I hope you guys lift the cup in the end![/offtopic]

Well yeah, the EU contains nearly twice as many people as the US, so their gross domestic product should be high. Per captia they end up being much smaller than in the US. And their economic growth (which is what I was talking about since you were not paying attention) has not been all that high in recent years and their unemployment rates are horrible. People are not going to go out and buy a new computer if they are unemployed and their nation's economic growth looks bleak. Believe me, I've seen it, my company's Europe numbers have been horrible recently compared to say the Americas or Asia. There is no way MS is going to potentially sacrifice their business in those markets just to make some politicians in Europe happy, especially since odds are at least 10-1 they are bluffing.

"That's democracy. A socially responsible company subjects itself to the rules of the jurisdictions it trades in. If you think a government is unreasonable, then stay out of that country."

No, thats absolutely not true. Just because a country is a democracy does not give them a right to pass any law they want to. Think Germany back in the '30s.

"NATO and the UN do not have the power to ban companies from a 11 trillion USD market."

Wanna bet?

As the voting form requires to vote for all categories it is not a good thing to do this if you have no clue who all these people are. Even I, as a overaddict news consuming European, have no clue what to choose for most of the categories because here in Europe news sources are mostly nation minded and therefore very fragmented.

Oh please, give me a break. There are a huge number of fantastic EU focused news-sites that have excellent coverage on all matters pertaining to the Union. Not to mention the EU's own news pages.

http://euobserver.com/
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/
http://www.european-voice.com/
http://europa.eu.int/geninfo/whatsnew.htm
http://europa.eu.int/newsletter/index_en.htm
http://europa.eu.int/news/index_en.htm
http://www.eubusiness.com/
http://www.eubusiness.com/

And of course most news sites (such as BBC news) have an EU portal. And of course you can use google news with a custom filter for 'European Union' to get your daily fix.

As the voting form requires to vote for all categories it is not a good thing to do this if you have no clue who all these people are. Even I, as a overaddict news consuming European, have no clue what to choose for most of the categories because here in Europe news sources are mostly nation minded and therefore very fragmented.

Oh please, give me a break. There are a huge number of fantastic EU focused news-sites that have excellent coverage on all matters pertaining to the Union. Not to mention the EU's own news pages.

http://euobserver.com/
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/
http://www.european-voice.com/
http://europa.eu.int/geninfo/whatsnew.htm
http://europa.eu.int/newsletter/index_en.htm
http://europa.eu.int/news/index_en.htm
http://www.eubusiness.com/
http://www.eubusiness.com/

And of course most news sites (such as BBC news) have an EU portal. And of course you can use google news with a custom filter for 'European Union' to get your daily fix.

1. Jose Manuel Barroso, the former Portugal Prime Minister and now the current President of the European Commission was fairly unpopular in his own country, just before he was (conveniently?) named to the top EU job.
2. He chose people for some of the top jobs in Europe who quickly alienated European Members of Parliament with their ultra-conservative positions and had to withdraw their candidacy.
3. Predictably, he has supported the wackiest pro-big-business policies, to the point that it threatened open-source and free software and favored the european equivalent of the RIAA (look it up on google or /.)

I think its funny all of these comments dissing on Finland when people know nothing about the country, i mean compared to the US finland is way better, have any of u been there? If not read some of these.. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/europe/09/13/ge rmany.corruption/ -- CNN= Finland least corrupt http://wef.typepad.com/blog/2004/10/finland_most_c o.html -- Finland, worlds most competitive economy http://www.eubusiness.com/Finland/55691 --- Finland= Worlds most technologically advanced country yeah sure maybe this/some laws or whatever are stupid, but the US has plenty of those too,it doesnt mean the whole cuntry sucks just cause you don't agree with one thing.

which relies upon a presumption that Greenpeace is against the technology rather than the timings involved in developing it

Or, you could do a little more homework and see that Greenpeace actually does oppose the very technology in question. Here they are quoted as saying that fusion "has all the problems of nuclear power, including producing nuclear waste and the risks of a nuclear accident." This doesn't come across like a position on the timing of the research. Greenpeace holds all sorts of positions that, acted upon, would be mind numbingly expensive. Even they can't think it's an either-or proposition (researching new methods, like fusion, while also making current technologies more efficient). These things aren't mutually exclusive, but Greenpeace's "anything with the the prefix 'nuc' is inherently evil/foolish" mantra is nonsense.

The larger issue, though, to get back to your point (wherein you called me a liar), is that the quote in question, as I presented it, is going to be digested by most casual (and non-scientific) news consumers in pretty much exactly the context in which is was quoted. They're going to hear "this is nuclear, it's bad" no matter how many phrases come before or after it. Greenpeace's frequently simple-minded fan club doesn't really bother with the details, pretty much ever.

But more to the (and back to my original) point: blocking this sort of research doesn't magically make any of Greenpeace's fantasy solutions instantly more achievable or economically viable. But if they can demonstrate to enough people that those things are worth pursuing, that doesn't make important research like this less so. If the people who speak for (or rave about) Greenpeace wanted to sound less shrill, they'd adopt a more rational tone generally. But after all these years, they keep choosing not to, and live in a emotionally inflated, eco-anthropomorphized echo chamber that doesn't actually help develop the tools that would burn less oil. They rely on fear-soaked press releases that, even to the non-savvy are transparently silly, and seem to think that grade-school level dramatics and tantrum-having will solve problems. And to the extent that not everyone involved is like that, those people should be realizing how the whinier majority of their group robs all of them of any credibility whatsoever.

Also, IIRC Greenpeace grudgingly supports nuclear technology because it's the lesser evil.

Actually, the word they use in reference to this particular project is "madness." Here is an article discussing their condemnation of this project.

Well actually, it would be a big deal. In a debate on Monday in France over ratifying the EU constitution, Airbus was constantly used as THE realization of the dream of a unified Europe. Along with the Galileo project, which will essentially duplicate the american military's GPS system in order to lessen Europe's dependence on the US, Airbus is also a project to make Europe more self-sufficient. The political capital invested in Airbus is definitely worth more than the $10 billion invested in the A380.

Still, look here for info on the EU-US dispute in the WTO over EU loans and US military contracts supporting Airbus and Boeing.

The point is that the NHS was very badly underfunded in the past, so increased funding was clearly needed. British people want free health care: the National Insurance premiums are based on your ability to pay and available to everyone.

Nobody in the UK *wants* to pay more taxes. However, people have made the logical connection between more funding and better services, so are prepared to pay higer taxes if it brings them a benefit. This happened back in 1997 when the right-wing Conservatives were thrown out after decades of heading towards a more US style small government, free market approach to government.

Our taxes are still lower than much of Europe. On a £30,000 salary, you could expect to pay £5300 tax and £2800 National Insurance (health and state pension contributions)

There is something of a warm and fuzzy feeling about the NHS - it was founded in the socialist reforms after world war 2 that aimed to create a more equitable society out of the incredibly poor state the war left the UK in.

The NHS is good enough for most purposes: waiting times are down, staff recruitment is up. I went into my local hospital with a broken arm on a busy afternoon, was seen straight away and was on my way home within a couple of hours. The state of dental care is another matter, of course, and so is the whole MRSA/nursing staff not knowing how to wash their hands thing. I don't know many people with private health insurance.

is my idea not my property?

Banning software patents cuts both ways. It erases any built up patents large companies have amassed but it also strips any independent or small developer from the protection he needs when he implements his idea or algorithm.

The small company protecting its assets with a patent from a large company generally simply doesn't work in practice. Suppose you do have the funds for a court case, even then the other side (e.g. IBM) will probably have ten times as many patents your programs infringe on, so they'll countersue you if you don't want to settle.

Have a look at how they treated Sun this way in the eighties...

The US is home to around 270 million people spread across roughly 3.5 million square miles. The EU is now home to about 450 million people, after the recent expansion, spread over only 1.4 million square miles (http://www.eubusiness.com/guides/enlarged_EU/).

I'm no mathematician, but to me this gives the EU a much higher population density than the US, and therefore a built in advantage.

keiferb, would you say this was the predominant reason or am I missing something?

If you follow the right link in "reached an agreement" link in this article you'll get your answer. The agreement ensures "compatibility" and "non-interference"

Probably not paper money, but I know that certain coins cost more to produce than their face value. There was a recent article about the EU considering scrapping 1 and 2 cent coins for precisely that reason (Finland already does not make 1 or 2 cent coins).

...there is no DMCA here :D Of course, once the EUCD is passed into law (sooner or later), it may be a problem.

Norway is not in EU.

I'm not sure how healthy the French economy is these days. France (and Germany) have been exceeding the EU's limit of deficit spending which is 3% of GDP. France is at risk of getting sanctions from the EU. In addition, it doesn't look like Europe's education system is fairing too well either, and it's generally agreed that education is required for a healthy economy. This Time article talks about overcrowded classrooms, underfunding, etc, etc.

Mostly the US has declared that it is 'unnecessary' for the EU to develop their own system or that the planned sytem would disrupt GPS (the planned improvements to GPS due to similar frequencies). Recently the US has come to an agreement with the EU about how the satellites will work. So it does appear that Galileo will become a reality.

Forbes magazine

EU viewpoint

European sources close to the talks said the United States and South Korea were in favor of Rokkasho, a remote fishing village in northern Japan.

Russia and China were said to back the European Union's site in Cadarache, near the Mediterranean port city of Marseille.

Indian officials said New Delhi would soon pick up a 350-million-dollar (300-million-euro) stake in the 3.2 billion euro European satellite project, meant to rival the Global Positioning System run by the US Defence Department.

There is still a case existing: EU commissioner (competition) Mario Monti against Microsoft. Perhaps it would be better to focus on this case.

There is an article on EU Business: Microsoft faces 'final chance' in EU anti-trust probe from August. And Newsfactor thinks Don ' t bet on it.

The response of Microsoft is already very strong. They want to take the case to the US, where the justice system is probably more corrupt (home advantage). See Hindustan Times's Reuters article for more information on this issue. They present the same accusation in an more polite manner: "Microsoft Corp has been trying to drum up support among US lawmakers as part of its effort to fend off antitrust sanctions being considered by European regulators, congressional sources say.

With the European Commission weighing a fine and behavioral changes that could go beyond its US antitrust settlement, Microsoft lobbyists have taken their case to key members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sources said.

While Microsft is under investigation because of its abuse of power, Microsoft propaganda requests stronger IPR law, criminal prosecution . They claim the proposed EURO DMCA++ (IP Enforcement directive) was not strong enough. Examine the horribleEU directive proposal paper by AEL Wiki (page of Association Electronic Libre, Belgium).

Say what you want about Bush killing jobs, it doesn't even compare with the French enforcing a 35-hour max workweek

The 35h work week was the first significant reform by Lionel Jospin.

Under his 5 years government, unemployment fell down 35%.

To oust him out of office, the conservative party launched an all-out media attack on insecurity, immigration, the usual populist far-right stuff. Result : Chirac won, the local fascist puppet came second, Jospin third. Wow, big surprise.

Now after having applied their recipes (lower taxes for the rich, higher indirect taxes for the poor) for a year and half, they found that France, once the economic locomotive of Europe, has become a laggard.

The 35 hour work week (which never made it to most small businesses anyway) is an ideal scapegoat.

Guess what : Economy is not an exact science.

Thomas Miconi

Clearly, I don't accept it either -- but that is the typical goal of people who seek power.

And yes, I did mean Plato's
Republic. Quite honestly, I think that this newspaper article I linked to is too close to imply anything but.

The problem is that if you read The Republic as a serious work [as our leaders would have us do], the Plato learned absolutely nothing from his teacher. But if you read it as a satire, then Plato was trying to take Socrates' work and turn it around, and a Republic, though not necessarily to be avoided in some cases, is something to be viewed with deep suspicion.

Personally, with all the hype going on around the new constitution, I suspect that there are going to be deep flaws. If this is done with a good heart, I fully expect amendments to come in a major rewriting. If not, then I expect serfdom for a while, followed by disaster after disaster.

In the end, you can't get around reality -- but that doesn't always stop governments from trying.

We'll just see what happens. Hopefully things won't be too bad.