Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you really conflating the idea of Schegen with "keeping unlocked doors to your house"? Very quick way to show you are not willing to engage in ideas in good faith.
[flagged]
[deleted]
EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
71–80 of 99 posts
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#72The 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.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hungary can leave the EU if it wants. Article 50 exists for this. If it wants to stay in the EU it has to adhere to the bloc rules. It is not forced to stay in the EU (and, in fact, getting rid of Orban would not be such a bad idea). Hungexit when?
[flagged]
> What are you supposed to do when the bloc rules imposed upon you now, are not the ones that were agreed upon when you joined?
Those rules are not conjured from thin air. They are proposed either by EU commission or EU council, and the national governments have direct participation on both, including veto powers.
And ultimately, a country can article 50 if the rules are unacceptable.
> Imagine your landlord or employer changes your contract without your consent and just tells you to walk if you don't like it.
Depending on the country where you live there are regulations, but employers in particular do that all the time.
> I'm old enough to see how the EU of today is not the same it was just 20 years ago.
Age presumably brings wisdom. Not always.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
That obviously makes no sense. A club isn’t a sovereign entity just because it has rules. Hungary is free to leave the EU and set a border policy that conflict with EU law if it wishes - but if it wants to remain part of that organisation, particularly one that has open borders thorough The Schengen area, then of course it needs to follow the rules.
[flagged]
No, EU is not the root of the problem, whatever the problem is. For example, countries are stronger, more resilient and business is more effective together than everyone trying to do it alone. And of course the EU is not perfect and there is room for improvement.
In my experience, one concrete problem is that so many people misunderstand or are unaware of basic things about the EU and why EU even exists. With the former I mean things like how the EU Parliament is put together, the relation of the EU Commission to the EU Parliament, how is the President of the EU Commission chosen (no, it's not "undemocratic"), what does Schengen mean, what is the Euro and WHY does it exist, why was there legislation which mentioned the curvature of cucumbers, and so on.
As there is no big picture, or it is rejected due to ideological reasons, the lack of knowledge and misunderstandings then manifest as fear of the unknown (=the EU). At this point, these people become against everything in EU: whatever new things are proposed from the EU side, it is somehow "lousy", "bad", "failing", "won't work anyway", and so forth. Any EU company has "bottom-barrel products" and "can't succeed", euro cannot work between countries, Europe is "weak" and "gay" and "collapsing".
Also, some people look at an individual member state and confuse it with the whole EU. For example, the nuclear power stance of Germany is seen as an EU-mandated position and then the whole EU is seen to be against nuclear power. This can also work in reverse: Poland sends generators to Ukraine, well done Poland and why is the weak and failing EU doing nothing (except the generators were from RescEU stores, and one such store was located in Poland, so EU was sending them).
When people understand what the EU is and know the basics, of course they might still disagree with things, that's normal, but at least the arguments are more factual.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kinds of innovations require protecting people from being held liable for harms that they participated in? Economic growth for whom and at whose expense?
Its complicated. - It would discourage share buying. - somebody with control packet can do terrible things, while minority stock owners have no impact. Blame attribution might be tricky.
- What's the catch? It's better than forcing the population to pour all their money into stocks that they don't understand just to stay ahead of inflation. This form of passive investing is creating a lot of problems under the surface.
- The one with the most control would get the biggest share of liability.
Blame attribution doesn't have to be precise. For example, if a police officer catches someone littering and it's a plastic Coke bottle, they would fine the person doing the littering, but also a small fine for Coca Cola for having made their bottle out of plastic... If the problem is significant enough, the CEO would be fined a large fine and lose their job along with any employees responsible for the design choice of using plastic. The shareholders would also get a fine (potentially taken out of their dividends).
Some panel of councilors in different towns can decide on the fines independently and fine any local branches that the company has.
It would open up opportunities for smaller companies which is good. Everyone is working constantly anyway; life would be better for most people if they could operate their own company.
Firstly, I question the efficiency of large companies in terms of delivering what people actually need. Secondly, I question the need for such efficiency to begin with; especially in a world where everyone is spending all of their time working bullshit jobs.
Wouldn't it be better if everyone could feel useful in their jobs? Even if it was less 'efficient' in aggregate? I'm pretty sure people would get more value in terms of what they actually need from such society.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#76[dead]
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#77[dead]
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#78It's funny that the EU pretends not to be a sovereign entity or a state in its own right, but then sets up legal frameworks like this. Even in the US, you can't set up a corporation at the federal level: apart from a handful of entities chartered via special acts of Congress, a business entity must exist under the laws of a particular state.
Yes, but you can incorporate in any state you want (provided the state allows that).
That means there’s no barrier to movement.
It’d also possible to reincorporate relatively easily.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#79It's funny that the EU pretends not to be a sovereign entity or a state in its own right, but then sets up legal frameworks like this. Even in the US, you can't set up a corporation at the federal level: apart from a handful of entities chartered via special acts of Congress, a business entity must exist under the laws of a particular state.
You can easily hire a person from Ohio to work for your company incorporated in California without having a separate legal entity in Ohio. Not the case in EU.
True but you do have to register with the state of Ohio, and jump through some hoops.
It’s possible to be registered in a state you’ve never been to - how many people have actually been to Delaware or Wyoming - and employ nobody at.
Some countries play this game too - after the Cayman Islands enacted anti money laundering laws, they tried to keep companies with privacy and efficient dispute resolution.
Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
No, EU is not the root of the problem, whatever the problem is. For example, countries are stronger, more resilient and business is more effective together than everyone trying to do it alone. And of course the EU is not perfect and there is room for improvement. In my experience, one concrete problem is that so many people misunderstand or are unaware of basic things about the EU and why EU even exists. With the for…
It sounds like a system with little democratic buy-in.