• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

the President o f Europe

Kalle

Banned
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
97
Reaction score
14
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Norway are not part of thiis.the EU this is big mistake.Russia try to get in EU and it past the Köpenhagn accord.this will not be good for Europe.i dont like Vladimir putin.i thiink Tarja Halonen or Eva britt Svensson make better presiident then for thiis Belgian PM Rompuy. :(

Meet the President of Europe | The Brussels Journal
 
Norway are not part of thiis.the EU this is big mistake.Russia try to get in EU and it past the Köpenhagn accord.this will not be good for Europe.i dont like Vladimir putin.i thiink Tarja Halonen or Eva britt Svensson make better presiident then for thiis Belgian PM Rompuy. :(

Meet the President of Europe | The Brussels Journal

You're Finnish, right?

Anyways, I don't like Rompuy because he views religion to have a place in government.

There should be no religion in government.
 
You're Finnish, right?

Anyways, I don't like Rompuy because he views religion to have a place in government.

There should be no religion in government.

Good thing he is a glorified office manager and not a real President then...
 
Interesting history lesson, and proof about how multiculturalism and liberalism are bull****. The only amazing thing is that a conservative flourished in the crap.
 
YouTube - New EU president confirms New World Order desire (19Nov09)

"Global Governance, Global Management" last 30 seconds of his little speech. What a swell guy.

So what are you saying that we should not strive to have global governance and management when it comes to things that effect everyone? That we should live in our little areas and pray and hope the stupidity of others or ourselves does not spread over the border?.. a bit hard if it is in the air or water ya know.
 
So what are you saying that we should not strive to have global governance and management when it comes to things that effect everyone? That we should live in our little areas and pray and hope the stupidity of others or ourselves does not spread over the border?.. a bit hard if it is in the air or water ya know.
Yeah, that's exactly what we should do. Global goverance is bull****.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what we should do. Global goverance is bull****.

I see.. so you are an utter isolationist.. stick your head in the sand then.

The point of global governance is not to make a one world government (I have no doubt that is for some) but to make sure that we have an effective response to issues that effect all of us and can only be solved by all of us.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what we should do. Global goverance is bull****.

Wow, for once we agree. Id say local governance should count most, and hand some to regional governance, who then again hand some to national/continental governance that takes care of only security for example. Tax should be local.
 
Wow, for once we agree. Id say local governance should count most, and hand some to regional governance, who then again hand some to national/continental governance that takes care of only security for example. Tax should be local.

Oh I dont disagree. What I am trying to say is that things that can best be handled locally should be done so, and things that best can be handled globally should be done so.
 
Oh I dont disagree. What I am trying to say is that things that can best be handled locally should be done so, and things that best can be handled globally should be done so.

Good to hear that I am not the only one.

I am unmovable in saying people should be taxed locally, and then handed upwards on a need basis to regional and national(US)/continental(EU) governance.

What is your stance on tax in that case?
 
I see.. so you are an utter isolationist.. stick your head in the sand then.

The point of global governance is not to make a one world government (I have no doubt that is for some) but to make sure that we have an effective response to issues that effect all of us and can only be solved by all of us.

You mean Germany and France? ;)
 
Good to hear that I am not the only one.

I am unmovable in saying people should be taxed locally, and then handed upwards on a need basis to regional and national(US)/continental(EU) governance.

What is your stance on tax in that case?

Depends on the tax system and what works best. I dont agree with top down tax systems nor do I believe in up top tax systems. Both cause problems. The top down tax systems dont always take into context the needs of the locals, and the up top tax systems can easily bring a country to its knees and give far far too much power to the locals, who frankly are far from always viewing the best interests of the country as a whole.

The best system is that you have a local and state tax you have to pay and hence separating the two. Now that does not mean you need two bloated bureaucracies to handle the administrative work. One organisation can easily handle both and that organisation should have local "branches" so to say.

As for the "continental tax".. does not exist and wont exist until we get another new treaty and is highly unlikely. Any transfer of money to the continent should go through the state (national) of course since the are best equipped to do so, and represent us in that matter.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the tax system and what works best. I dont agree with top down tax systems nor do I believe in up top tax systems. Both cause problems. The top down tax systems dont always take into context the needs of the locals, and the up top tax systems can easily bring a country to its knees and give far far too much power to the locals, who frankly are far from always viewing the best interests of the country as a whole.

The best system is that you have a local and state tax you have to pay and hence separating the two. Now that does not mean you need two bloated bureaucracies to handle the administrative work. One organisation can easily handle both and that organisation should have local "branches" so to say.

As for the "continental tax".. does not exist and wont exist until we get another new treaty and is highly unlikely. Any transfer of money to the continent should go through the state (national) of course since the are best equipped to do so, and represent us in that matter.
I hope you get that treaty and they tax the living **** out of you without reducing the current taxes. Then I hope to hear Europeans whine their little butts off about how tough it is. hahahahahaha
 
I hope you get that treaty and they tax the living **** out of you without reducing the current taxes. Then I hope to hear Europeans whine their little butts off about how tough it is. hahahahahaha

The day that Brussels get tax authority breaking 50 years of policy is the day the EU dies and a new Federated European Nation is born.. and that will not happen within the next 50 years at least, if every. I for one will be against it.
 
You guys just aren't paying enough taxes. You need to use the special IRS form 1040

Line 1) How much did you make last year? __________
Line 2) Send it in. ___________
 
Depends on the tax system and what works best. I dont agree with top down tax systems nor do I believe in up top tax systems. Both cause problems. The top down tax systems dont always take into context the needs of the locals, and the up top tax systems can easily bring a country to its knees and give far far too much power to the locals, who frankly are far from always viewing the best interests of the country as a whole.

The best system is that you have a local and state tax you have to pay and hence separating the two. Now that does not mean you need two bloated bureaucracies to handle the administrative work. One organisation can easily handle both and that organisation should have local "branches" so to say.

As for the "continental tax".. does not exist and wont exist until we get another new treaty and is highly unlikely. Any transfer of money to the continent should go through the state (national) of course since the are best equipped to do so, and represent us in that matter.


Agreed!

By top up I more mean that most taxes should be collected by local governance. Some part by regional, some part by national and some part by federal.

I like the idea of 4 layers, but we could be better of removing the nations alltogether.
 
You guys just aren't paying enough taxes. You need to use the special IRS form 1040

Line 1) How much did you make last year? __________
Line 2) Send it in. ___________

Ive paid anything from 10%-55% total taxes of my wages in different European countries. On average of all of those and the tax systems I know, around 35% seems the average and the norm(yes, after studying all brackets, not only my own income bracket).
 
Oh I dont disagree. What I am trying to say is that things that can best be handled locally should be done so, and things that best can be handled globally should be done so.

The problem is, you will have a very difficult time trying to maintain such a balance. Envariably, the globalists will always attempt to increase their influence and power.
 
Pete, because the people wanting "Global control" tend to believe 99% of the world are incapable of existing without being told how to live. And those people tend to want more and more power. It's called Soft Tyranny, which usually collapses after it's ineptitude reaches critical mass leading to hard tyranny.
 
Pete, because the people wanting "Global control" tend to believe 99% of the world are incapable of existing without being told how to live. And those people tend to want more and more power. It's called Soft Tyranny, which usually collapses after it's ineptitude reaches critical mass leading to hard tyranny.

That happens and can happen at any level of government or "control regime" for peak sake. Anyone who wants power in any part of society can abuse it. This can be everything from the local mayor, elected official, appointed official, manager in a company all the way up to the head of state.

That does not change the fact that certain things are best solved as a whole planet than at a local level and visa versa.
 
The problem is, you will have a very difficult time trying to maintain such a balance. Envariably, the globalists will always attempt to increase their influence and power.

Of course you will have a hard time maintaining a balance, but should that stop us attempting to get most bang for our buck? For example, the Tsunami a few years ago. That was a global response through the UN... just think if that had been done on a "local level".. utter chaos and waste would have ensued as a result.

But it is not only the globalists that will attempt to increase their influence and power, it is just as much the "locals" all the way down to the very local level. There are far far more abuses of power and attempts to gain even more power on the local level on a daily basis than there is and has been on a global level.

It is far far easier to expand your influence and power and take full control of a local area than a large area. We have seen it time and time again. A cult leader having absolute control over a hundred people, a local mayor or copper abusing his power for personal gain, a local business man who controls a large portion of the wealth in the area, abusing his or her standing for even more personal gain.. the "we cant go after X because he gave us our jobs" syndrome.
 
Local governments can be tyrannical too.
Look at Somalia.
Their very local guerilla warlords are tyrants.
They have no ambitions of one world government whatsoever.
They are not globalists.

If we had everything be local governments, we'd have tyrants like that... lots of warlords imposing their tyranny on small groups of people.

It is better to have a strong central government.
It is easier to keep ONE government honest than try to keep thousands upon thousands of local warlords in their place.
 
Back
Top Bottom