Tag Archives: USA

And here are the results of the European votes (excluding mine)…

Let me start with a clear statement – I didn’t vote last week. This action has raised some eyebrows among those who know me, as this is absolutely contrary to what I normally do. I usually vote, although for obscure parties, but this time I do have my reasons not to. They are threefold – firstly, I am elections-tired, secondly, I don’t understand how the EU parliament works and thirdly, Parkinson’s law. Allow me to explain in more details.

  1. I am elections-tired
    The number of elections in the Netherlands is starting to be ridiculous. I’m good with numbers (otherwise I wouldn’t be doing a Ph.D. in Earth Sciences) but I actually start losing track of the number of times I voted in the last few years. See for yourself – there are the national parliament elections, which are normally held every 4 years, but in recent times are held biannually due to unstable governments falling quite regularly. Then there are the municipal elections, which were held just two months ago. So far, so good? This is where things get complicated. There are also the provincial parliament elections of the regional government. These parliaments elect the provincial government and the Senate, the upper house of the Dutch parliament. Feeling lost? Wait, there’s more – there are also the Water Board elections – the guys that manage the dikes and polders get elected, too. Actually, I forgot to mention that in the big cities (like Rotterdam, where I live) during the municipal elections also the neighbourhood committees were elected, but these are rather unimportant. By the time the European elections are up, I just don’t give a damn anymore.
  2. I don’t get it
    What was I supposed to vote for? The European parliament? And they do what exactly? Theoretically, I know they are rather important and take hundreds of decisions that effect my daily life. Like the tough decision to call carrot a fruit for the purposes of making jam. But wait – that was not a decision by the European parliament at all! It was a Directive of the Council of the European Union, who (and I quote):

    Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 37 thereof,
    Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
    Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,
    Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee,
    Have decided that:
    – for the purposes of this Directive, tomatoes, the edible parts of rhubarb stalks, carrots, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, pumpkins, melons and water-melons are considered to be fruit[…]

    Must be a tough job indeed, having regard of all those people. Now who were they exactly? Don’t know? Well, neither do I. And I know even less about how they get their positions and what is exactly the power balance between the Parliament, the Commission and the Economic and Social Committee. And why is it that they need all those meetings of heads of state, finance and foreign ministers, if they have all these committees working for them?

  3. Parkinson’s law
    To anyone familiar with Parkinson’s law it is obvious that a parliament that has 751 members and three places of work (Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg) just can’t function. In fact, a body of this size would probably be counterproductive to the extreme, has it not been slowed down by its own weight. So besides eating a lot of taxpayers money (simultaneously translating debates between 24 languages costs around €150,000 per day), it probably does nothing. Yes, it makes decisions, but by the time they finish debating, the problem has either solved itself or became otherwise irrelevant, so the whole circus can start all over.

And that’s why I didn’t vote for the European parliament. Of course, I do have suggestions for improvement. In fact, they are pretty obvious.

  1. The number of levels of government must be cut
    I can only speak of the Netherlands, but here the provincial parliament, the Upper House and the Water Boards can all be deleted without anyone noticing. Except the people working there, but the ones doing useful work can be redistributed among the remaining governments and the useless ones are clearly a burden and can be sent to retirement. Most of them are already retired (more than two thirds of the Upper House members, for example) so its not an issue.
  2. The EU must become less complicated and much, much more transparent
    The successes of the anti-EU parties should be a wake-up call for all. The majority of the Europeans support the EU, think it is a good thing and see the benefits of it. But they can’t see the forest through the trees. If a high-educated person like myself doesn’t get how and why the EU takes its decision (read – spends my money), what about those with less academic qualifications? The EU and its various governing bodies need to get mature, define their objectives, divide responsibilities and keep out of touchy subjects until they prove to be capable and trust-able to handle them.
  3. The European parliament needs to get tough on itself
    And I mean real tough – cutting drastically the number of members and choosing a single location. Limiting the number of official languages might be a good starting point. If even the UN can stick to just six official and two (just 2!) working languages, the EU has no excuses there.
  4. The European parliament may have to split in two to increase its credibility
    I know it sounds contradictory, but I think the Americans actually got this one right – in what is known as the Connecticut Compromise, the states send two types of representatives – a proportional Congress (like the EU parliament is) and an egalitarian Senate, where each state has two members. I am not saying the EU should copy this model but I do think that a compromise in such style can contribute to the balance of power between the members, in the long term reducing the frictions and the need for elaborate discussion between governments.

I remain hopeful that Sunday’s dramatic result will lead to dramatic changes in the way the EU is run. But unfortunately, I don’t see any of this happening any time soon. In 5 years, I will reconsider voting. I will have plenty of opportunities to vote in between, so I’ll keep practising colouring my ballot.

1 Comment

Filed under Europe, Work

European myths and legends

Europe is teeming with myths and legends. Tales of kings, gnomes, elves, wolves and witches are everywhere in the castle-filled Europe. But its not only old myths – modern myths are here as well. As you can probably guess, these modern myths hold about as much truth as the old ones. Here are some of those modern myths about Europe.

  1. Holland is all about drugs and hookers
    When I told my grandma I was going to the Netherlands to study, she started crying. I said: “But grandma – why? You’ve always wanted me to study, so what’s wrong?”. “Its all drugs and hookers there”, the old woman cried – “I’ve seen it on TV!”. I did my best to reassure her. I said: “But grandma – its all drugs and hookers here as well”. That brought her right back to her senses. She stopped crying and said: “You’re right. The TV is all lies anyway”. Despite both prostitution and cannabis being legal in the Netherlands, the consumption of both here is actually around or even slightly below the European average.
  2. London is full of rich people
    This myth is fuelled by the high concentration of Russian billionaires and football players in London. The capital of the grandest Empire of all times is also full of Imperial Glory in the shape of grand buildings, museums and fancy shops. Sad truth is, that most Londoners are poor people. Even those with a good job in the City pay half of their salary to rent a shared apartment (not even their own!) and endure an hour’s ride each way in the rush hour Tube to and from work. You can’t call that being rich.
  3. Eastern Europe is poor
    This myth is especially popular in… Eastern Europe! True, on average, income is significantly lower in Eastern European countries. But the reality is not as black as some would make you believe. The GDP per capita in Bulgaria, for example, is about 7,000 USD. Corrected for Purchasing Power Parity (that is, the actual prices of goods, which are significantly lower in the East), the GDP PPP in Bulgaria is over 15,000 USD! That is still rather low compared to Western Europe, but the differences are not that big anymore. And another thing – the more one moves to the East (and South) of Europe, the higher the share of non-documented economy – the untaxed, unreported income. In Russia it may be as big as the official economy according to some reports! So no, Eastern Europe is not as poor as you might think by looking at the dry numbers.

    Eastern Europe? No, Holland (at -12 C)!

    Eastern Europe? No, Holland (at -12 C)!

  4. Europeans are skinny
    Mostly believed by Americans, this myth is only partially true. Yes, compared to Americans, Europeans are skinny. But Europe is competing with the U.S. for first place in the obesity crisis. In every country in the EU, more than 50% of men are overweight, and almost everywhere more than 40% of women. The UK is hit especially hard, with numbers approaching the USA. Even in France and Italy, countries praised for their healthy food, more than 10% of the population is obese and the numbers are rising dramatically.
  5. Europeans are well-dressed
    Again, a myth mostly believed by a specific group, this time visitors from SE Asia (and, again, many Americans). Compared to SE Asia, where its nothing unusual to do your shopping dressed in a pygama (mint green, with blue teddy bears or purple, with yellow chicks), Europeans are haute couture. In reality, almost everywhere on the continent, people dress casually. Business districts see more suits and there may be less sweatpants and sneakers on the streets that in North America, but outside the city centre in any European country there is plenty of Adidas fashion walking around. Geographically, as you go Eastwards, sweatpants become less and less the exception until, in Russia, they become the norm.

These are just five of the many, many modern myths about Europe. Have you heard any myths you found out to be untrue? Or have a myth you particularly like? Do share it please!

Leave a comment

Filed under Europe

Europe and USA – same same but different

Europe and the USA are similar in many ways. Both are roughly the same size, have about the same number of states/countries, even the average income is (roughly) compatible. There are differences, too, and many of them. While for most differences a US state and a European country can be found that share some commonality, there are two points on which Europe and the USA are radically different as a whole.

First one is morals. When I turn the TV on, what comes on right after the evening news? I’ll give you a hint – its Dutch TV. Anyone who’s seen a Dutch movie will instantly know the right answer – nude! Not speedos, not topless, no – NUDE. People naked as the day they were born. On mainstream national public channels. And nobody is making a fuss about it. That, I think, is symbolizing the huge differences in morals between Europe and the USA. Nipplegate is just inconceivable in even the most conservative parts of Europe. I seriously can’t think of a European country where an incidental one-second exposure of something that might have been a nipple would lead to public outrage of the magnitude unleashed in Nipplegate.

The other difference is guns. Can you buy a gun in the supermarket in the USA? Yes, you can! In most European countries, gun ownership for self-defence is prohibited. Even the Czech Republic which has the most gun-friendly laws in Europe requires the gun-owner to pass tests about firearms legislation, weapon knowledge and first aid, and a medical inspection. American gun-proponents like to point out that Norway and Switzerland have high gun-ownership ratios. But in Norway, almost all guns owned by civilians are hunting rifles, and to get a hunting license the applicant must complete a 30 hour, 9 session course and pass a written exam. And in Switzerland most guns are government-issued rifles held by members of the military reserve. They don’t even have ammo for those!

Personally, I prefer the European approach to these two issues and I don’t think I would like to live in the USA. Because having the choices, I’d much prefer being surrounded by nipples than by guns. And you?


Filed under Europe