Poll: HN EU readers, should we start lobbying the EU? | Hacker News Reader

Poll: HN EU readers, should we start lobbying the EU?

64 pointsdanmaz74105 comments

In the latest poll [1] we saw that there are a lot of Europeans on HN, and I guess many of them from the EU. I also noticed a comment [2] from davedx from the Netherlands that said "not being based in the US comes with lots of disadvantages, such as terrible payment gateways, unfriendly tax and small business legislation, and smaller networks of entrepreneurs", and started wondering if in the EU we could, and should, start lobbying the EU Parliament and Commission to get a better environment for (especially web, but not only) startups: eg for payment gateways, only a more harmonized system could make them easier to create. To do so, we would also (need to) build bigger networks of entrepreneurs.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=3298905 [2] http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=3300204

So, the question is: Should we start lobbying the EU Parliament and Commission to create a better business environment for startups?

View on HN

I am French, living in Germany with a company in UK. I can tell you, business is easy in Europe. It is extremely easy to take the good of each country and leave the bad. You can setup a company in any EU country and run it from any other country. This means an insane level of flexibility at the regulations level (if you are looking at regulations loop holes) or ease of management (if like me you go for where you have the minimum of paper work and do not care about tax level).

EU is working very well for businesses, have you created a company in EU? I recommend you start to look at where you can influence to solve your real problems this will avoid you losing your time on big lobbying plans for little results.

This can't be said for all of the EU.

In the UK if you direct a foreign company but are UK based then HMRC will consider it a UK company for tax purposes.

I looked at incorporating in Ireland because A. We wanted good Euro banking which the UK doesn't have and B. The corporate tax rate is a mere 12.5%.

Regarding taxes the rule would probably be the same everywhere in Europe. However nothing would (legally) stop you to base your company in Ireland or Estonia etc...

The EU flexibility rather concerns other aspects. For example in Germany if you wanted to have a limited liability company (GmbH), you needed to have 20,000€ capital. The british limited had a lower requirement so lots of small german businesses incorporated as a Ltd. Now there is a new limited liability company in Germany called the "UG" without the minimum capital, which otherwise would never have happend or at least not as fast.

As said before, in my case, I do not try to escape the taxes, I try to get the simplest setup to focus on my work and not on paper work. If your really want to limit your tax footprint, ask a good accountant, in UK with the City, you are packed with accountants specialized in tax optimization. But again, I am a small startup, so no ideas about all these options.

As a matter of fact, I'm considering setting up my limited liability company in the UK because in Italy that is very expensive for a bootstrapped startup - at least 4.000 euro just for setting it up, without actually doing any business, and most of it isn't even taxes but professional fees you are forced to pay.

But my case apart, I don't think that the current system is good eg for 20 something students who could create a startup while studying, if anything else because it's too complicated to find and exploit those loopholes. What I'd like is not having to look for loopholes, which are much easier to use for bigger companies (look at what Google pays in taxes).

Where in Germany are you based? Berlin perhaps? To me Berlin looks like a great location to run an online business from.

I was in the former East Germany for a while, now in NRW. Anywhere outside Munich (way too expensive) is a good place to be to run a business in Germany.

> You can setup a company in any EU country and run it from any other country.

I keep seeing conflicting reports about whether this is actually possible in Italy in reality.

    living in Germany, with a company in UK

Let me guess, you're not paying any taxes? :)

I pay full taxes. I am employed by my UK company, this means that I pay all the German taxes on my salary (health &employment insurances, pension, etc.) and of course pay the corporate taxes in UK. I did it for two reasons:

- simpler to manage a UK limited from anywhere (we tend as a family to move quite a lot, so the limited is a fixed point for my customers.

- the German limited is not "limited" if you run it alone. If something goes wrong, as you run it alone, you lose defacto the limited liability.

So, all in all, better to go this way even if sometimes it costs more (2 accountants one in UK and one in Germany). As said, for me the goal was and is not to pay less taxes. I am happily paying taxes. If I pay a lot it means I make a lot :)

I'm not a lawyer nor any kind of expert, but I don't think what you are doing is completely legal, and might get you into trouble with the German tax people if their eye falls on you.

I have looked into this myself some time ago, and the problem appears to be that some countries in Europe (including the UK) apply 'Incorporation Theory', while others (including Germany) apply 'Real Seat Theory'.

'Incorporation Theory' states that a company is governed by the law of the country where the company was incorporated. So far so good.

'Real Seat Theory', however, states that a company is governed by the law of the country where the actual decisions are made (location of company directors). In your case, this would be Germany. This means you may in fact be MORE personally liable now, since under German law your company is de facto German, but unlawfully so, and you have that way lost whatever protection you would have had under German law.

Again, caveats apply, I have a business but I am not an expert, though I feel you should consult one.

That's what I understood too (in Italy it is like in Germany). So I would need to have a front man in the UK to be absolutely sure, but I don't like that.

This is exactly the kind of worries that I would the EU to abolish. Not easy of course, and not something I would expect in a few months, but it there isn't anybody pushing in the right direction, we could wait forever...

Since 2002 this real seat theory has been ruled out by EU, yes EU do a lot of good things :)

http://www.germanlawjournal.com/print.php?id=214

Yes you are correct for company law, but not tax law, see the §§ 1, 2 of the german corporate income tax law. ("KStG" http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kstg_1977/BJNR025990976.ht...). Unfortunately there is no official english version, but the tax code is formulated in such a convoluted way that GoogleTranslate can't make it much worse ;)

German taxes, more than 1000 pages of new rules written each month, nobody can follow, not even the state employees taking care of checking the submissions. For the tax part, I have a very good German accountant with a very good knowledge of all the cross border rules. Everything is done through chartered accountants both in UK and Germany to avoid issues.

Wow, that is excellent news! Hopefully that is the end of it.

Yes. The EU represents the worlds largest economy, dwarfing the US by about USD$7 trillion. Yet the potential is locked up in bureaucracy and petty nationalism.

Another bitter truth that people in the EU need to acknowledge is that English needs to be spoken by the majority. Not as a first language, but to the level of countries like the Netherlands or Norway.

That's easy for me to say, I'm British, but this isn't national pride in my language. Only 4% of English speakers are English. English is a necessity in the world we live in, and Europe's diverse mix of languages is holding it back in a lot of ways.

I think that among young Europeans English is already very very common.

I live in Poland, and every programmer I've met speaks English at least good enough to read documentation.

I'm really impressed with the good level of English spoken by younger people in Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary. I believe this will give them an edge in technology over people from countries like Austria, Italy and Spain.

What baffled me when I visited Spain was that everything was translated - for instance I went to a cinema and all the movies had voice doubling in Spanish, whereas in my country the norm is showing subtitles, but leaving the audio unaltered. And this happens at all levels; for instance cartoon characters that are called like Pedro Picapiedra instead of Fred Flinstone, or El Pato Lucas (or something) for Daffy Duck. Also the doubled voices are terribly bad. In all seriousness, movie makers should sue for copyright infringement.

My road took me through Barcelona and I couldn't get by with English. Maybe it was just my luck, however I met more people that understood some Romanian or Italian, rather than English.

In Italy, I happened to travel to Livorno, staying there for a whole month. Again, all movies are voice doubled. But at least in Italy educated or younger people seem to understand English a little and a couple of them spoke it fluently. However while I stayed there I found it easier to learn some Italian instead, instead of bothering with English.

(I'm from Romania)

I lived in Italy for a number of years. The company I worked for was international so English was a requirement, but the level of english spoken by many was rudimentary, which made it difficult to communicate and while the words may have been understood, all too often, the meaning and nuance was lost. Confusion ensued, productivity suffered.

On that note I'm all for introducing English as additional official state language in all EU countries. There's a lot being done to educate people in English across Europe, but this will be a slow process, taking decades, no matter what you do. Right now politicians seem to be pre-occupied with keeping the EU together though, so we'll have to wait first for the dust to settle a bit.

I wish you could go to any govt office in any of EU countries and do your business in English.

oddly enough, in the UK most forms and leaflets relating to council and government services are available in a range of languages from Polish to Chinese. As a brit, I take a small amount of pride in that.

I've spent some years in Scotland and I was amazed with how robust and effective most govt services were (at least ones I've used). Poland and Austria (were I lived, too) are nowhere near that.

Lobby for the abolishing of software patents and copyright policies that allow internet services to operate without fear of getting taken down by rights holders. Those are bigger hurdles in starting web businesses than tax or payment gateways.

On a more general note, if you want to lobby for something on the EU level, lobby for more democracy and transparency, the current system is only catering to large lobby organizations and not held accountable for its actions.

More democracy and transparency are certainly good, but interest groups are everywhere and aren't going away anyway. So, why not organizing an interest group for (web) startups?

You could lobby the EU for a productivity report. I'm an Aussie, not an EU citizen, but we have a group called the "Productivity Commission". They basically write reports on how the government can improve business conditions, by reducing red tape, reforming tax, and lowering barriers to entry.

The important thing is to get the write part of the EU to act. If the wrong agency (or whatever the name is for EU appendages) gets involved, you'll have a bunch of soul-sapping incubators run by eurocrats, which will only sponsor 40-year-old guys with detailed business plans, and good PowerPoint decks. The right agency will give ammunition to the legislators who want to reduce paperwork, not jobs to people who want to write business plans.

You can't lobby the EU with a specific plan, though. You tell them there's a problem, and they tell you the solution. They are politicians, or answerable to politicians, so they want to be seen to be do the right thing, not doing the right thing. You can try to frame it in a way that the right agency gets the ball, though.

You can tell them what the problem is, but you can also tell what a good solution would look like, so that if they implement a bad solution you can tell so. Otherwise, they can say "ok we solved it" and it would be difficult to say it isn't true.

OK, but you aren't dealing with a monolithic entity, and they don't care about you, but about all the people who care about the problem. Whoever you lobby (say, the politicians) need a solution. "Cut red tape, federate payment gateways" is not a solution they can implement. They can either legislate, or handball the problem to "the relevant authority". Assuming legislation is infeasible (which seems to be the case) you have to make sure it goes to the right authority.

Productivity commisions will come up with a clear plan, which will feed back into further decisions. It's not an elegant solution, but you are talking about steering a ship with a lot of inertia.

Regarding payment gateways: The EU is already on it, see the SEPA project: http://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/sepa/html/index.en.html

However like anything in the EU it moves very slow, I believe the target is to phase the first national systems out in 2013/2014, but delays are not unlikely...

Very interesting, thank you! But still, lobbying could make it faster, or make it more difficult for possible lobbies that could be against it to stop it/slow it down...

Thanks for the link, it's good to hear progress is being made, even if slowly.

Yes: I am from EU and know that lobbyism works.

I participated in a lobbyism against EU wide software patents some years before. Serious lobbying works in the sense that you contact EU people and tell them your complaints with solid facts in a respectful way. Then they get serious and pay attention to you.

Without the massive lobbying of many small and medium sized companies and freelancers against Software patents the EU would have invented them already years before.

That's a very good example we should look at.

One thing that ought to happen is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Private_Company

If done correctly, it could be an excellent way of forming companies for startups, and might be able to get around some of the crap that you have to go through to form a company in places like Italy (thousands of Euros and tons of paperwork).

That would definitely be a great help - as long as they don't set high fees and capital requirements in order to lower the competition to "national" alternatives.

So, having this kind of EPC with very low initial fees and capital requirements would certainly be something worth lobbying for. How do we start? ;)

> unfriendly tax and small business legislation

In France though the tax situation and small business legislation is far from ideal, it has gotten much much better over the last few years, with things like the JEI (Jeune Entreprise Innovante), or the auto-entrepreneur status. Not perfect though, and something coming from Bruxelles could certainly do much better.

> terrible payment gateways

There you are. I have no idea how to fix this other than creating my own company and start doing it right. Except that I'm doing something else, so I don't have time (or ressources) to scratch this itch.

But it's itching enough that I'm seriously contemplating spawning a LLC in the United States.

But it's itching enough that I'm seriously contemplating spawning a LLC in the United States.

I'm in a very similar position...

By the way, trying to act at the European level doesn't mean that on a national level things can't be improved faster, or that we shouldn't lobby at that level; for example in Italy I'm suporting this: http://srlfacile.org/

I'm not at all convinced the EU would be the best target for this kind of lobbying. Startup company supports vary widely by member country, and even by region within those countries. Certainly in my case (Ireland) lobbying agencies like Enterprise Ireland or the local county enterprise board gives much more return in much smaller periods of time. These agencies effectively navigate the EU thicket of regulations for you. But I can see how that would vary widely, depending where you're from.

The payment gateway issue is a real one but separate to startup supports. Big business would love to see this resolved too, surely?

> Big business would love to se this resolved too, surely?

Big business already have everything in place to handle each country, so while smoothing out payment across the EU may reduce their own costs, it would also make the market that more interesting to enter: instead of having to deal with 27 countries individually, of 5 to 80 million potential clients, you'd have a prospective market of 500 million in a single swoop. Startups and the like would be much more likely to invest in EU-wide support early rather than start from US-only and then maybe enter a pair of EU market (UK, Germany, France) once they've grown enough to think of broadening their aim.

This would increase competition risks in EU markets, which big businesses do not want.

True. I'd forgotten how incumbent 'big' business sets barriers to competition in the manner you describe. Though this kind of barrier still leaves them susceptible to competition from other, non-incumbent, big players (if any remain?).

(Repost from original thread.)

Tax legislation is the domain of national parliaments, not the EU (except for aspects of VAT, anything else?). Tax harmonisation requires a treaty change and agreement from all 27 member states.

On unfriendly legislation --- is this national legislation or EU-wide legislation?

On terrible payment gateways --- why do you think that is? Imperfect implementation of the common market (e.g. unharmonised regulations)? Insufficient competition generally? Something else?

Terrible payment gateways: AFAIK, based on many comments by the newest providers in the US, the biggest problem is exactly that of different regulations for different EU countries. Creating better options requires different solutions for each country, so it is very expensive. With a harmonized system, you would be able to create a solution for 500 million potential users - it would be worth the effort.

Unfriendly legislation: The EU parliament can force national legislations to become friendlier, and especially to make it easier for a startup to operate in the whole EU.

Tax legislation: I'm not thinking about revenues taxation, but registration fees and mechanism and controls and the likes. There could be interventions from the EU Parliament to harmonize them, I think, and if that's impossible now - we could at least start to lobby to make it possible.

Personally I have very little faith in the political process for citizens. Lobbying only works if you can throw the kind of money the MPAA etc. have at it. At least, this is the impression I get from the US - I've not paid as much attention to EU-level politics.

I did try engaging my local MP when I lived in the UK, which was a complete failure - he didn't ever reply to any of my letters.

Personally I'm more inclined to start my next company in the US instead.

this kind of thinking is exactly why the US startup scene thrives and the EU startup scene is so fragile.

There are so many untapped opportunities in Europe and so much less competition in EU markets and I think that makes up largely for the european drawbacks.

To be heard, you need to organize. Did you try to contact your MP individually, or with the backing of a group? That makes a lot of difference...

It depends on the level of lobbying. To achieve both you need massive members AND decent money resources (i.e. a full time in-person representation in Brussels).

Petitions and other "virtual" protests forms are certainly nice, but it is nothing in comparison to having an ex-parliament member going from door to door explaining the issue to his former colleagues.

One way I could see this working is creating an organization that is largely focused on member size while cooperating issue-based with existing money strong lobbying efforts for example of Google. Joining forces could bring benefits to both parties by pairing money with democratic representation.

Also I like the idea of focusing just on the EU and not regional issues. The EFF partner organization in Europe ( http://www.edri.org/ ) is in my opinion largely ineffective because of their way to fractioned member organization system.

I agree that we should start thinking European on many issues. It isn't easy, but we should start somewhere, and this looks to me like a very good place to start.

Yes. In particular, we need to prevent the european 'unitary patent' project from allowing software patents in the EU. Recently, this project achieved the nect step, the EU parliament voted to open negotiations with the national governments. So both the EU and national governments need to be lobbied about this.

I am German and voted for lobbying, but it always seemed to me that our problems were domestic. The 'Abmahnwesen' was terrible when we were a tiny web service shop. Basically, if you violate any of a changing set of rules, e.g. you don't properly label the 'Imprint' link of your website, competitors or vampiric lawyers can directly bill you a few k€. Even when we felt safe about it, smaller clients were scared of the internet as a whole.

The 'Störerhaftung' is terrible too. If somebody downloads crap on a coffeeshop's WiFi, the coffeeshop owner is liable (with some exceptions). Consequently, free WiFi is a very rare sight. But this is more of a lifestyle problem, I am not sure if it really inhibits hacker socializing in the wild.

But the point is that some domestic problems (not all, of course) can be solved at a European level, with the right legislation that national parliament are then forced to adapt to...

I think it is less relevant what is good for entrepreneurs compared to what is good for business angels. In my country, start-ups feel like a bit of a cargo cult, because the concept of traction is so vague, when you can't say that you have backing from angels or Andreesen/YC/Sequoia, etc. I don't get an impression that there's an endgame like flip/IPO here. An "Ask the Angels/VCs" to get an impression of what might make certain countries and their entrepreneurs more appealing would probably be more elucidating.

The EU as a union has not really imposed any counter-entrepreneurial measures that I can recall, which is more than I can say about the local politicians who tax everything, everyone, and their dog.

I am from EU, I have been involved with the pirate party, I think this is a good way to petition the EU : get MPs elected. Currently 3 are in the EU parliament.

Are better conditions for entrepreneurs and small companies part of the profile of the Pirate Party? (Honest Question)

Sorry for the late answer.

Depends. In my case (freelance IT entrepreneur) I know that software patents and silly copyright laws are really dangerous for my business. The day IBM decides to send patent lawyers because I happened to solve a problem with the same obvious solution they have patented in 1999, I am done for. So yes, I would say they promote better conditions.

Another thing they like pushing is the possibility to go through administrative tasks online, in a secure way. I must say that it would be a relief if I could do everything through email (though France has made a lot of efforts these last years).

Other than that, I don't know the specifics of their economics program. It is adapted locally from what I understand, only the copyright/patent/net neutrality/privacy platform is international. If you have a specific issue you want to defend locally, go make your voice heard in your national pirate party !

Regarding payment gateways: SEPA is fast, cheap and rolled out in a large portion of Europe. I don't see much room for improvement there, quite frankly.

I don't know where (if) we can go from here, but for those interested I just created a google group to discuss this further:

http://groups.google.com/group/eu-startup-interest-group

eu-startup-interest-group@googlegroups.com

HN isn't best for longer discussions...

you may also want to give a look at the EBN network (european business network) which via BICs (business innovation centre) pursue the following:

> All funds available to the Association will be devoted to the pursuit of the Association’s aims and objects. Its main object is to promote the growth of Business and Innovation Centres both within and outside the European Union (EU), the aim of which is to set up new small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and/or new activities within existing SMEs based on new ideas with growth potential. It will mobilize any system, service or activity, which may directly or indirectly assist its members in achieving their objectives with optimum professionalism and efficiency.

http://www.ebn.be/DisplayPage.aspx?pid=5

They should be interested in this kind of action too. Thanks for the link!

Yes: I'm from the EU and I think that lobbying the EU Parliament and Commission is a good idea.

No, i'm in EU, and it's not the same here as in Netherlands and i dont want any legislation. There are payment gateways for me to choose from, no problems on any of those fields.

I think the problem is that most of these laws / incentives are country based. You should lobby in your home country or vote for a stronger EU.

I already do both, but I also think that also lobby at an European level can only help.

The bigger problem for European web services is a diversity of cultures and languages. This is not something the lobbying can solve.

Agreed. But having "more european" startups would already help, even at that level.

Sorry, but as a "petty" nationslist, I would rather see the EU disappear than more legislation.

Out of interest, which part of the EU are you from? And if you are from the UK, which part?

I ask because as a Scot, and therefore in a country that is already part of a fairly succesful Union, I'm fairly certain that having an even wider and deeper European Union would bring many of the same advantages that being part of the Union brought to Scotland.

Obviously there are many of my compatriots who don't see things this way but to me if you are in favour of the UK (which I am) it seems like a logical step to be in favour of the EU.

I'm English, and a southerner at that... Let's just say I'm quite a fan of Alex Samond.

Don't get me wrong... There are many advantages to the Union, but I believe that a lot of them could exist without it. Free trade, for instance, doesn't require a union, whilst it removes our obligation to fund other regions (of whichever Union...)

"whilst it removes our obligation to fund other regions (of whichever Union...)"

Of course, it is worth pointing out that if Scotland had been independent we'd probably be as rich as the Norwegians by now...

Reasoning?

As Mr Salmond used to argue, "It's Scotland's Oil".

Of course, we pumped it out as fast as possible to help keep the UK economy afloat during the 80s.

And what would stop the losers (or self-perceived losers) in free trade to opt out of it? History is full of examples of that.

Yes: lets become self-confident!

Lobbying won't make a difference at all. The situation is FUBAR by design. Big companies hate competition and the EU rules (they pay for) make sure competition is limited.

Wish to change this? DISRUPT with a great startup and don't sell it to (old school) companies if you're successful.

I voted no, I don't want more legislation.

More and more, the EU is taking away liberties of people and countries in name of a 'common good' and a 'better europe'. A good example is the now credit crisis which was mostly a problem with EU interfering with countries. For example production "Ok, you stop producing X and we will pay you Y for you to buy X from us" which short sighted politicians were all too happy to accept since it meant money coming to countries and reelection was easier.

It is hard to get payment gateways ala feefighters and others, sure, but you can go to a normal bank, get a merchant account and accept those payments yourself.

About taxes, it isn't that complicated to be honest. VAT is charged at the rate your business as a presence in (usually your home country) when selling to someone in EU. Corporate taxes is dependent on country but UK isn't that bad. Most countries that have bad corporate tax structures are usually riddled with corruption.

Most countries now are also trying to offer a better environment for new companies. UK is lowering taxes for small business if I'm not mistaken. Portugal decreased the minimal capital from 5000 euros to 1 euro. Some countries are decreasing taxes to companies that export alot(by giving them tax incentives) Most EU small business have access to programs that offer them line of credit and sometimes free money for projects (in portugal it is called QREN no idea what is called elsewhere) that comes from EU.

And maybe it is just me, but whenever I see lobbying mentioned, I shriek! Trying to do this on the EU scale would probably involved a lot of money under the tables.

You could lobby for _less_ legislation. I think what the OP had in mind was creating a better business environment, which usually means less legislation and less regulation.

Yes, when I think about harmonization, that would often mean less national regulations. The EU already often intervenes against national regulations that are anticompetitive, so this wouldn't be a first time.

"the EU is taking away liberties of people and countries in name of a 'common good' and a 'better europe'"

I'm struggling to think of what individual liberties I've lost to the EU.

On the other hand the fact that people from anywhere in the EU can come here to live and work here in the UK is great and the fact I can work, live and travel where I want within the EU looks like a huge increase in liberty to me.

I'm from Italy, and, even if there are some things I don't like coming from the EU (for example, some regulations about food), I find that a LOT has improved in Europe thanks to it. I would just like things to improve even more ;)

Even with food, things like the Protected Geographical Status seem like a damn good idea - we have fantastic local foods in the EU and this can do a lot to protect manufacturers from blatantly unfair competition and give good guarantees to consumers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Geographical_Status

So forty six thousand words designating what is acceptable as a 'quality wine' is a good thing? To be a quality wine requires that the wine be produced in a designated area?

Sorry, but to me that is nothing more than good old protectionism to prevent worthy competitors from entering a market. I would not doubt that it is so corrupt that you can buy your way into a designated area provided you have the connections.

While some protection of known names is valid, determine who makes a good product simply based on their geographical domain is not. What we have is government bureaucrats picking winners and losers.

Fantastic local foods protect themselves by upholding their quality and their name. I fully agree that names need protecting, however determine quality by the region its produced in; the wine example; is wrong.

I agree that the wine example is stupid, but here is (fairly) local example to me:

http://www.arbroathsmokies.net/pgi.php

Quality wine doesn't need to come from a specific area. But if you write "Chianti Wine", it has to come from Chianti (which is a specific area in Italy).

There is protectionism, and there is consumer protection: I'm glad to buy food from everywhere, but I want to know what it is.

> I'm struggling to think of what individual liberties I've lost to the EU

Likewise. So far for France it's mostly been a very positive driving force, especially in fixing the completely fucked up legal system and strengthening defense rights (the french political class and police force are still fighting those, but they've been on the losing side every time so far). If anything, most of the EU decisions have seemed to improve the situation of individual liberties and reign in country insanity.

> On the other hand the fact that people from anywhere in the EU can come here to live and work here in the UK is great and the fact I can work, live and travel where I want within the EU looks like a huge increase in liberty to me.

Yep, great one as well (although technically the UK is not covered by the EU, it's a separate set of agreements)

You may be mixing up the Schengen Agreement, which the UK is not part of, and the EU which the UK is most certainly part of!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement

As far as I know it's the EU that gives me the right to work and live anywhere in the EU. Schengen gives citizens of member countries the ability to travel between countries without passport controls.

Ok, first I'm not totally against EU and I know they did some good things, but heres some things from the top of my mind that relate to my personal liberties:

- Barroso being elected in a secret vote by EU parliament (I'm sorry, but that isn't very democratic)

- Circumventing Ireland's vote on the the Lisbon treaty, but saying in the EU parliament that even without Ireland's vote, they will modify whatever in the rules is needed for the Lisbon treaty to come into effect (Think it was Barroso and some Belgium guy that said that)

- Trying to ban sale (not sure what was the resolution on that one but was supposed to come into effect early this year) on all over the counter supplements.

- Forcing US vendors to setup a local presence to pay VAT on online shopping (even of digital goods).

- While this was was sorta deserved, since we did take their 'bailout' but Germany/France and now the EU saying countries should lose their part of their sovereign powers if they request help.

- Preventing, by direct influencing politicians, referendums in countries where a vote against some resolution is against EU ideas (leaving the Euro, leaving EU, signing the Lisbon treaty which by the polls some other countries pepole would also be against it) removing from the people the right to choose democratically.

The problems I see with EU was when they tried to shift it from a set of 'gentlemen' agreements about trade and free pass to trying to make it a full state (ala USA) without allowing the people to vote on whether they want to or not.

Edit: While I can't find an unedited video, here is a good example why more and more I'm starting to hate the EU. Please do watch it and than explain to me that there are no liberties being lost: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6QmH-7fu68

Of course, I should be careful about coming across as completely uncritical of the EU. Some things it does are pretty awful.

However, on balance, I'm pretty keen on wider and deeper European integration.

Unfortunately, this is not true for UK as UK is not part of Shengen. I think most(but not all) EU citizen can settle in UK and UK citizen settle in EU countries, but this is due to bilateral treaty not European one. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Area)

Schengen concerns passport/border controls, it has nothing to do with rights concerning living and working in EEA countries.

" A good example is the now credit crisis which was mostly a problem with EU interfering with countries. "

This is completely untrue, if the EU had more power the crisis would be much easier to solve. For example with one interest rate for the whole Euro zone instead of a different one for each country.

Please note I mentioned an example that wasn't the response in 2009-2010 to the crisis, but what happened before causing part of the crisis. Easy influx of money, both in interest rates by joining the Euro (more borrowing but not fault or EU per se) and influx of money from EU to close specific industries and/or production of goods (Agriculture for example) was a problem. Also, at least in Portugal, during this crisis there were incentives to buy new cars that were influenced by EU. This benefited some countries but countries that do not have an auto industry were screwed. Also for example, there were added taxes from pakistan on textile products. When the floods hit, EU wanted to lift those taxes as a whole, hurting a lot of countries that have a good amount of people employed in those industries.

These are the examples I mention with interfering. A central parliament where the members are payed an enormous amount of money to be there (yes, I also have a problem with the money and benefits they get there), deciding for the whole EU where individual countries get shafted because some countries (UK, Germany, France and Italy together get more than 50% of votes) can get a majority easily and can look after their own interests.

I see the benefits of Europe but I do not like how the EU is moving towards a single mega state. This isn't what I want the EU to be or do.

If anyone should be lobbied it should be your countries government, not the EU.

> This isn't what I want the EU to be or do.

I have to ask: why not?

I'm British, I prefer this identity to being European. You can see with the single currency that one size doesn't fit all. Flying under one giant flag reduces individual states ability to stimulate their economy and promote a certain sector to grow.

The EU isn't bad and I certainly wouldn't want Britain to stop being a member however - economic woes aside - I am generally happy with how things are currently. Europe doesn't need to become the United States of Europe to prosper.

That's because the EU is a heterogeneous environment and so there is a big difference between British/German standards, quality of life and mentality and the Greeks. However, it doesn't have to be that way.

Apparently 50 states in the U.S. that are spread across an area that's almost as big as all of Europe and with a population that's racially and ethnically very diverse, can get along.

I assume you are citizen of USA.

Would you like USA to join countries like Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Kuba, Wenezuela, Peru, and others to form one huge country with common political system (mix of current political systems of these countries), new official language (let's say it won't be English), common currency, etc? For this analogy to hold don't assume USA will dominate this union (even thought it would in reality), because for most countries in EU - they won't dominate.

Think about this - more people in this new country would live outside of USA than inside, so when some hard decision comes, there's big chance former USA will lose the voting. There's big chance that people from USA will be minority in government of that new country.

That's how many people in EU think about EU becoming one state.

> I assume you are citizen of USA.

> Would you like USA to join countries like Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Kuba, Wenezuela, Peru, and others to form one huge country with common political system

I'm a citizen of the EU, and that's the kind of stuff I'd welcome. There are risks to it (leveling the resulting country to the bottom instead of the top), but it would make "globalization" far more accessible (and beneficial) to the common man.

> That's how many people in EU think about EU becoming one state.

That's mostly how people in the UK, historically "eurosceptics" and fearing a loss of power by the more populated and powerful (in their own right, but even more so when paired) franco-german pair, think. Interestingly, had the UK invested more heavily into the EU instead of going with the US they might have been able to create more balance by making the current DE-FR pair into a DE-FR-UK triplet.

> new official language

The US don't currently have an official language, only states do. And it's about half-half there (27 states have established English as an official language, including Hawaii and New Mexico which have a second official language besides english — respectively Hawaiian and Spanish)

I'm not a citizen of the USA - I live in the EU.

The difference between the USA and Brazil, Kuba, Wenezuela and Peru are much bigger and irreconcilable than the difference between Europe's members.

However I could see the US joining Mexico and Canada. Canada has pretty high standards of living and I don't know if you noticed, but Hispanics are the nation's largest minority, as lots of Mexicans have migrated. If they can eradicate corruption in Mexico somehow, they could do it.

> whenever I see lobbying mentioned, I shriek!

danmaz74's idea came because he's part of the http://SrlFacile.org initiative, which is lobbying for less laws and complications for the creation of limited liability companies in Italy!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com