[pavelludiq]

Because the EU should absolutely not become a superstate like the US, it should remain firmly an economic and political union and the less force it is capable of exerting, the better. That means no army and no police force? How Democratic can such structures be really? Also don't tell me western and northern states won't be privileged in such a scheme. It's us in the south and the east that are corrupt and can't handle our organized crime groups obviously.

[pas]

That's a nice pipe dream. But without force, it'll become irrelevant.

It can be as Democratic as people make it.

Western states are already privileged, they have the population advantage.

Anyway, it's not like corruption (and market efficiency) analyses are just made up.

Case in point, Hungary. Billions of euros went there and at least 30-40% got funneled to "friends and family". The good old Putin model. Dear Leader has nothing, his yearly wealth report is whiter than snow, his friends on the other hand .. well, they are the best businessmen on Earth: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-25/what-s-bo...

The other "interesting" thing is that OLAF (the EU's anti-corruption office) found a lot of irregularities in Hungary, recommended investigations. And nothing happened. (The Prosecutor General of Hungary ... happens to be a good friend of those involved.) See also: https://budapestbeacon.com/olaf-says-hungary-misappropriated...

[pavelludiq]

> That's a nice pipe dream. But without force, it'll become irrelevant.

Transnational authority is extremely terrifying and western Europe has an extremely horrible and tragic track record when allowed to decide the fate of other people.

> It can be as Democratic as people make it.

That's a nice pipe dream.

> Western states are already privileged, they have the population advantage.

I meant that force would be used disproportionately against poorer states

> Case in point, Hungary. Billions of euros went there and at least 30-40% got funneled to "friends and family".

I have opinions about the wisdom of subsidies in general.

[lmm]

> It can be as Democratic as people make it.

Yes and no; the current EU is put together with accountability structures that make sense for a trade body (which is after all what it evolved from) - as a Brit it reminds me of our (deliberately apolitical) civil service. In principle it could be possible to reform the EU into something with the kind of accountability structure appropriate to a political body, sure, but it's an enormous institution with a lot of cultural inertia.

[pas]

It already has better foundations and processes than a lot of member states' internal ones.

Sure, the failure case of a strong EU is much worse than the current situation (EU-dystopia), but the current situation is very much like a limbo, it's kind of like an opportunity, and it won't exists forever. (Poorer states will be left behind, because even though they are subsidized by the EU, without structural changes, the whole system will break into pieces.)

[notyourday]

It is so nice when the rich civilized European states decide what poor states should do. After all the rich European states know more than the poor states what's good for them. After all, Africa is grateful for the European colonialism. Just ask any Sudanese or Liberian.

[charlesdm]

To be fair, a lot of EU money does magically disappear in Eastern Europe due to corruption. But I don't disagree with your statement.

[vetinari]

That's by design.

These money that did disappear purchase loyalty of locals at the power. It will stop only when these people will be no longer needed to push for EU interests.

[tertius]

> To be fair, a lot of EU money does magically disappear in Eastern Europe due to corruption.

And so the EU police will also be fair.