[the_mitsuhiko]

> Probably not what the self patting EU clowns were expecting.

I don't know who you have in mind with "self petting EU clowns" but in general people are very aware of what's going on. A lot of companies have been giving this feedback for a long time.

[hintymad]

> in general people are very aware of what's going on.

But what can people do? It seems to me that the EU government can do whatever they like. Or is it like what people say about the US politics: the politicians do what voters want, and it's just that a minority of people don't like EU's policies?

[the_mitsuhiko]

> But what can people do? It seems to me that the EU government can do whatever they like

You might think the problem is the EU but in all reality all this shit comes from the national governments. And how to improve these I don't know because people vote for this nonsense.

[frankjr]

> I don't know who you have in mind with "self petting EU clowns"

The politicians.

> A lot of companies have been giving this feedback for a long time.

Yeah, still got ignored as the report suggests.

[RandomLensman]

And who elects those politicians? Does the median voter in the EU want high growth or rather something more like museum?

[Aerroon]

I think there's a very large amount of Europeans that either want something like a museum or they simply don't understand what the opportunity costs are for what they want. They think the economy is gonna work itself out and be good no matter what.

For example: environmental talk when your largest source of natural resources gets cut off is just going to compound together. It will result in high energy prices, which will make your industry less competitive and prices higher. Quality of life will fall as a result of this. But people will just blame it on something else (whatever happens to be the popular scapegoat the time). And this same kind of pattern repeats itself in many areas of life, where Europeans just ignore what the opportunity costs are.

[frankjr]

> And who elects those politicians?

For the most part other politicians. A vote of a constituent every few years means very little, you don't even know for sure who gets to be a MEP, you give a "preference". For the remaining time EU politicians do whatever they want and you are just expected to take it. And if your country doesn't want to, they give you a penalty.

[RandomLensman]

And that differs how from some national systems? How can the Commission do whatever it takes when the Council is the senior part of the executive when it comes to outlining policies and countries enjoy veto rights on a variety of things there (and can even leave the EU)?

[Aerroon]

The way the EU differs from national systems in that the EU is compartmentalized. The different languages and cultures mean that ideas, information, and politics doesn't flow freely. If you care about a specific policy then not only do you have to convince all the voters in your country, but you'll have to convince people in a dozen other countries that speak entirely different languages too.

Compartmentalization like this also allows some influence to spread more than it would in a unified information space. It's possible for a larger country to convince a smaller one to side with them on an EU level issue, while "paying" for it on a national level.

I think that because of these barriers it makes sense that a lot of European voters feel entirely disconnected from EU level politics. It's preteen met with an attitude of "Brussels decided that we must jump, so we jump." It's reminiscent of the Soviet times with "Moscow decided". (Not in the decisions itself, but people's attitudes.)

[RandomLensman]

The EU is also not a nation but only a supranational organization, so it shares that with other such organizations. But that aside, is that actually true for policymaking that it needs a lot of countries or for a lot things other countries don't care, i.e., small, focused minorities can enact things (not unlike most democracies)?