General / Off-Topic With friends like Brussels, who needs enemies? EU to fine Greece for saving ship builders

[Cosmo]

With friends like Brussels, who needs enemies? EU to fine Greece for saving ship builders

BRUSSELS bureaucrats are set to fine impoverished Greece a million euros every month in revenge for its Government stepping in to save ship builders’ jobs.

Out of touch eurocrats are seeking a court order for a massive financial crackdown on the struggling country, which has been driven into third world poverty by EU policies.

They want to impose a six million euro upfront penalty on Greece’s cash-strapped government, to be followed by a daily levy of 34,974 euros.
-------------

When individuals demanded that the UK Government should immediately step in over the pending Port Talbot Steel Works closures due to the amounts of Chinese Steel being dumped on the world markets, it was pointed out that EU rules prevent State intervention. Greece did this for its Shipping Industry years ago when it was in trouble.

The EU has now decided Greece's punishment for that intervention. Consider the punishment the EU would impose on a "richer nation" who breached its rules.

 

[Andy Kappa]

Ummm... you do know the referendum vote happened a little over a month ago, don't you?

Just curious to know why you feel the need to post pointless propaganda like this...

 

[FuzzySpider]

The Daily Express, owned by Richard Desmond, also owner of "Asian Babes".

Robert Jay, QC: "What interests, if any, do you have in ethical standards within your papers? Or is that purely a matter for the editors?"

Richard Desmond: "Well erm... Ethical? I don't quite know what the word means but... er... perhaps you could explain what the word means, ethical?"

[video=youtube;Htyb6W6H6IY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htyb6W6H6IY[/video]

 

[verminstar]

Ummm... you do know the referendum vote happened a little over a month ago, don't you?

Just curious to know why you feel the need to post pointless propaganda like this...

It's a good thing to get information out there and known...it's easy to miss some things which could be relevant because there is literally so much going on right now, especially with so many media sources who are allegedly biased in their reporting.

I doubt they even want the blocs help but they in the unenviable position of not really having any alternative...they need their EU fix so will take whatever punishment brussels/berlin hands out with minimal fuss.

The most tragic thing about it being that Greece was the birthplace of democracy...now they nothing more than the whipping boy "yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir"

 

[Talarin]

The headline is quite striking, but even reading the article itself lends a little balance. The Greek government did a naughty, then ignored the rules about state aid despite them being make clear in 2012. It would have been in the Greek government's interest to recoup the cash, so I think the EU is right to take a harder line on this (although you do have to wonder how they're going to pay...)

More balanced article: http://greece.greekreporter.com/201...court-for-unlawful-aid-to-hellenic-shipyards/

 

[Minonian]

And they are fined us, because we saved our Air travel company.

 

[Becks]

With friends like Brussels, who needs enemies? EU to fine Greece for saving ship builders

BRUSSELS bureaucrats are set to fine impoverished Greece a million euros every month in revenge for its Government stepping in to save ship builders’ jobs.

Out of touch eurocrats are seeking a court order for a massive financial crackdown on the struggling country, which has been driven into third world poverty by EU policies.

They want to impose a six million euro upfront penalty on Greece’s cash-strapped government, to be followed by a daily levy of 34,974 euros.
-------------

When individuals demanded that the UK Government should immediately step in over the pending Port Talbot Steel Works closures due to the amounts of Chinese Steel being dumped on the world markets, it was pointed out that EU rules prevent State intervention. Greece did this for its Shipping Industry years ago when it was in trouble.

The EU has now decided Greece's punishment for that intervention. Consider the punishment the EU would impose on a "richer nation" who breached its rules.

First: The greek debt crisis is the sole fault of the greek government. Neither the EU nor Germany or France forced them to fake their finances.

Second: The austerity measures are extremely hard for Greece but Greece without the EU simply wouldn't exist anymore.

Third: The relevant subventions for the hellenic shipyard were paid fifteen years ago. They were unlawful under EU competition law and thus the EU demanded the greek government to reclaim those subventions from hellenic shipyards, something they never did. All of this predates the crisis and again it's the sole fault of the greek government that they're not complying.

 

[FuzzySpider]

First: The greek debt crisis is the sole fault of the greek government. Neither the EU nor Germany or France forced them to fake their finances.

Second: The austerity measures are extremely hard for Greece but Greece without the EU simply wouldn't exist anymore.

Third: The relevant subventions for the hellenic shipyard were paid fifteen years ago. They were unlawful under EU competition law and thus the EU demanded the greek government to reclaim those subventions from hellenic shipyards, something they never did. All of this predates the crisis and again it's the sole fault of the greek government that they're not complying.

It's a copy/paste from a Daily Express piece. Let me put this in perspective.

Imagine taking this;

[video=youtube;u-YQdQN3d9c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-YQdQN3d9c[/video]

...and trying to claim that dog/cat related violence involves croquet, baseball bats, and mice waving bells. That's the Daily Express, cited here as a source. That isn't even hyperbole. The Express is tinfoil-hat wearing bananas. The person who owns it, "Dirty Desmond", didn't cut his teeth on real journalism. His other publications have been "Horny Housewives", "Posh Wives", "Skinny and Wriggly", and most famously, "Asian Babes".

Apparently, according to Desmonds logic, he is ok with immigrants if they are female and taking their clothes off for him. Otherwise - back to where they came from.

To attempt to argue with an article there is to give dignity to something that deserves none.

 

[Becks]

It's a copy/paste from a Daily Express piece. Let me put this in perspective.

Imagine taking this;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-YQdQN3d9c

...and trying to claim that dog/cat related violence involves croquet, baseball bats, and mice waving bells. That's the Daily Express, cited here as a source. That isn't even hyperbole. The Express is tinfoil-hat wearing bananas. The person who owns it, "Dirty Desmond", didn't cut his teeth on real journalism. His other publications have been "Horny Housewives", "Posh Wives", "Skinny and Wriggly", and most famously, "Asian Babes".

Apparently, according to Desmonds logic, he is ok with immigrants if they are female and taking their clothes off for him. Otherwise - back to where they came from.

To attempt to argue with an article there is to give dignity to something that deserves none.

Oh, I know that Cosmo is the basically the propaganda bot of the offtopic forum, don't worry

But it's always funny to see how he needs to copy and paste stuff from those newspapers since he's apparently not able to express arguments supporting his position in his own words

 

[Stupid_hippy]

You're quoting the Express as if it's some sort of meaningful source of information?

hahahahahaha.

 

[Talarin]

What is factually wrong with the Express' article? I seem to be missing something with all of the snobbery in this thread...

 

[Andy Kappa]

What is factually wrong with the Express' article? I seem to be missing something with all of the snobbery in this thread...

Just in the interest of clarity, are you actually arguing that the newspaper is presenting a fair and balanced assessment of the situation?

If you are, then with all due respect you cannot have read the same article as I read.

If you are not, then wouldn't you agree that a wholly one-sided analysis of the situation (poor little Greece good, big mean nasty EU bad) counts as textbook case of a propagandist argument?

While I'm here, I resent the accusation of snobbery. Since when does seeking to draw attention to a misrepresentation of the facts count as snobbery? I'm not targetting the OP (despite the fact that he has form in this regard); simply pointing up the unbalanced nature of the article.

Or have I missed your point again?

 

[Talarin]

Just in the interest of clarity, are you actually arguing that the newspaper is presenting a fair and balanced assessment of the situation?

If you are, then with all due respect you cannot have read the same article as I read.

If you are not, then wouldn't you agree that a wholly one-sided analysis of the situation (poor little Greece good, big mean nasty EU bad) counts as textbook case of a propagandist argument?

While I'm here, I resent the accusation of snobbery. Since when does seeking to draw attention to a misrepresentation of the facts count as snobbery? I'm not targetting the OP (despite the fact that he has form in this regard); simply pointing up the unbalanced nature of the article.

Or have I missed your point again?

No, I'm not arguing that it presents a balanced assessment of the situation - I'm arguing that the article is factually correct and that the Express' chosen editorial slant is a valid one. Instead of critiquing the article or the EU's actions we see accusations of "propaganda" and ad-hominem posts relating to Richard Desmond and the opinion of the Express itself.

Personally, I see how the position has been reached. I utterly agree that Greece has brought her fiscal woes on herself (but I also think that Greece should never have been admitted to the Eurozone, problems were clearly known prior to admission and post-admission. I do consider the EU partially culpable in the Greek financial crash). But I'm struggling to see how the Express has misrepresented anything. You may not like the narrative they give but I've not seen a shred of evidence to suggest that they're wrong.

Have a look at EU Commission press releases. In particular, root through to the July infringements package and Bulgaria's infringement notice, or the combined Greece, Luxembourg and Romania notice. Is this really what the European public expects the commission to be doing?

How does this action help anyone, given the circumstances of this particular case? What were the positions of the individual commissioners? Were any mitigating circumstances considered prior to referring this to the EU Court of Justice and asking for a relatively punitive judgement (such as crippling government debt)? How does the EU Commission expect Greece to retrieve cash from a now foreign-owned company? Is this not a totally unnecessary (and unwinnable) position for the Commission to take? Is this not likely to further inflame those Greeks who already dislike the EU because of the fiscal policies that the country has had to take?

Which facts, in particular, do you feel have been misrepresented?

It isn't as simple as "poor little Greece good, big mean nasty EU bad". But neither is it the opposite and the instant you say "EU isn't entirely good" then you have a legitimate grounds for what could be an interesting discussion.

 

[Andy Kappa]

No, I'm not arguing that it presents a balanced assessment of the situation - I'm arguing that the article is factually correct and that the Express' chosen editorial slant is a valid one. Instead of critiquing the article or the EU's actions we see accusations of "propaganda" and ad-hominem posts relating to Richard Desmond and the opinion of the Express itself.

Personally, I see how the position has been reached. I utterly agree that Greece has brought her fiscal woes on herself (but I also think that Greece should never have been admitted to the Eurozone, problems were clearly known prior to admission and post-admission. I do consider the EU partially culpable in the Greek financial crash). But I'm struggling to see how the Express has misrepresented anything. You may not like the narrative they give but I've not seen a shred of evidence to suggest that they're wrong.

Have a look at EU Commission press releases. In particular, root through to the July infringements package and Bulgaria's infringement notice, or the combined Greece, Luxembourg and Romania notice. Is this really what the European public expects the commission to be doing?

How does this action help anyone, given the circumstances of this particular case? What were the positions of the individual commissioners? Were any mitigating circumstances considered prior to referring this to the EU Court of Justice and asking for a relatively punitive judgement (such as crippling government debt)? How does the EU Commission expect Greece to retrieve cash from a now foreign-owned company? Is this not a totally unnecessary (and unwinnable) position for the Commission to take? Is this not likely to further inflame those Greeks who already dislike the EU because of the fiscal policies that the country has had to take?

Which facts, in particular, do you feel have been misrepresented?

It isn't as simple as "poor little Greece good, big mean nasty EU bad". But neither is it the opposite and the instant you say "EU isn't entirely good" then you have a legitimate grounds for what could be an interesting discussion.

Fine words indeed; but you know as well as I do what is going on in that article (as I suspect you likewise do in regard to the OP's likely motive for posting it in the first place).

As to the truth of what is said, I'm not sure that anybody has claimed that any of it is factually incorrect. I make no claim to speak for others, but it's the spin that's been put on it that I take issue with. I would respectfully suggest that the article (as distinct from the subject matter to which it purports to speak) provides little opportunity for any discussion whatsoever, interesting or otherwise.

While I'm here, I'm seeing 'ad hominem' claims a lot in these forums. It has it's roots in Aristotelean logic (and was part of a group of logical fallacies intended principally to counter the Sophist rhetoric of the time), and in forums such as this is a much overused term that tends to surface any time someone seeks to defend dubious rhetoric.

My argument is not to the man (or indeed the publication); it is to the content of the article, and in particular to the manifestly one-sided interpretation that has been put on the facts contained therein. If that is not a valid ground for criticism then I'm not sure what might be. Kindly do me the courtesy of not making such unwarranted accusations.

I have no plans to take part in an extended (and no doubt semantically tortuous) discussion on this topic - I can think of very little I would less look forward to. I have said what I came to say and will now leave - much as the OP has in fact.

Good evening.

 

[beelbeebub]

The express is appalling.

Here's a report of the tragic shooting near Spalding a week ago.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/69...s-eastern-European-migrants-Lincolnshire-UKIP

The shooting appears to be the result of a domestic argument in a non-immigrant family. The article even admits that this shooting has nothing to do with immigrant gangs

There is no indication today’s events are connected to gang activity, with police saying they are not seeking anybody else in connection with the tragic incident.

Yet they still manage to use the tragic event as some kind of platform for UKIP and anti immigration views.

Victoria Ayling {ukip councillor} said local residents’ reaction to the horrific shooting at a swimming pool in Spalding, during which three people including the gunman were killed, was to say: “Oh God, it's the gang warfare again”.

So she was wrong as it wasn't gang warfare or immigrant related yet they still make up 90% of the article about it rather than the shooting which was the nominal reason for the report.

 

[Mr_sukebe]

Our media is an embarrassment.
Quite clearly their key strategy is "shock horror" and controversy comments, often in a highly biased and with little context.
It's the reason that 52% of our population voted to leave the EU.

Funny really, I was in Prague last week on business, meeting with a bunch of people from Germany and Czechs. Even they thought we were completely nuts for wishing to leave.

 

[Anon Sin]

Mr_sukebe,
1) All main-stream "World" media is an embarrasment,not just our's.
2) Both sides used the same stratergy.
3) Thats why 48% of the voters (not population) wanted to remain.
4) It is of no importence what other people,from other countries,think about a democratic choice made by British people about the future of the U.K.

 

[beelbeebub]

Mr_sukebe,
1) All main-stream "World" media is an embarrasment,not just our's.
2) Both sides used the same stratergy.
3) Thats why 48% of the voters (not population) wanted to remain.
4) It is of no importence what other people,from other countries,think about a democratic choice made by British people about the future of the U.K.

Both side didn't use the same strategy.

Remain tried to scare the electorate using the more extreme interpretations of expert opinion. Although extreme, their predictions were backed up by expert opinion and facts. Although they might have been clumsy, the majority of Remain campaigning was focused on rebutting the wild claims from Leave.

Leave tried to scare the electorate with outright lies, conflating issues and muddying rather than clearing the water. Leave made promises they had no hope of delivering (£350 million, keeping UK citizens freedom of movement whilst restricting EU citizens, being in the sinker market send doing independent trade deals etc), which is why they all legged it when they unexpectedly won.

 

[Talarin]

As to the truth of what is said, I'm not sure that anybody has claimed that any of it is factually incorrect. I make no claim to speak for others, but it's the spin that's been put on it that I take issue with. I would respectfully suggest that the article (as distinct from the subject matter to which it purports to speak) provides little opportunity for any discussion whatsoever, interesting or otherwise.

While I'm here, I'm seeing 'ad hominem' claims a lot in these forums. It has it's roots in Aristotelean logic (and was part of a group of logical fallacies intended principally to counter the Sophist rhetoric of the time), and in forums such as this is a much overused term that tends to surface any time someone seeks to defend dubious rhetoric.

My argument is not to the man (or indeed the publication); it is to the content of the article, and in particular to the manifestly one-sided interpretation that has been put on the facts contained therein. If that is not a valid ground for criticism then I'm not sure what might be. Kindly do me the courtesy of not making such unwarranted accusations.

I completely appreciate that the spin of the article is incredibly one-sided. (And the Express has plenty of form on this and other topics.) However, we're exposed to propaganda all of the time on either side of any particular debate. Some of that propaganda is a lot more subtle (and thus arguably more insidious).

Why is one set of propaganda acceptable and another not?

The express is appalling.

I find objectionable coverage in most media outlets nowadays, in all honesty. Some with naked bias, some with utterly uncritical journalism. And to be clear, my comments are not supposed to be some spirited defense of the Express - more a response to the preceding comments in the thread.

 

[beelbeebub]

Forget the bias from both sides (although when was the last time you saw a "positive" biased EU story in any paper?) concentrate on the facts.

Remember that EU commission decisions can, and have been, contested in the European court of Justice. If Greece has broken the rules, which it appeared to have done then it should pay a fine.

State aid rules are in place for a reason, if they are not enforced UK companies would find themselves out of business competing with European companies who are subsidised. The steel industry could have been helped by an EU wide anti dumping tariff on Chinese steel as many in the EU wanted, but the UK vetoed that so we only have our own government to blame.