(No, just keep on. These kinds of regulations were long overdue)
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
1939 points (97.5% liked)
Memes
45888 readers
1423 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
EU has its many flaws but they pretty much doing their job in regards of consumer rights, human rights and protection of personal data.
If we could only fix that veto issue... And the parliament issue... Someday hopefully :')
Hungarian is against fixing the Veto Issue!
I veto that
Viktor is it you?
*Swears in hungarian
And the chat control issue :')
If Article 17 (Upload filters) didn't make it through I cannot see chat control making it (even tho I think we shouldn't even let it get so far)
The worst part about chat control is that they proposed it without having a single clue as to how this would be set up, let alone managed and controlled.
Them not being able to give clear answers to absolutley valid and fair questions just breaks more trust in their competence.
Anyway, next I'd like them to ban anything that can be considered factory new e-waste, like cheap usb fans that break after a month, or keychain speakers that don't even sound good. There's so many things in production that just don't have any business existing.
Yeah, it was the same way with upload filters... Me and the boys were protesting, experts were saying it wouldn't work yet the EU politicians kept being stubborn...
Yeah, I think they should ESPECIALLY ban these non refillable vape sticks... I mean, the batteries are practically unused yet it's more or less useless after being emptied. And there's always the refillable option. (No vapes would be best, get off that sh***)
Human rights? Lol I wish, frontex is just waiting to start shooting migrants at the borders
Unpopular opinion: most migrants come to Europe from safe countries. We should absolutely 100% allow people who flee from war zones to take refuge in Europe. But most migrants who currently cross the border illegally are coming from places like Turkey or Morocco. Is there a war tearing these countries apart that I do not know about? I agree, asylum is a human right, but it’s just that: a right. It’s not an obligation. People abuse that right and then complain they’re not handed stuff on a silver plate.
If Europe went to war right now, like in the good old days, I’d flee to safety as well. No doubt about that. But I’d be happy to take refuge in the nearest safe country, not try to get into Canada illegally, just because I heard it’s a nice place to live.
That's not an unpopular opinion, that's just a sheltered opinion. A few things you need to get out of your head:
Most people come from Turkey or Morocco? They might come from there but most of the asylum seekers nationality is not Turkish or Moroccan. Most asylum seekers are from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq or poorer African nations. This changed year by year of course but that’s generally true. Also of course EU states have an obligation to respect human rights, it’s literally law in the European convention of human rights. A right implies an obligation by somebody else to honor that right. What does it matter if your home country is at war or not? If you can’t feed your family due to economic problems or climate change or whatever, it’s more than fair enough to get out of there.
Hope for same work direction in the future!
The European Convention of Human Rights, the Council of Europe and its court looks after human rights, not the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights
You are right. My intention was to refer the whole of Europe as EU (which I know its incorrect) rather than go into specifics but regardless thanks for the clarification.
No worries. There's so many councils, courts and presidents it's easy to lose track!
Question, do these bodies have teeth? And if so would these teeth exist without the EU?
My understanding of the EU is that the only thing they can really do to coerce uncooperative members is threaten to revoke membership.
So, if these bodies are not EU, and it wants to impose a sanction against a member nation, by what mechanism can it enforce that?
Just wondering.
Yes, the ECHR does have teeth. The UK is still subject to its rulings despite brexit
UK is still a member of The Council of Europe, which is different to the European Council...
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/jun/15/what-is-the-echr-and-how-did-it-intervene-in-uk-rwanda-flight-plans
The EU cannot threaten revoking membership of the EU, there is no mechanism to expel a member state. There is only article 50 for the state leaving of its own accord, or suspension of rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_7_of_the_Treaty_on_European_Union
The battery thing is for the environment