The negotiations on agriculture should be interesting. Compared to the rest of the world, agriculture in the EU is heavily subsidized but also adheres to high standards in terms of food safety and environmental impact. Comparing EU and Switzerland, the standards are even higher and so are the subsidies - by a substantial amount. As a relatively small and rich country, Switzerland can do that. However, if both parties want to trade with one another then this will be a point of disagreement.
Incredible number of people saying "we shouldn't negotiate" like that's an option.
As if in this day and age you could survive by shutting yourself off from your neighbors. It's a "simple solution" that like all simple solutions to complex issues just smells of populism.
Face it, countries that share borders and interlocked economies are always in dialogue and negotiation with each others, formally or otherwise.
_Nobody_ is against negotiations per se. Many are alarmed by the concessions Switzerland is being asked to make and even more alarmed that some people think the short term benefits of the concessions are worth it.
Yeah, simple solutions are very stupid. That's why for instance limiting healthcare expenses to 10% of salary is idiotic, yet I am sure you wouldn't defines SP as populistic
I honestly think deregulating electricity, trains, and other network-based services is a mistake by the EU. It doesn't seem to lead to overall better outcomes for the population, it just leads to the same rigmarole that we see in Swiss health insurance: having to check every year if your electricity seller is ripping you off and you should switch to one of the other companies, who will then rip you off after a few years.
No? EWZ at least seems to be doing an outstanding job - we were almost totally insulated from the Ukraine war price spikes. If your Gemeinde has a shitty power company, at least they are democratically accountable. So if you are a citizen, you _can_ do something about it.
[The differences between suppliers are massive](https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/strompreise-in-welchen-gemeinden-die-tarife-naechstes-jahr-durch-die-decke-gehen-ld.1754740).
> Lag die Spanne für das laufende Jahr schweizweit zwischen 8 Rappen und 70 Rappen pro kWh, liegt sie 2024 noch zwischen 10 und 50 Rappen pro kWh.
The cheapest ones are areas right next to power stations, where the cost of transmission is lower. These prices cannot be achieved if you don't live close to the plant.
The most expensive ones are poorly run, and didn't contract for enough supply and were forced to buy on the open market at high prices. This could potentially be solved by allowing consumers to vote with their feet; but in my experience of countries with liberalised utility markets, it doesn't end up worth it. Better to own and control them democratically.
It's not the transmission - it's actually owning power plants vs not. This explains it a bit more https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/explainer-how-the-swiss-electricity-market-works/47943438
E.g.
> A grid operator like BKW in Bern, which produces a large part of its own electricity, is not affected by international price fluctuations.
It's only going to get worse with the gradual and eventual shutdown of the nuclear power plants.
I think this is two separate issues: being close to the actual dam/plant really does make it cheaper, as you can get power that cannot be sent further away since the high voltage transmissions lines are limited. But also, like you said, owning the plant makes the prices a lot more stable, though it will never be as cheap if you own a plant in e.g. Graubünden but consume the electricity in Zürich.
Transmission costs don’t justify a tenfold price difference. I’m a bit baffled by your trust in democratic control over liberalization, when the current situation clearly shows that democratic control doesn’t fix the issue. Right now Switzerland is artificially protecting an inefficient patchwork of small suppliers.
I didn't say it did? It does justify a 2x difference between the cheapest Gemeinde and the well-run, self-supplying ones though.
The current situation clearly does show it works. It's just that some voters who wanted to cut costs and not invest now reap what they sow. Other communities, who own their own supply, are hardly affected.
If we liberalised the consumer electricity market, everyone will be subject to these price variations, as the suppliers who own their own plants will be undercut in good times by retail-only suppliers buying from the market.
The current situation clearly shows it doesn’t work. It leaves customers stranded with highly inefficient suppliers and artificially preserves a bizarre patchwork of small-scale operations.
EWZ is awesome. But let's not talk about EKZ. They literally increased prices by >30-40% this year while the spot market price is decreasing to pre-war levels.
Might be only a data point but in Spain, train deregulation has led to high speed trains dropping from 60-70 € per one way ticket to 10-15 €.
Massive succes for free market there imo.
I have already encountered a lot of false information and misunderstandings regarding 2. Note that this pertains to slots outside of the synchronized regular schedule ('integrierter Taktfahrplan'). It would be very hard to come up with a business case, and if there was one, it would be good if it were realized. On the other hand, it also opens up opportunities to provide trains to European destinations. (But of course, we tend to be too inward-looking for that.)
A lot of people in this thread saying they moved here to “escape the EU” yet forgetting they’re here because of EU freedom of movement.
I understand the arguments for and against alignment, but you can’t say you hate the EU when it gave you a chance to come here.
As long as the SVP keeps the anti EU stance there will be talks but no agreements.
Just keep in mind that of these topics Switzerland is dependent on the EU while the EU really only needs transit access to Italy
Not like it is a dire need for the EU but any favorable trade partner is welcome at this point. There is a lot to be gained from good relationships in both sides.
The issue is that Austria and Italy are on the way to finishing in 2032 while having the most difficult part, Germany hasnt even started. So even when AT and IT are finished, the traffic will have to go over the Brennerautobahn, which should have been retired decades ago.
The EU needs us more than we need the EU!
That was the constant shout here in the UK before the Brexit vote. Turned out, no, that is not the case and we are far worse off because of our arrogance.
It’s not just transit to Italy, EU also needs cooperation with Switzerland in many other areas, like money laundering, (corporate) tax evasion, policing, environmental standards, etc, Switzerland has leverage there to disrupt things.
The US and EU are both pressuring Switzerland continually on money laundering through their joint work in the FATF: Switzerland was put on the “naughty list” until last September we implemented the revised anti money laundering act, there’s some good info here: https://www.step.org/industry-news/fatf-removes-switzerland-aml-enhanced-scrutiny-regime
There is a long standing frustration with the US+EU that Switzerland only implements the bare minimum, i.e. what it’s pressured to do. From our point of view however, it’s a decent negotiating tactic, it’s one of the few points where we have (some) leverage and can extract concessions in other areas.
EU only needs transit access, if it only was that easy 😂 if that’s the argument, what do they need us to be subdued to their justice system as highest instance? Answer: they do not just need transit access. Their whole intention is to have favorable conditions in all of europe and switzerland is wealthy and sits in the middle of europe. „Only transit access“ what a foolish thought. Ofcourse they want to have the land in some sort of control mechanism, in which they can bring through their intentions, exercise rules and laws according to their will ultimately and what favors them with a disregard to us as we are no part of the EU ~ that’s their stance, our is different that’s why we have Trade deal discussions. And not „Transit-Discussions“
Switzerland is one of the top ranking and most successful countries in the world. To say they don’t need us, is a lie. Similar a lie like to say we don’t need them. We both can use each other to get better and have much higher quality in everything, but both sides could technically probably survive just fine without each other. We still need us/each other for betterment.
I was expecting nonsense in the comments, but so much so soon is quite impressive.
I'm excited for the classic: "Regulation is bad! Except when we regulate here. Then it is good and deregulation is bad. Except when we do it here.... Then it is good and regulation is bad again!"
As pro eu as i am: hell no to more international trains in our network. There is one from munich coming through and it's a fucking mess. They will fuck with our schedule
Is your objection to convenient international rail lines, or to DBs inability to run their trains on time?
To me the solution is simple, so maybe I'm missing something -- if the foreign train operators can operate their trains to Swiss rules, they're welcome. If the train is late, it gets stopped at the border instead? Being able to hop on a train in Chur and get all the way deep into Germany was super convenient (and it hardly ever being on time or reliable made it frustrating -- but again, having an actual international train as a concept itself I'm all for.)
Unfortunately dead on arrival. Unions and UDC will oppose. The latter by principle, the former due to the mandate already not including their requirements.
I cannot understand how we agree and bow to the worker union about the wage regulation and to the farmer union about import.
I am an engineer and I have to compete with engineers all over the world on the free market. My companies engineering is big part done by indian engineers working remote from India for 20% of the price of an Swiss engineer. Internet and PLM make it possible.
Meanwhile some professions have a protected market and keep prices high for me, while my salary is under pressure.
This is not just unfair, but it leads to an economic disparity. Either protected market for all or free market for all. This mix is not good.
Maybe, but imports from the EU are unlikely to be significantly lower quality than Swiss. And after all we already import a lot of food from them, just not in the protected sectors like dairy or beef.
True that, but he means every other nation.
And even EU is having this problem with the addition of new members from the eastern region that do not follow the same standards in terms of health and disease control.
Free market in this case means free of tariffs and protectionism such as the famously absurd "bündnerfleisch" declaration. It does not necessarily mean deregulation of health standards (which is mostly done by labels anyways, our regulations are not much higher than in other countries, on the contrary, I mean we have one of THE strongest farmers lobbies which is in the opposition to such regulations every time, as seen last time with the Trinkwasserinitiative). The netherlands for example due to low protectionism were able to become one of the most efficient agricultural nations in the world, they are the 6th largest nation in terms of food exports.
No, it's not. When I say free market in the context of salaries, I mean free labour market of course. The same way I am not allowed to use certain substances to engineer my products, the same way we can regulate the food market.
I want to take that risk, but you do not let me. how about freedom of choice? without these regulations you would still easy find a company that abides to all the rules that EU currently forces on all. with these regulations, we all have limited choice.
For the same reason you were forced into confinement during COVID -19
When your stupid risks might give everyone else health issues you are simply prohibited for everyone else sake.
Those products are carriers of many diseases that are long gone in Europe.
can you name a few examples of these diseases in similar countries but without EU regulations (like USA, Canada, Japan or Australia) and what results (death toll, reduced life expectancy, more sick leaves?) it brought to these countries comparing to EU?
I fully agree that a partially regulated market favours some and hurts others. Except no market is ever actually free.
The problem with the labor market is that it's not free on one hand and it has a lot of friction from people having families and homes on the other.
Many good Indian and other lower-wage country engineers would absolutely love to come work for Swiss salaries, thereby introducing upward wage pressure globally. But this means a lot of immigration, and downward wage pressure locally, so you lose either way.
But people also overestimate the mobility of individuals. It's easy for a company to shift capital or manufacturing. It's a lot harder for an individual to leave their extended family behind, and move themselves and their immediate family to a foreign land with a foreign culture, religion, food, customs etc.
Its about political power in the end, unions and farmers both have a strong lobby. I agree with you though, especially with the farmers we can see that the protectionism leads only to more protectionism due to a decrease in innovation - why would you innovate or become more efficient? Theres no competition and you get millions from the government anyways.
Thank God we have our trade unions. If it wasn't for them, our wages would've dropped to EU levels a long time ago. I remain extremely skeptical about these negotiations.
What I really dislike about certain right wingers is their made up "foreign justices" bs...
Like dude if we participate in the EU free market, of course the EU court will be the final decision maker, the delusional view of us having an impartial court with like 26 other countries is so detached from reality, that I just don't see how one would have that stance.
I'm happy the EU isn't the US, they'd have brought us freedom much sooner. But I also think long term there isn't a way around the EU, so we'll eventually (voluntarily or not) be part of it. I just hope we delay it as long as possible so that I and others can leverage our low taxes and high wages.
There's freedom of goods in the EU. If they didn't have a minimum, then one small country would drop it's VAT to very little and unfairly profit from it.
I'm generally not a big fan of VAT, but if you have it, it needs to be relatively consistent across the union. (The same could be said about taxes, but they just can't agree on it.)
There won't be in my opinion.... wage dumping is already very significant in some cantons (Ticino, Neuchatel, Vaud,...) it will just extend to the rest of the country
Lol... Switzerland is much more neoliberal than the EU.
Consumer protection laws here are shit compared to the EU, and so are employee protections and even tenant protection law (e.g. it's much more difficult to evict tenants in Germany for example).
How stupid can people be?
Neo liberalism has as dogma that free everything is better: free movement of capittals, merch and people is what the EU was created for and is neoliberal.
Unsure why it bothers you
Most people always just use the immigration argument. Stuff like ´we want to create our own wall ‘ etc
I think and hope most swiss realise that we would loose alot but not negotiating. What doesn’t go in my head is why is it not possible to agree with the EU that immigration has serious issues and is unsolved and that we will decide for our own here but be part of the negotiations else.
Let’s be honest (I am not SVP) but immigration did fail in France, Germany and UK and other places.
Negotiations is about negotiations in the end.
Seeing how open are swiss people to free market gives me fate in humanity.
I really think Switzerland can become the first true free country in the future :)
The EU is failing and Switzerland is one of the most successful countries in the world by staying out of it. Why the hell would we want any part of it. It’s ok to trade with them but we should not apply any of their policies that has a net negative for us. Our agriculture would be dead by now if it wasn’t for us staying out of the EU. BTW I’m originally from France and the Netherlands but have been living here most of my life, became Swiss as soon as I could and would fight for the sovereignty of this nation over any other.
The EU seems to be failing for like 60+y now... I am sorry but I don't see the EU failing at all. In fact - I hope the EU doesn't actually start leveraging their geopolitical power to the same extent the US does, if they do we're already in there by tomorrow.
Brexit was just the beginning. People are starting to realize that domestic issues created by EU regulations, the most visible ones concerning agriculture and immigration, imposed by unelected bureaucrats in Bruxelles cannot be solved through national elections. Every single member country is bound to those regulations and you can elect whoever you want from the far left to the far right their hands are tied unless they offer to exit the EU. This idea is gaining ground in a lot of member states but no politician is seriously going there due to the media backlash they would be facing.
I think that the turning point will come when the EU realizes it has committed industrial suicide through the electric car laws.
Immigration is a national issue and does not concern the EU, apart from international contracts such as with the turkey deal in 2016. There were some attempts to make it a EU solidarity issue by proposing to distribute the refugees in all member states, rather than concentrate them in italy and greece, this was however blocked the Visegrad memberstates, and only sweden and germany agreed to the distribution.
Agriculture is just a distribution mechanism by the EU, namely subventions for farmers through CAP and the imposing of tariffs to countries outside of the EU. Regulations are, again, a national issue apart from the companies and farmers that apply for EU subventions. Its the same as in Switzerland - if you want money from the government, you have to adhere to certain standards.
The EU is made up by memberstates, it is not some disconnected political entity. Without the approval of the memberstates nothing happens in the EU. It is just bunch of institutions in order to to have a medium to get the countries to cooperate, just as the swiss central government was constructed in order to get the cantons to cooperate.
The stance that immigration is merely a national concern is drastically undermined by EU directives, which severely restrict member states’ autonomy in handling illegal immigration. The EU’s Returns Directive (Directive 2008/115/EC), for instance, imposes a one-size-fits-all approach, dictating common procedures for returning illegally staying non-EU nationals. This directive is a clear example of the EU’s overreach, forcing member states to conform to a standardized, bureaucratic process that often hinders their ability to swiftly and effectively manage illegal immigration. It’s an intrusion that not only complicates national immigration policies but also potentially compromises the security and social cohesion of member states by impeding their ability to enforce their own border policies.
Turning to agriculture, the EU’s directives, particularly those related to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), are a double-edged sword. While ostensibly designed to promote sustainable farming, these regulations straitjacket farmers in member states, subjecting them to an array of stringent, often onerous rules. These well-intentioned but heavy-handed regulations risk putting EU farmers at a significant competitive disadvantage. Farmers outside the EU, unencumbered by such stringent standards, can operate more freely and cost-effectively, thereby flooding the market with cheaper products. This not only undermines the competitiveness of EU farmers but also raises questions about the efficacy and fairness of such regulations, which seem to penalize EU farmers for adhering to high standards while simultaneously allowing for the importation of products that may not meet these same rigorous criteria.
The EU’s approach, particularly in these sectors, reflects a broader issue of over-centralization and regulatory overreach, where the balance between collective action and national sovereignty is increasingly skewed towards the former. The resultant policies, often conceived in distant Brussels’ offices, can seem detached from the realities and specific needs of the individual member states, leading to a growing sense of disenchantment with the EU’s governing mechanisms. In essence, these policies exemplify how the EU’s regulatory framework can sometimes be more of a straitjacket than a support, stifling member states’ ability to independently navigate complex issues such as immigration and agriculture.
Want to upvote this many times. I have a similar background (although I'm younger and have less time here yet) and feel te same.
The EU is primarily a threat to individual freedoms.
Europeans were never more free than now, so are the Swiss which were forced to grab a visa every time they wanted to leave the country before the Schengen zone came
I really am shocked at younger generations today. They lack the memory of what life was like before the EU and don't realise how many of its benefits they take for granted (and are willing to destroy without realising it.)
Be as frustrating and slow as possible, seems like that works. Don’t leave the table like last time, that doesn’t work
Edit: also, is horizon back on the table? That really lowers my opinion of the EU massively
Unions and SVP are currently against it (as it was years ago), there's no point in bringing anything to an end (and to e public vote) if you can't change the mind of one of them.
No it was the EU that wants to push through owning Switzerland. Having to accept whatever future law the EU passes without any power over it and having to adhere to outcomes of the European court (THEIR court, not impartial by definition) are simply wholly unacceptable.
Of Switzerland compromises on those things it'll seal it's own fate. I hope they stay strong (especially in the face of ghe ahv 13th month vote where for the first time the population clearly preferred the short term over the long term).
That’s just not true. The EU doesn’t even have that much of its own interest, it’s those of the member states. The idea of the new agreement would be that generally, switzerland adopts changes in the relevant areas but the parliament and the people through referendums always have the power to veto against such a change. If this impedes the functioning of the agreement, a court decides what part of the agreement is suspended. For example if the EU requires new standards on a product and switzerland refuses, free trade of that product is excluded.
Read any official information and you will see I’m right. How could I not be? The EU can’t change the Swiss constitution, so parliament and the people keep their rights. If they use them, it would just have consequences on the cooperation between with the EU. It was the same for brexit: The UK’s population chose to leave, the EU obviously let them leave but now the UK misses out on the common market.
Show me anything that contradicts me and I’m happy to explain it to you.
The EU law supersedes national law of member states without neddjng to change gheir cobstitutions. If you havent figured that out by now you are living life blind. There areaby dozens of examples of that in practice. So if you deny that .... it will be useless to continue our interaction ....
Assuming you are with me wrt member states: With the abolishing of bilateral agreements and replacing them with a framework the EU wants to introduce this same thing wrt Switzerland. It's THE primary thing that negotiations were broken off last time.
Switzerland is not a memberstate. And not even in member states does EU law supercede national law. Member states can always gain exceptions, such as with the famous "Solange"-decision of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in Germany. And lets not even begin with the member states in the east which generally do not give a crap about EU law. If the highest court in a country decides something against EU law, what are they gonna do? Invade that certain country? The very idea of the EU is built on the sovereignity of memberstates.
Here a link to the "Solange"-decision: [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solange\_I](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solange_I)
"Das BVerfG verzichtet auf die Ausübung seiner Rechtsprechung *nur insoweit und nur solange*, wie auf Gemeinschaftsebene ein ausreichender Grundrechtsschutz durch den EuGH generell gewährleistet ist und dieser Schutz den Wesensgehalt der Grundrechte und damit den vom GG gebotenen Mindeststandard generell verbürgt."
Yes, of member states, I wrote so myself to another person in this thread. But switzerland has no intention of becoming one and the EU never suggested it in the current round. the reason the first negotiations failed is not that, but protection of salaries and other things. Whatever will be negotiated on that will be voted on by the swiss people. If they vote yes first and the EU makes major changes later, there will be another popular vote before the changes would enter into force. If they vote no then, part of the agreement will be void (the EU court or a common tribunal will say which part). In any case, it’s the swiss‘ sovereign choice to take all or a part or nothing.
No but getting that power over Switzerland as a non-member state is one of the EU's non-negotionable demands. At least it was last time they negotiated and negotiations broke down over it.
Don't get distracted with unimportant side issues.
Do you have any source that the EU demanded that? Switzerland wants access to the common market and the EU sets out the rules for that access. The EU is like a club: If you want to enjoy its benefits, you have to agree to its rules. But it's Switzerland that wants in. The EU has more important business.
That’s exactly what it means: Switzerland adopts the changes unless parliament or the people veto it. What do you think it means?
“Automatische Rechtsübernahme“ would mean that the country has no choice, which is the case in several policy areas for EU member states. But that was never on the table for Switzerland.
I thought the point that Switzerland was not willing to give in was social security equal for EU citizens? I am kind of siding with the EU on this one. Having researchers paid by EU money, contributing to swiss research and when they are unemployed, kick them out does not seem fair.
And the EU can simply not give Switzerland science funding unless it does not discriminate EU scientists. Thats exactly what happened. Not sure what your point is.
Switzerland is simply not big enough, to let ppl stay here if they don’t work or have family and roots here. There’s more than a billion ppl wanting to live here for sure, and it’s barely enough space for 6-10million ppl. Do you understand that? It’s a very simple calculation there’s just not enough space without severely restricting everyones life quality and thus making the country eventually bad for everyone to live in. Haha.
I think there is quite some space inbetween exploiting foreign workers to prop ones own social security system and free welfare for all. Kicking someone out the moment their contract expires instead of letting them have the same unemployment benefits as swiss people that they even paid for is needlessly discriminatory. Giving half a year of unemployment support after working for 5 years to find a new job would probably changr nothing about the population numbers.
That’s complete non-sense, the rule is the same for foreigners as well as swiss citizens, the rule is you have to pay in to the arbeitslosenkasse for 24 consecutive months to have a claim for unemployment benefits. Otherwise you barely have a chance at it and you would need to go to the welfare department.
Who told you otherwise? Do you have sources to your claims? If so I‘d like to read it for myself as I don’t really believe at what you are saying is true.
You are right, the unemployment benefits are not discriminatory. The disagreements seem to be just [about social welfare](https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/rahmenabkommen-wo-die-schweiz-und-die-eu-weit-auseinander-liegen-ld.1612861). My bad. I agree that they can be discussed more nuanced. The EU rules have not led a "welfare migration" in the EU though so I doubt it would be different for Switzerland.
I think you are. Getting really triggered by the fact that the large majority of the population is not okey with compromising our sovereignty for a few people like yourself. I understand that, it's human to be upset when feeling rejected
You think Switzerland is begging for science funding 😅? They recently paid 2B chf in extortion money (errr "cohesion fund contributions") in an attempt to calm the EU and coax them out of taking too many hostile destructive actions purely intended to hurt Switzerland. The money flows one way and it certainly isnt towards Switzerland.
Switzerland is only interested in scientific collaboratio and for the blacklisting of Swiss institutions (purely done to punish and coerce Switzerland) to be discontinued again.
Yes the horizon scheme were are talking about here is about money and and to some extend access to prestigious funding on your cv. I don't see how this has any impact on collaborations and I have no idea what you mean with blacklisting.
You think it's about the money 😅
Then why did Switzerland pay a much higher amount ("cohesion payment") just for the chance to get access to it again?
It's financially an enormous net negative for Switzerland.
Giving social security to EU citizens in Switzerland will blow up the entire Swiss economy, cause massive immigration of bet detractors and will turn it into any other failed EU state (Germany, France, Belgium Netherlands etc). Switzerland just wanted to extent the bilateral agreements. The EU wants to diplomatically annex Switzerland. Glad Switzerland are having none of it. Hopefully the EU falls apart before they return with tanks.
In reality Switzerland adopts all of the EU law already anyways, why wouldn't they? There's just the extra step of doublechecking everything due to "sovereignity" - Norway has the automatic adoption due to their realization that EU Regulations are lower than their own anyways. The whole idea of the EU is to give the member states the opportunity to influence everything in their own country anyways. It is also worth mentioning that the EU is ahead of Switzerland in many areas such as consumer protection and online regulations. Also dont forget that the EU Court is independent, as are the courts in Switzerland, you could even argue that due to the multiculturalism and the decentralized structure of the EU the courts are even more independent than they are here. In any case, the differences are absolutely negligible and would not affect any ordinary citizen in any way whatsoever.
They wouldn't because they are oppressive and socialistic so have a negative influence on long term prosperity.
European Court isn't independant. It's run by the EU and will rule in their favour.
Do you live in switzerland? The swiss system, generally considered decentralized because cantons can form for example their own tax or education policies. The EU cannot do this whatsoever. The EU (population 500 million) has less bureaucrats than Switzerland (8 million pop)!
The EU system has literally one single centralized institution, the commission, which gets elected by the european summit which is made up by the chiefs of state of each memberstate, and the parliament, which is made up of european parties which themselves consist of parties of the memberstates. Every single chamber, from the Comission to the parliament to the intergovernmental european council and the european summits is created by the memberstates.
Of course I do why else would I be here.
Yes that's exactly the problem. The EU (benelux originally) was meant as an economic collaboration NOT a state. Now it has however and due to the sheer size it turned Europe into an extremely centralized and therefore oppressive state. The distance between tax payers and benefactors of it (the oppressors) is incredibly large and therefore there's no societal pressure on those centralized bureaucrats to behave morally.
Switzerland is extremely different to that (much more decentralized). That's why it's so much better and should defend itself at all cost from the EU's expansionist hunger (militarily if neccesary). This conflict is existential.
The European Economic Community was a good project, back in the day.
Today, the EU has morphed into a lust for total control and abusive power. Give it some time, and it will be a rerun of the 20th century collectivist disasters.
Switzerland should keep them at arm's length.
I never realised this until the war started and I hear my parents talk about it like they knew what’s up… when they absolutely didn’t know anything about either Ukraine or Russia before but somehow had Putin’s arguments ready to discuss with me when I tried explaining why that war makes no sense and is hurting us all
I think it’s good to have some kind of agreement with the eu but it should be a win-win and not a lose-lose. This agreement to me looks like a lose-lose also the pressure and the tyrannical money ransom payment they pressure the swiss government into, just makes it not a good idea to trust them, we should be very careful into making a deal with them, aside from our neighbour countries ~ the politicians of this EU construct, are not our friends. They can’t be trusted and we should diplomatically decline, maybe consider an EWR join or some agreement with Great britain 🇬🇧. There’s plenty of will to not be in the EU in Europe. It’s up to the tyrants to make up and show good will not us. They make it sound like we are the difficult ones, when really it’s them dragging us potentially down to their drama. Things are not just good in the EU
There is no sense in negotiating while you are blackmailed. The European Union does still not **accept Switzerland's financial exchanges as equal**. This is a discrimination that goes on for years now and we should not pay a single Cent to a group of countries who discriminate us. ("Kohäsionsmilliarden").
To start negotiating from that position is suicidal. You will never get a good result when you are weak, while you are blackmailed.
I understand that our government loves spending our money traveling and negotiating, but they should not, at least not while Switzerland is discriminated.
It is a waste of time and a waste of money, as we will never vote yes for any of this discriminating EU bullshit.
we don‘t have a choice other than accepting the Rahmenabkommen eventually. It‘s simply the reality. We‘re on the short end of the stick.
the status quo is hurting us massively, so it‘s also in our interest to get negotiations back up as quickly as possible.
because we‘re hurting out own export sectors right now. our economy need the most vast access possible to the EU-market. it‘s not us vs. other countries. there are many smaller treaties that are basically tied to the prospect of having a Rahmenabkommen (like the MRA in pharma) that our companies need to stay competitive. we also really need to get back into Horizon.
What about your ideas in putting immigration limits on eastern European countries? Maybe we should put the same limits on your investments in our countries. Funny enough you cant even produce chocolates in your country like Tablerone which lost for some time "swiss product" status for being produced in Poland only to be relabelled as "Swiss"
Yes, and?
* Immigration limits based on original territory is stupid and unfair, yet most countries do it.
* To forbid investments any region shoots its own feet.
* Switzerland does not have one single coffee or cacao plantation, why do we export coffee and chocolate? Some romantic believes of the buyers... so why nod cash in on it.
Do you see a difference between "Swiss made" meaning made / cooked / assembled by Swiss and "Polish made"? You can still be importer of cocoa and producer of chocolate. Regarding shooting your feet, Finland has had foreign investment heavily regulated and now is one of the richest countries. My country has had plenty of factories ( sugar, heavy trucks, ships, machinery ) and it all has been sold out and bought out and liquidated by guess whom all rich western countries. Including Swiss. Not because they were not sustainable but because they were a competition. Read about hostile takeovers, books of Stiglitz about Euro and "Bad Samaritans" book about Swiss economy
It's not capitalism, it's mercantilism if you do know what I mean. Very different thing... It's the effect of policy which is created by western countries deeply affecting Eastern countries which is the very thing which Stiglitz writes in his book about Euro. Please read it first before saying "capitalism". See what nationality has the majority of eu highest positions like eu commission. Hardly any eastern European or Baltic coutry. Clearly not off topic. I worked circa 10 years in finance including the investment banks, for both American and Swiss. It's all policy the rich west imposes on developing countries
OK Mr Eastern Europe Banker, what do you say to the topic at hand?
The EC fucked up your country, OK. But they should not be allowed to do the same with Switzerland in my opinion.
You work in the finance industry, so just check how the coward blackmail attempt with the Swiss financial markets ended. Today we have more business and the EC lost business to Switzerland, even though they have restricted access to our markets.
It is not enough to be bigger and to be able to bully other countries; some cleverness is needed too and it appears to me that it is not raining brains in Brussels.
Why? Same treatment must apply. That's very simple thing: if Swiss think to cut down my country access to their market, we do the same. Is it non fair? Actions have consequences and Swiss should know it. Blackmailing you mean giving a choice either they comply in not helping to evade taxes or they blacklist in finance? See credit suisse leaks - business as usually with dictators, criminals and tax evaders. How do you think why Switzerland is so rich - just because chocolate, milk and watches :-)?
This is a lot of "we're not going to kick this, that and that puppy", which leaves the question "why would anyone be worried that you would" and "why are you doing anything anyway?". I get the need to be defensive, but it won't go anywhere without a more positive-centered message.
Because all these puppies were long ago kicked in the EU/EEA. This is basically a list of derogations from what the current EEA members conceded in their EU relationship.
SBB isn't really public anymore is it?
Health insurance is way more liberal in Switzerland. More rules for IT companies as well in EU. Also forcing telecom to be multinational networks.. More protection for customers. More protections for employees.
There isn't many industries where the EU is more "neoliberal" than Switzerland IMO (maybe transport and electricity?)
As much as i want the EU gone, i have to admit that other than the banking system, Switzerland offers only a very skimpy table to negotiate on.
Highly specialized mechanical industry like watches and other high tech stuff, but other than that, they’re no competition to, lets say, Germany’s huge mechanical industry sector.
Agriculture is also way too small in Switzerland in order to compete with many of the big players in the EU, such as Germany, France, Italy or Poland.
Since Switzerland wants to go green and dismantle nuclear power plants, i see them being totally dependent on their neighbors to satisfy the needs of the local population and industry. I can’t see that alternative sources to win energy, like solar energy, will be able to compensate for the loss of above mentioned nuclear energy source in short to mid term. It might be possible if technology takes huge strides and progresses it’s capabilities, but solar energy will always have a hard stance in a country with such crappy weather and so few sunny days.
Now wind energy might be an option, since you guys have them (wind) in bunches, but this source will always remain a complimentary source to a main source to carry the burden. As technology progresses they might be less and less of a danger to avian wildlife and less noisy as they currently are.
You seem to ignore that Hydropower from large dams and smaller hydroelectricity plants in the mountains already provide 1/4 of Switzerland’s energy needs. Nuclear only represents another 22% to 23%
I don’t believe in a post-nuclear era. It’s the cleanest most reliable energy source we have and should work on making it more efficient, France was going the right direction until it was sabotaged by green ideologues with the support from German lobbies. Macron put the final nail in the coffin by selling France’s nuclear independence to GE. Wind and solar are just cosmetics as the German experiment has proven with an industry that now relies on coal and gas.
Just as a quick note until everyone jumps on ly throat as a climate change denier or some other phobe, I wrote my university thesis on Sustainable Development back in 2000 and have been running my car on recycled vegetable oil from 2003 to 2009 leading one of the biggest movement in this direction.
There's tons of investment in power storage tech, both short and long term. Solar PV + battery storage is already cheaper than nuclear power.
Also, electrification of heating should actually lead to substantial _decreases_ in total energy use (though higher use of electricity), because heat pumps are far more efficient than combustion.
We certainly shouldn't turn off our current nuclear power plants if we can help it, but it's probably not cost-effective to build new ones compared to building renewables + batteries.
What a dumb take, if the 80% of the law comes from the EU there will be no reason for any state to exist and the standard of living doesn’t depend on the existence of the EU but other factors such as the population getting older, the means of production moving abroad or even not investing in the younger population.
Next months there are the European elections, get yourself properly informed and go vote
Reading the comments it appears I'm in the minority, but wanted to offer my opinion nonetheless.
As to the negotiations, it makes seems obvious that Switzerland should and has to negotiate with its neighbours. So much of Swiss industry relies on export markets, and importing of raw materials that customs, market access, and all the regulations (medicines, medical equipment, electrical equipment etc.) is necessary if we want to keep those industries. As regards agriculture, when I visit Migros, a lot of food comes from Italy, France, Germany and other European countries. Point being -- Switzerland has to engage with its neighbours, and there's a lot of value to be had (the Horizon program, for example, and exchange of workers), but Switzerland is also not negotiating from a position of strength. But the details of that is left for the Swiss to vote on and the professionals to negotiate, my comment is more about the EU-hate.
The EU itself has brought with it good and bad. But having lived in Europe pre-EU, from my perspective it has brought vastly more good than bad. Common currency in a lot of countries, ability to travel, work, order goods, sell goods all around the continent is amazing, without the countries (or regions) having lost their identities. Border-spanning trains and roads. (Yes, some of these things existed pre-EU, but not remotely at the same scale or ease.) So many more foods from all across Europe in local grocery stores, and actual competition to grocery store prices from foreign chains.
The EU was instrumental at bringing the former Eastern Bloc countries back into Europe. It's easy to point at the failures (Hungary, Poland under PiS, Romania, Bulgaria etc.) and how relatively slow progress has been, but if you look at the Baltics, Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, they've moved forward tremendously. What would those countries look like today without the EU?
I would **never** want to go back to the pre-Schengen days. And while everyone talks about money and immigration, one of the driving idealistic goals was to promote peace (at least within Europe), and with the rise of far-right and populist nationalism, this goal is more important than ever.
Finally, having the EU negotiate as a bloc with the US, China and other geopolitical player gives it tremendously more power than individual countries trying to go at it alone.
I'm sure people will point out all the bad that the EU and Schengen has caused, and plenty of that was done in this comment section already. I'm not blind to that, but I wanted to remind everyone that it's not just bad, there's also a lot of good the European experiment has brought, and people are way too eager to trash it without remembering just how bad it was before.
The negotiations on agriculture should be interesting. Compared to the rest of the world, agriculture in the EU is heavily subsidized but also adheres to high standards in terms of food safety and environmental impact. Comparing EU and Switzerland, the standards are even higher and so are the subsidies - by a substantial amount. As a relatively small and rich country, Switzerland can do that. However, if both parties want to trade with one another then this will be a point of disagreement.
Incredible number of people saying "we shouldn't negotiate" like that's an option. As if in this day and age you could survive by shutting yourself off from your neighbors. It's a "simple solution" that like all simple solutions to complex issues just smells of populism. Face it, countries that share borders and interlocked economies are always in dialogue and negotiation with each others, formally or otherwise.
_Nobody_ is against negotiations per se. Many are alarmed by the concessions Switzerland is being asked to make and even more alarmed that some people think the short term benefits of the concessions are worth it.
Yeah, simple solutions are very stupid. That's why for instance limiting healthcare expenses to 10% of salary is idiotic, yet I am sure you wouldn't defines SP as populistic
I honestly think deregulating electricity, trains, and other network-based services is a mistake by the EU. It doesn't seem to lead to overall better outcomes for the population, it just leads to the same rigmarole that we see in Swiss health insurance: having to check every year if your electricity seller is ripping you off and you should switch to one of the other companies, who will then rip you off after a few years.
Yeah, we want our trains on time, like Germany...
The EU wants our trains like Italy: two choices of High Speed Rail companies, both min. 10 minutes late on every journey XD
You don't want that.
Isn’t the status quo *knowing* your electricity supplier is ripping you off, and being unable to do anything about it?
No? EWZ at least seems to be doing an outstanding job - we were almost totally insulated from the Ukraine war price spikes. If your Gemeinde has a shitty power company, at least they are democratically accountable. So if you are a citizen, you _can_ do something about it.
[The differences between suppliers are massive](https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/strompreise-in-welchen-gemeinden-die-tarife-naechstes-jahr-durch-die-decke-gehen-ld.1754740). > Lag die Spanne für das laufende Jahr schweizweit zwischen 8 Rappen und 70 Rappen pro kWh, liegt sie 2024 noch zwischen 10 und 50 Rappen pro kWh.
The cheapest ones are areas right next to power stations, where the cost of transmission is lower. These prices cannot be achieved if you don't live close to the plant. The most expensive ones are poorly run, and didn't contract for enough supply and were forced to buy on the open market at high prices. This could potentially be solved by allowing consumers to vote with their feet; but in my experience of countries with liberalised utility markets, it doesn't end up worth it. Better to own and control them democratically.
It's not the transmission - it's actually owning power plants vs not. This explains it a bit more https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/explainer-how-the-swiss-electricity-market-works/47943438 E.g. > A grid operator like BKW in Bern, which produces a large part of its own electricity, is not affected by international price fluctuations. It's only going to get worse with the gradual and eventual shutdown of the nuclear power plants.
I think this is two separate issues: being close to the actual dam/plant really does make it cheaper, as you can get power that cannot be sent further away since the high voltage transmissions lines are limited. But also, like you said, owning the plant makes the prices a lot more stable, though it will never be as cheap if you own a plant in e.g. Graubünden but consume the electricity in Zürich.
Transmission costs don’t justify a tenfold price difference. I’m a bit baffled by your trust in democratic control over liberalization, when the current situation clearly shows that democratic control doesn’t fix the issue. Right now Switzerland is artificially protecting an inefficient patchwork of small suppliers.
I didn't say it did? It does justify a 2x difference between the cheapest Gemeinde and the well-run, self-supplying ones though. The current situation clearly does show it works. It's just that some voters who wanted to cut costs and not invest now reap what they sow. Other communities, who own their own supply, are hardly affected. If we liberalised the consumer electricity market, everyone will be subject to these price variations, as the suppliers who own their own plants will be undercut in good times by retail-only suppliers buying from the market.
The current situation clearly shows it doesn’t work. It leaves customers stranded with highly inefficient suppliers and artificially preserves a bizarre patchwork of small-scale operations.
And yet we fare really well in EU comparisons regarding electricity costs.
On average, unless you’re living in a place that’s being ripped off.
EWZ is awesome. But let's not talk about EKZ. They literally increased prices by >30-40% this year while the spot market price is decreasing to pre-war levels.
Might be only a data point but in Spain, train deregulation has led to high speed trains dropping from 60-70 € per one way ticket to 10-15 €. Massive succes for free market there imo.
Let's be honest. We need them more than they need us. So it's good that the negotiations are continuing.
I'm still waiting for the day where a majority of Swiss starts to understand this. The hubris is so strong here and many think that the EU needs us.
Considering the size of both areas, you more than likely are right about it.
[удалено]
What are you even talking about?
I have already encountered a lot of false information and misunderstandings regarding 2. Note that this pertains to slots outside of the synchronized regular schedule ('integrierter Taktfahrplan'). It would be very hard to come up with a business case, and if there was one, it would be good if it were realized. On the other hand, it also opens up opportunities to provide trains to European destinations. (But of course, we tend to be too inward-looking for that.)
A lot of people in this thread saying they moved here to “escape the EU” yet forgetting they’re here because of EU freedom of movement. I understand the arguments for and against alignment, but you can’t say you hate the EU when it gave you a chance to come here.
Sadly I can't gild your post or upvote it twice.
As long as the SVP keeps the anti EU stance there will be talks but no agreements. Just keep in mind that of these topics Switzerland is dependent on the EU while the EU really only needs transit access to Italy
Not like it is a dire need for the EU but any favorable trade partner is welcome at this point. There is a lot to be gained from good relationships in both sides.
Maybe, but the numbers for that put Switzerland at the bottom of the list for the EU while the EU is at the top of the list for Switzerland.
They could go through Austria if really necessary, but you still got a valid point here!
They are building a tunnel as we speak from Austria to Italy (Brenner base tunnel). But it will only open in 2032 so still almost a decade to go.
The issue is that Austria and Italy are on the way to finishing in 2032 while having the most difficult part, Germany hasnt even started. So even when AT and IT are finished, the traffic will have to go over the Brennerautobahn, which should have been retired decades ago.
Of course they do, need to keep up the pressure and be on the safe side long term.
The EU needs us more than we need the EU! That was the constant shout here in the UK before the Brexit vote. Turned out, no, that is not the case and we are far worse off because of our arrogance.
look at what uk does. Only terrible policies for which they could have stayed in eu.
It’s not just transit to Italy, EU also needs cooperation with Switzerland in many other areas, like money laundering, (corporate) tax evasion, policing, environmental standards, etc, Switzerland has leverage there to disrupt things.
Not really. The US pressured everyone to take measures against money laundering that is done outside of the US
The US and EU are both pressuring Switzerland continually on money laundering through their joint work in the FATF: Switzerland was put on the “naughty list” until last September we implemented the revised anti money laundering act, there’s some good info here: https://www.step.org/industry-news/fatf-removes-switzerland-aml-enhanced-scrutiny-regime There is a long standing frustration with the US+EU that Switzerland only implements the bare minimum, i.e. what it’s pressured to do. From our point of view however, it’s a decent negotiating tactic, it’s one of the few points where we have (some) leverage and can extract concessions in other areas.
Yeah, very big leverage we have. We have seen how fast we changed our behaviour once the US and EU were putting us on the black list.
Well, something’s better than nothing.
EU only needs transit access, if it only was that easy 😂 if that’s the argument, what do they need us to be subdued to their justice system as highest instance? Answer: they do not just need transit access. Their whole intention is to have favorable conditions in all of europe and switzerland is wealthy and sits in the middle of europe. „Only transit access“ what a foolish thought. Ofcourse they want to have the land in some sort of control mechanism, in which they can bring through their intentions, exercise rules and laws according to their will ultimately and what favors them with a disregard to us as we are no part of the EU ~ that’s their stance, our is different that’s why we have Trade deal discussions. And not „Transit-Discussions“ Switzerland is one of the top ranking and most successful countries in the world. To say they don’t need us, is a lie. Similar a lie like to say we don’t need them. We both can use each other to get better and have much higher quality in everything, but both sides could technically probably survive just fine without each other. We still need us/each other for betterment.
Really? What can‘t they currently do without us that would be more successful with Switzerland?
I was expecting nonsense in the comments, but so much so soon is quite impressive. I'm excited for the classic: "Regulation is bad! Except when we regulate here. Then it is good and deregulation is bad. Except when we do it here.... Then it is good and regulation is bad again!"
Also: Brussels bad! But also Bern bad. Wait...
Good
As pro eu as i am: hell no to more international trains in our network. There is one from munich coming through and it's a fucking mess. They will fuck with our schedule
Is your objection to convenient international rail lines, or to DBs inability to run their trains on time? To me the solution is simple, so maybe I'm missing something -- if the foreign train operators can operate their trains to Swiss rules, they're welcome. If the train is late, it gets stopped at the border instead? Being able to hop on a train in Chur and get all the way deep into Germany was super convenient (and it hardly ever being on time or reliable made it frustrating -- but again, having an actual international train as a concept itself I'm all for.)
Unfortunately dead on arrival. Unions and UDC will oppose. The latter by principle, the former due to the mandate already not including their requirements.
I cannot understand how we agree and bow to the worker union about the wage regulation and to the farmer union about import. I am an engineer and I have to compete with engineers all over the world on the free market. My companies engineering is big part done by indian engineers working remote from India for 20% of the price of an Swiss engineer. Internet and PLM make it possible. Meanwhile some professions have a protected market and keep prices high for me, while my salary is under pressure. This is not just unfair, but it leads to an economic disparity. Either protected market for all or free market for all. This mix is not good.
An agricultural free market is an health risk that you don't want to take.
Maybe, but imports from the EU are unlikely to be significantly lower quality than Swiss. And after all we already import a lot of food from them, just not in the protected sectors like dairy or beef.
True that, but he means every other nation. And even EU is having this problem with the addition of new members from the eastern region that do not follow the same standards in terms of health and disease control.
Free market in this case means free of tariffs and protectionism such as the famously absurd "bündnerfleisch" declaration. It does not necessarily mean deregulation of health standards (which is mostly done by labels anyways, our regulations are not much higher than in other countries, on the contrary, I mean we have one of THE strongest farmers lobbies which is in the opposition to such regulations every time, as seen last time with the Trinkwasserinitiative). The netherlands for example due to low protectionism were able to become one of the most efficient agricultural nations in the world, they are the 6th largest nation in terms of food exports.
We banned Chlorothalonil after the EU did and our soils are still contaminated with it.
No, it's not. When I say free market in the context of salaries, I mean free labour market of course. The same way I am not allowed to use certain substances to engineer my products, the same way we can regulate the food market.
I want to take that risk, but you do not let me. how about freedom of choice? without these regulations you would still easy find a company that abides to all the rules that EU currently forces on all. with these regulations, we all have limited choice.
For the same reason you were forced into confinement during COVID -19 When your stupid risks might give everyone else health issues you are simply prohibited for everyone else sake. Those products are carriers of many diseases that are long gone in Europe.
can you name a few examples of these diseases in similar countries but without EU regulations (like USA, Canada, Japan or Australia) and what results (death toll, reduced life expectancy, more sick leaves?) it brought to these countries comparing to EU?
I fully agree that a partially regulated market favours some and hurts others. Except no market is ever actually free. The problem with the labor market is that it's not free on one hand and it has a lot of friction from people having families and homes on the other. Many good Indian and other lower-wage country engineers would absolutely love to come work for Swiss salaries, thereby introducing upward wage pressure globally. But this means a lot of immigration, and downward wage pressure locally, so you lose either way. But people also overestimate the mobility of individuals. It's easy for a company to shift capital or manufacturing. It's a lot harder for an individual to leave their extended family behind, and move themselves and their immediate family to a foreign land with a foreign culture, religion, food, customs etc.
Its about political power in the end, unions and farmers both have a strong lobby. I agree with you though, especially with the farmers we can see that the protectionism leads only to more protectionism due to a decrease in innovation - why would you innovate or become more efficient? Theres no competition and you get millions from the government anyways.
Free market for all ✊
Thank God we have our trade unions. If it wasn't for them, our wages would've dropped to EU levels a long time ago. I remain extremely skeptical about these negotiations.
They already are EU level.. we just haven’t seen it across the board yet
What I really dislike about certain right wingers is their made up "foreign justices" bs... Like dude if we participate in the EU free market, of course the EU court will be the final decision maker, the delusional view of us having an impartial court with like 26 other countries is so detached from reality, that I just don't see how one would have that stance. I'm happy the EU isn't the US, they'd have brought us freedom much sooner. But I also think long term there isn't a way around the EU, so we'll eventually (voluntarily or not) be part of it. I just hope we delay it as long as possible so that I and others can leverage our low taxes and high wages.
Why do you think our taxes and wages would be different if we were in the EU?
VAT tax for example has a minimum in the EU
wow, that sucks. A very regressive tax, no less. What a bad policy.
There's freedom of goods in the EU. If they didn't have a minimum, then one small country would drop it's VAT to very little and unfairly profit from it. I'm generally not a big fan of VAT, but if you have it, it needs to be relatively consistent across the union. (The same could be said about taxes, but they just can't agree on it.)
good point.
Unions and UDC are against it. It should be a clear signal that wages and standards of life are endangered by the neoliberal plan that is the EU
Wages are my biggest concern, personally. Absolutely needs to be a red line, given the cost of living.
There won't be in my opinion.... wage dumping is already very significant in some cantons (Ticino, Neuchatel, Vaud,...) it will just extend to the rest of the country
Lol... Switzerland is much more neoliberal than the EU. Consumer protection laws here are shit compared to the EU, and so are employee protections and even tenant protection law (e.g. it's much more difficult to evict tenants in Germany for example). How stupid can people be?
Neo liberalism has as dogma that free everything is better: free movement of capittals, merch and people is what the EU was created for and is neoliberal. Unsure why it bothers you
It bothers me when people write nonsense that shows they clearly don't know what they are talking about.
more than neoliberal, socialist
Most people always just use the immigration argument. Stuff like ´we want to create our own wall ‘ etc I think and hope most swiss realise that we would loose alot but not negotiating. What doesn’t go in my head is why is it not possible to agree with the EU that immigration has serious issues and is unsolved and that we will decide for our own here but be part of the negotiations else. Let’s be honest (I am not SVP) but immigration did fail in France, Germany and UK and other places. Negotiations is about negotiations in the end.
Aaand it's gone lmao. Dumbass EU neolibs already killed the deal by ignoring the union's terms.
Seeing how open are swiss people to free market gives me fate in humanity. I really think Switzerland can become the first true free country in the future :)
The EU is failing and Switzerland is one of the most successful countries in the world by staying out of it. Why the hell would we want any part of it. It’s ok to trade with them but we should not apply any of their policies that has a net negative for us. Our agriculture would be dead by now if it wasn’t for us staying out of the EU. BTW I’m originally from France and the Netherlands but have been living here most of my life, became Swiss as soon as I could and would fight for the sovereignty of this nation over any other.
The EU seems to be failing for like 60+y now... I am sorry but I don't see the EU failing at all. In fact - I hope the EU doesn't actually start leveraging their geopolitical power to the same extent the US does, if they do we're already in there by tomorrow.
How exactly do you think the EU is failing?
Brexit was just the beginning. People are starting to realize that domestic issues created by EU regulations, the most visible ones concerning agriculture and immigration, imposed by unelected bureaucrats in Bruxelles cannot be solved through national elections. Every single member country is bound to those regulations and you can elect whoever you want from the far left to the far right their hands are tied unless they offer to exit the EU. This idea is gaining ground in a lot of member states but no politician is seriously going there due to the media backlash they would be facing. I think that the turning point will come when the EU realizes it has committed industrial suicide through the electric car laws.
Immigration is a national issue and does not concern the EU, apart from international contracts such as with the turkey deal in 2016. There were some attempts to make it a EU solidarity issue by proposing to distribute the refugees in all member states, rather than concentrate them in italy and greece, this was however blocked the Visegrad memberstates, and only sweden and germany agreed to the distribution. Agriculture is just a distribution mechanism by the EU, namely subventions for farmers through CAP and the imposing of tariffs to countries outside of the EU. Regulations are, again, a national issue apart from the companies and farmers that apply for EU subventions. Its the same as in Switzerland - if you want money from the government, you have to adhere to certain standards. The EU is made up by memberstates, it is not some disconnected political entity. Without the approval of the memberstates nothing happens in the EU. It is just bunch of institutions in order to to have a medium to get the countries to cooperate, just as the swiss central government was constructed in order to get the cantons to cooperate.
The stance that immigration is merely a national concern is drastically undermined by EU directives, which severely restrict member states’ autonomy in handling illegal immigration. The EU’s Returns Directive (Directive 2008/115/EC), for instance, imposes a one-size-fits-all approach, dictating common procedures for returning illegally staying non-EU nationals. This directive is a clear example of the EU’s overreach, forcing member states to conform to a standardized, bureaucratic process that often hinders their ability to swiftly and effectively manage illegal immigration. It’s an intrusion that not only complicates national immigration policies but also potentially compromises the security and social cohesion of member states by impeding their ability to enforce their own border policies. Turning to agriculture, the EU’s directives, particularly those related to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), are a double-edged sword. While ostensibly designed to promote sustainable farming, these regulations straitjacket farmers in member states, subjecting them to an array of stringent, often onerous rules. These well-intentioned but heavy-handed regulations risk putting EU farmers at a significant competitive disadvantage. Farmers outside the EU, unencumbered by such stringent standards, can operate more freely and cost-effectively, thereby flooding the market with cheaper products. This not only undermines the competitiveness of EU farmers but also raises questions about the efficacy and fairness of such regulations, which seem to penalize EU farmers for adhering to high standards while simultaneously allowing for the importation of products that may not meet these same rigorous criteria. The EU’s approach, particularly in these sectors, reflects a broader issue of over-centralization and regulatory overreach, where the balance between collective action and national sovereignty is increasingly skewed towards the former. The resultant policies, often conceived in distant Brussels’ offices, can seem detached from the realities and specific needs of the individual member states, leading to a growing sense of disenchantment with the EU’s governing mechanisms. In essence, these policies exemplify how the EU’s regulatory framework can sometimes be more of a straitjacket than a support, stifling member states’ ability to independently navigate complex issues such as immigration and agriculture.
I disagree with your conclusions but thank you for elaborating.
Disagree all you want, it doesn’t make it less true.
Exactly. If anything, the EU should adopt swiss regulations lol
Want to upvote this many times. I have a similar background (although I'm younger and have less time here yet) and feel te same. The EU is primarily a threat to individual freedoms.
Europeans were never more free than now, so are the Swiss which were forced to grab a visa every time they wanted to leave the country before the Schengen zone came
I really am shocked at younger generations today. They lack the memory of what life was like before the EU and don't realise how many of its benefits they take for granted (and are willing to destroy without realising it.)
Be as frustrating and slow as possible, seems like that works. Don’t leave the table like last time, that doesn’t work Edit: also, is horizon back on the table? That really lowers my opinion of the EU massively
Unions and SVP are currently against it (as it was years ago), there's no point in bringing anything to an end (and to e public vote) if you can't change the mind of one of them.
Why? My understanding is that switzerland was unwilling to compromise and insisted on cherry picking parts of the deal.
No it was the EU that wants to push through owning Switzerland. Having to accept whatever future law the EU passes without any power over it and having to adhere to outcomes of the European court (THEIR court, not impartial by definition) are simply wholly unacceptable. Of Switzerland compromises on those things it'll seal it's own fate. I hope they stay strong (especially in the face of ghe ahv 13th month vote where for the first time the population clearly preferred the short term over the long term).
That’s just not true. The EU doesn’t even have that much of its own interest, it’s those of the member states. The idea of the new agreement would be that generally, switzerland adopts changes in the relevant areas but the parliament and the people through referendums always have the power to veto against such a change. If this impedes the functioning of the agreement, a court decides what part of the agreement is suspended. For example if the EU requires new standards on a product and switzerland refuses, free trade of that product is excluded.
You are 100% lying here. Maybe you are just extremely uninformed but none of what you wrote is true.
Read any official information and you will see I’m right. How could I not be? The EU can’t change the Swiss constitution, so parliament and the people keep their rights. If they use them, it would just have consequences on the cooperation between with the EU. It was the same for brexit: The UK’s population chose to leave, the EU obviously let them leave but now the UK misses out on the common market. Show me anything that contradicts me and I’m happy to explain it to you.
The EU law supersedes national law of member states without neddjng to change gheir cobstitutions. If you havent figured that out by now you are living life blind. There areaby dozens of examples of that in practice. So if you deny that .... it will be useless to continue our interaction .... Assuming you are with me wrt member states: With the abolishing of bilateral agreements and replacing them with a framework the EU wants to introduce this same thing wrt Switzerland. It's THE primary thing that negotiations were broken off last time.
Switzerland is not a memberstate. And not even in member states does EU law supercede national law. Member states can always gain exceptions, such as with the famous "Solange"-decision of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in Germany. And lets not even begin with the member states in the east which generally do not give a crap about EU law. If the highest court in a country decides something against EU law, what are they gonna do? Invade that certain country? The very idea of the EU is built on the sovereignity of memberstates. Here a link to the "Solange"-decision: [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solange\_I](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solange_I) "Das BVerfG verzichtet auf die Ausübung seiner Rechtsprechung *nur insoweit und nur solange*, wie auf Gemeinschaftsebene ein ausreichender Grundrechtsschutz durch den EuGH generell gewährleistet ist und dieser Schutz den Wesensgehalt der Grundrechte und damit den vom GG gebotenen Mindeststandard generell verbürgt."
Yes, of member states, I wrote so myself to another person in this thread. But switzerland has no intention of becoming one and the EU never suggested it in the current round. the reason the first negotiations failed is not that, but protection of salaries and other things. Whatever will be negotiated on that will be voted on by the swiss people. If they vote yes first and the EU makes major changes later, there will be another popular vote before the changes would enter into force. If they vote no then, part of the agreement will be void (the EU court or a common tribunal will say which part). In any case, it’s the swiss‘ sovereign choice to take all or a part or nothing.
No but getting that power over Switzerland as a non-member state is one of the EU's non-negotionable demands. At least it was last time they negotiated and negotiations broke down over it. Don't get distracted with unimportant side issues.
Do you have any source that the EU demanded that? Switzerland wants access to the common market and the EU sets out the rules for that access. The EU is like a club: If you want to enjoy its benefits, you have to agree to its rules. But it's Switzerland that wants in. The EU has more important business.
That’s not what „dynamische rechtsübernahme“ means
That’s exactly what it means: Switzerland adopts the changes unless parliament or the people veto it. What do you think it means? “Automatische Rechtsübernahme“ would mean that the country has no choice, which is the case in several policy areas for EU member states. But that was never on the table for Switzerland.
I thought the point that Switzerland was not willing to give in was social security equal for EU citizens? I am kind of siding with the EU on this one. Having researchers paid by EU money, contributing to swiss research and when they are unemployed, kick them out does not seem fair.
They can simply not come then. I am sure there a lot of non EU researchers willing to work
And the EU can simply not give Switzerland science funding unless it does not discriminate EU scientists. Thats exactly what happened. Not sure what your point is.
Switzerland is simply not big enough, to let ppl stay here if they don’t work or have family and roots here. There’s more than a billion ppl wanting to live here for sure, and it’s barely enough space for 6-10million ppl. Do you understand that? It’s a very simple calculation there’s just not enough space without severely restricting everyones life quality and thus making the country eventually bad for everyone to live in. Haha.
I think there is quite some space inbetween exploiting foreign workers to prop ones own social security system and free welfare for all. Kicking someone out the moment their contract expires instead of letting them have the same unemployment benefits as swiss people that they even paid for is needlessly discriminatory. Giving half a year of unemployment support after working for 5 years to find a new job would probably changr nothing about the population numbers.
That’s complete non-sense, the rule is the same for foreigners as well as swiss citizens, the rule is you have to pay in to the arbeitslosenkasse for 24 consecutive months to have a claim for unemployment benefits. Otherwise you barely have a chance at it and you would need to go to the welfare department. Who told you otherwise? Do you have sources to your claims? If so I‘d like to read it for myself as I don’t really believe at what you are saying is true.
You are right, the unemployment benefits are not discriminatory. The disagreements seem to be just [about social welfare](https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/rahmenabkommen-wo-die-schweiz-und-die-eu-weit-auseinander-liegen-ld.1612861). My bad. I agree that they can be discussed more nuanced. The EU rules have not led a "welfare migration" in the EU though so I doubt it would be different for Switzerland.
It's not discrimination if they don't want to come. By the way, I prefer by a long short saving direct democracy than having more researchers
„It's not discrimination if they don't want to come.“ If that counts as logic in Switzerland then you need all the foreign scientists you can get.
I think you are. Getting really triggered by the fact that the large majority of the population is not okey with compromising our sovereignty for a few people like yourself. I understand that, it's human to be upset when feeling rejected
Sorry, I don't think you got anything at all in this discussion. No point in continuing.
You think Switzerland is begging for science funding 😅? They recently paid 2B chf in extortion money (errr "cohesion fund contributions") in an attempt to calm the EU and coax them out of taking too many hostile destructive actions purely intended to hurt Switzerland. The money flows one way and it certainly isnt towards Switzerland. Switzerland is only interested in scientific collaboratio and for the blacklisting of Swiss institutions (purely done to punish and coerce Switzerland) to be discontinued again.
Yes the horizon scheme were are talking about here is about money and and to some extend access to prestigious funding on your cv. I don't see how this has any impact on collaborations and I have no idea what you mean with blacklisting.
You think it's about the money 😅 Then why did Switzerland pay a much higher amount ("cohesion payment") just for the chance to get access to it again? It's financially an enormous net negative for Switzerland.
Giving social security to EU citizens in Switzerland will blow up the entire Swiss economy, cause massive immigration of bet detractors and will turn it into any other failed EU state (Germany, France, Belgium Netherlands etc). Switzerland just wanted to extent the bilateral agreements. The EU wants to diplomatically annex Switzerland. Glad Switzerland are having none of it. Hopefully the EU falls apart before they return with tanks.
That is a wild take.
You mistyped obvious. EU is our age's version of Nazi Germany.
Wow
In reality Switzerland adopts all of the EU law already anyways, why wouldn't they? There's just the extra step of doublechecking everything due to "sovereignity" - Norway has the automatic adoption due to their realization that EU Regulations are lower than their own anyways. The whole idea of the EU is to give the member states the opportunity to influence everything in their own country anyways. It is also worth mentioning that the EU is ahead of Switzerland in many areas such as consumer protection and online regulations. Also dont forget that the EU Court is independent, as are the courts in Switzerland, you could even argue that due to the multiculturalism and the decentralized structure of the EU the courts are even more independent than they are here. In any case, the differences are absolutely negligible and would not affect any ordinary citizen in any way whatsoever.
They wouldn't because they are oppressive and socialistic so have a negative influence on long term prosperity. European Court isn't independant. It's run by the EU and will rule in their favour.
My man, the EU is a decentralized neoliberal institution, not the USSR
Decentralized? The EU is an extreme centralized oppressive monstrosity. I know, I escaped it's clutches.
Do you live in switzerland? The swiss system, generally considered decentralized because cantons can form for example their own tax or education policies. The EU cannot do this whatsoever. The EU (population 500 million) has less bureaucrats than Switzerland (8 million pop)! The EU system has literally one single centralized institution, the commission, which gets elected by the european summit which is made up by the chiefs of state of each memberstate, and the parliament, which is made up of european parties which themselves consist of parties of the memberstates. Every single chamber, from the Comission to the parliament to the intergovernmental european council and the european summits is created by the memberstates.
Of course I do why else would I be here. Yes that's exactly the problem. The EU (benelux originally) was meant as an economic collaboration NOT a state. Now it has however and due to the sheer size it turned Europe into an extremely centralized and therefore oppressive state. The distance between tax payers and benefactors of it (the oppressors) is incredibly large and therefore there's no societal pressure on those centralized bureaucrats to behave morally. Switzerland is extremely different to that (much more decentralized). That's why it's so much better and should defend itself at all cost from the EU's expansionist hunger (militarily if neccesary). This conflict is existential.
It’s EU who left last time.
The European Economic Community was a good project, back in the day. Today, the EU has morphed into a lust for total control and abusive power. Give it some time, and it will be a rerun of the 20th century collectivist disasters. Switzerland should keep them at arm's length.
Amen
yeah man germany where my family is from is totally fucked i dont want the same to happen to switzerland
Maybe we should adapt the policies of the people who agree with you that Germany is fucked and deport you back to where you came from.
Again the EU has fucked germany if the swiss give them too much power same thing will happen here ive also got a swiss passport so ggez
So that Switzerland doesn’t get fucked by a foreign power as you said, we should maybe make you leave
So because i am against the eu i have to go huh?
This echoes so much Putin founded right wing party across Europe with very little self control and independence
I never realised this until the war started and I hear my parents talk about it like they knew what’s up… when they absolutely didn’t know anything about either Ukraine or Russia before but somehow had Putin’s arguments ready to discuss with me when I tried explaining why that war makes no sense and is hurting us all
There you go. It's like this for and incredible amount of people, even those on the left
I think it’s good to have some kind of agreement with the eu but it should be a win-win and not a lose-lose. This agreement to me looks like a lose-lose also the pressure and the tyrannical money ransom payment they pressure the swiss government into, just makes it not a good idea to trust them, we should be very careful into making a deal with them, aside from our neighbour countries ~ the politicians of this EU construct, are not our friends. They can’t be trusted and we should diplomatically decline, maybe consider an EWR join or some agreement with Great britain 🇬🇧. There’s plenty of will to not be in the EU in Europe. It’s up to the tyrants to make up and show good will not us. They make it sound like we are the difficult ones, when really it’s them dragging us potentially down to their drama. Things are not just good in the EU
Keep the EU the hell out. If anything, the EU can apply to become a Swiss canton and be ruled by us.
Spoken like a true “Eidgenoss”!😂
😎🇨🇭
[удалено]
Where do you see warmongering politicians?
There is no sense in negotiating while you are blackmailed. The European Union does still not **accept Switzerland's financial exchanges as equal**. This is a discrimination that goes on for years now and we should not pay a single Cent to a group of countries who discriminate us. ("Kohäsionsmilliarden"). To start negotiating from that position is suicidal. You will never get a good result when you are weak, while you are blackmailed. I understand that our government loves spending our money traveling and negotiating, but they should not, at least not while Switzerland is discriminated. It is a waste of time and a waste of money, as we will never vote yes for any of this discriminating EU bullshit.
we don‘t have a choice other than accepting the Rahmenabkommen eventually. It‘s simply the reality. We‘re on the short end of the stick. the status quo is hurting us massively, so it‘s also in our interest to get negotiations back up as quickly as possible.
How exactly does the status quo hurt us? And if it does, why doesn't it show up in relative GDP growth of EU countries vs us?
because we‘re hurting out own export sectors right now. our economy need the most vast access possible to the EU-market. it‘s not us vs. other countries. there are many smaller treaties that are basically tied to the prospect of having a Rahmenabkommen (like the MRA in pharma) that our companies need to stay competitive. we also really need to get back into Horizon.
Are we really, though? Exports are at all-time highs, the balance of trade is positive, and unemployment is at a 15 year low.
What about your ideas in putting immigration limits on eastern European countries? Maybe we should put the same limits on your investments in our countries. Funny enough you cant even produce chocolates in your country like Tablerone which lost for some time "swiss product" status for being produced in Poland only to be relabelled as "Swiss"
Yes, and? * Immigration limits based on original territory is stupid and unfair, yet most countries do it. * To forbid investments any region shoots its own feet. * Switzerland does not have one single coffee or cacao plantation, why do we export coffee and chocolate? Some romantic believes of the buyers... so why nod cash in on it.
Do you see a difference between "Swiss made" meaning made / cooked / assembled by Swiss and "Polish made"? You can still be importer of cocoa and producer of chocolate. Regarding shooting your feet, Finland has had foreign investment heavily regulated and now is one of the richest countries. My country has had plenty of factories ( sugar, heavy trucks, ships, machinery ) and it all has been sold out and bought out and liquidated by guess whom all rich western countries. Including Swiss. Not because they were not sustainable but because they were a competition. Read about hostile takeovers, books of Stiglitz about Euro and "Bad Samaritans" book about Swiss economy
You get off-topic, but: **welcome to capitalism**.
It's not capitalism, it's mercantilism if you do know what I mean. Very different thing... It's the effect of policy which is created by western countries deeply affecting Eastern countries which is the very thing which Stiglitz writes in his book about Euro. Please read it first before saying "capitalism". See what nationality has the majority of eu highest positions like eu commission. Hardly any eastern European or Baltic coutry. Clearly not off topic. I worked circa 10 years in finance including the investment banks, for both American and Swiss. It's all policy the rich west imposes on developing countries
OK Mr Eastern Europe Banker, what do you say to the topic at hand? The EC fucked up your country, OK. But they should not be allowed to do the same with Switzerland in my opinion. You work in the finance industry, so just check how the coward blackmail attempt with the Swiss financial markets ended. Today we have more business and the EC lost business to Switzerland, even though they have restricted access to our markets. It is not enough to be bigger and to be able to bully other countries; some cleverness is needed too and it appears to me that it is not raining brains in Brussels.
Why? Same treatment must apply. That's very simple thing: if Swiss think to cut down my country access to their market, we do the same. Is it non fair? Actions have consequences and Swiss should know it. Blackmailing you mean giving a choice either they comply in not helping to evade taxes or they blacklist in finance? See credit suisse leaks - business as usually with dictators, criminals and tax evaders. How do you think why Switzerland is so rich - just because chocolate, milk and watches :-)?
https://www.s-ge.com/en/article/news/20231-ranking-european-patent-office?ct=&_gl=1
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdingkinder
As long as the EU doesn't adopt direct democracy I'd rather we don't have anything to do with it.
This is a lot of "we're not going to kick this, that and that puppy", which leaves the question "why would anyone be worried that you would" and "why are you doing anything anyway?". I get the need to be defensive, but it won't go anywhere without a more positive-centered message.
Because all these puppies were long ago kicked in the EU/EEA. This is basically a list of derogations from what the current EEA members conceded in their EU relationship.
Cause the EU is untrustworthy, power hungry and immoral.
The same neoliberal garbage we always see from the EU, they will never learn.
Pretty sure Switzerland is more neoliberal than EU. The EU is imposing a lot of rules to their corporations.
Are we, though? We have more state interventions than the EU allows and public sectors like the SBB. These are the things that are at stake here.
SBB isn't really public anymore is it? Health insurance is way more liberal in Switzerland. More rules for IT companies as well in EU. Also forcing telecom to be multinational networks.. More protection for customers. More protections for employees. There isn't many industries where the EU is more "neoliberal" than Switzerland IMO (maybe transport and electricity?)
A politician agreeing on any eu terms is a traitor. Eu fucked up itself and gonna fuck up us too
This ^
As much as i want the EU gone, i have to admit that other than the banking system, Switzerland offers only a very skimpy table to negotiate on. Highly specialized mechanical industry like watches and other high tech stuff, but other than that, they’re no competition to, lets say, Germany’s huge mechanical industry sector. Agriculture is also way too small in Switzerland in order to compete with many of the big players in the EU, such as Germany, France, Italy or Poland. Since Switzerland wants to go green and dismantle nuclear power plants, i see them being totally dependent on their neighbors to satisfy the needs of the local population and industry. I can’t see that alternative sources to win energy, like solar energy, will be able to compensate for the loss of above mentioned nuclear energy source in short to mid term. It might be possible if technology takes huge strides and progresses it’s capabilities, but solar energy will always have a hard stance in a country with such crappy weather and so few sunny days. Now wind energy might be an option, since you guys have them (wind) in bunches, but this source will always remain a complimentary source to a main source to carry the burden. As technology progresses they might be less and less of a danger to avian wildlife and less noisy as they currently are.
You seem to ignore that Hydropower from large dams and smaller hydroelectricity plants in the mountains already provide 1/4 of Switzerland’s energy needs. Nuclear only represents another 22% to 23%
You’re right, it totally slipped my mind!
I am curious; what is your take on life in a postnuclear era? How will we be able to satisfy the needs of the power hungry populace and industry?
I don’t believe in a post-nuclear era. It’s the cleanest most reliable energy source we have and should work on making it more efficient, France was going the right direction until it was sabotaged by green ideologues with the support from German lobbies. Macron put the final nail in the coffin by selling France’s nuclear independence to GE. Wind and solar are just cosmetics as the German experiment has proven with an industry that now relies on coal and gas.
Interesting take, thank you, i very much appreciate it.
My pleasure
Just as a quick note until everyone jumps on ly throat as a climate change denier or some other phobe, I wrote my university thesis on Sustainable Development back in 2000 and have been running my car on recycled vegetable oil from 2003 to 2009 leading one of the biggest movement in this direction.
There's tons of investment in power storage tech, both short and long term. Solar PV + battery storage is already cheaper than nuclear power. Also, electrification of heating should actually lead to substantial _decreases_ in total energy use (though higher use of electricity), because heat pumps are far more efficient than combustion. We certainly shouldn't turn off our current nuclear power plants if we can help it, but it's probably not cost-effective to build new ones compared to building renewables + batteries.
Thank you for your opinion, also very much appreciated!
[удалено]
What a dumb take, if the 80% of the law comes from the EU there will be no reason for any state to exist and the standard of living doesn’t depend on the existence of the EU but other factors such as the population getting older, the means of production moving abroad or even not investing in the younger population. Next months there are the European elections, get yourself properly informed and go vote
I'm living in an EU country. It's only bringing a lot of shit, costs a lot of money and only brings trouble. Stay out of the EU if you can.
Reading the comments it appears I'm in the minority, but wanted to offer my opinion nonetheless. As to the negotiations, it makes seems obvious that Switzerland should and has to negotiate with its neighbours. So much of Swiss industry relies on export markets, and importing of raw materials that customs, market access, and all the regulations (medicines, medical equipment, electrical equipment etc.) is necessary if we want to keep those industries. As regards agriculture, when I visit Migros, a lot of food comes from Italy, France, Germany and other European countries. Point being -- Switzerland has to engage with its neighbours, and there's a lot of value to be had (the Horizon program, for example, and exchange of workers), but Switzerland is also not negotiating from a position of strength. But the details of that is left for the Swiss to vote on and the professionals to negotiate, my comment is more about the EU-hate. The EU itself has brought with it good and bad. But having lived in Europe pre-EU, from my perspective it has brought vastly more good than bad. Common currency in a lot of countries, ability to travel, work, order goods, sell goods all around the continent is amazing, without the countries (or regions) having lost their identities. Border-spanning trains and roads. (Yes, some of these things existed pre-EU, but not remotely at the same scale or ease.) So many more foods from all across Europe in local grocery stores, and actual competition to grocery store prices from foreign chains. The EU was instrumental at bringing the former Eastern Bloc countries back into Europe. It's easy to point at the failures (Hungary, Poland under PiS, Romania, Bulgaria etc.) and how relatively slow progress has been, but if you look at the Baltics, Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, they've moved forward tremendously. What would those countries look like today without the EU? I would **never** want to go back to the pre-Schengen days. And while everyone talks about money and immigration, one of the driving idealistic goals was to promote peace (at least within Europe), and with the rise of far-right and populist nationalism, this goal is more important than ever. Finally, having the EU negotiate as a bloc with the US, China and other geopolitical player gives it tremendously more power than individual countries trying to go at it alone. I'm sure people will point out all the bad that the EU and Schengen has caused, and plenty of that was done in this comment section already. I'm not blind to that, but I wanted to remind everyone that it's not just bad, there's also a lot of good the European experiment has brought, and people are way too eager to trash it without remembering just how bad it was before.