Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

While I think that the EU should not (and if they try they won't be able to) try and become a "super country" and the bureaucracy can be excessive (but some of it is needed) it's a good idea in principle

> I prefer countries to leave and establish new bilateral treaties along the same lines

So that they have all the obligations of a member but no say on the discussions?




> So that they have all the obligations of a member but no say on the discussions?

Not sure what you mean. Bilateral treats that are single purpose have many advantages over tying everything into a centralized superstructure.

It would be far better if people could vote on these individually and accept or reject them as needed. This is hardly possible with the current EU.


Bilateral treaties between n countries would mean a total of n*(n-1)/2 deals

If you have more than 3 countries, it's useful to have a common set of rules instead of just bilateralizing all deals

(Which doesn't mean all rules really need to be centralized, not all EU countries adopt the Euro, for example

However, when you sign a BT with the EU, your power on the decisions is diminished, but you still have to pay to be an "associated member" (that's what I meant above)




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: