|
|
ONLINE FEATURES
Book Reviews
BW Video
Columnists
Interactive Gallery
Newsletters
Past Covers
Philanthropy
Podcasts
Special Reports
BLOGS
Auto Beat
Bangalore Tigers
Blogspotting
Brand New Day
Byte of the Apple
Economics Unbound
Eye on Asia
Fine On Media
Green Biz
Hot Property
Investing Insights
Management IQ
NEXT: Innovation
NussbaumOnDesign
Tech Beat
Working Parents
TECHNOLOGY
J.D. Power Ratings
Product Reviews
Tech Stats
Wildstrom: Tech Maven
AUTOS
Home Page
Auto Reviews
Classic Cars
Car Care & Safety
Hybrids
INNOVATION
& DESIGN Home Page Architecture Brand Equity Auto Design Game Room SMALLBIZ Smart Answers Success Stories Today's Tip INVESTING Investing: Europe Annual Reports BW 50 S&P Picks & Pans Stock Screeners Free S&P Stock Report SCOREBOARDS Hot Growth 100 Mutual Funds Info Tech 100 S&P 500 B-SCHOOLS Undergrad Programs MBA Blogs MBA Profiles MBA Rankings Who's Hiring Grads | |
JULY 28, 2003
Create an EU for People, Not Politicians As a full-blooded European (Austro-Hungarian origin, British nationality, resident of France), I feel entitled to a few comments about John Rossant's essay, "How to build a better EU constitution" (European Business, June 30) and "The Stars of Europe" (European Edition Cover Story, July 7). Rossant's essay should have been titled, "How to build an EU constitution" -- the word "better" is hardly justified because there was no European constitution that could have been improved upon. But the attempt to draft a one-size-fits-all constitution is kicking up much dust and creating much controversy. Should the EU be a federalist United States of Europe? Or should it simply be a group of sovereign European member states cooperating closely in certain fields but acting on their own in other areas? Should there be an elected European President, an appointed European Foreign Minister, etc.? Will France, Germany, and Britain give up their permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council in favor of an EU representative? Not in your wildest dreams! Will any institutionalized European Union be a democratic forum for all of its 15 existing and 25 future member states? Will it be governed by egalité (hardly), liberté (hopefully -- but at a price in lost sovereignty), and fraternité (that's certainly stretching it unless fraternité is limited to France and Germany)? And where will it all end? The European Union needs to formulate a geographical mission statement. Three of your 25 "Stars of Europe" are from Russia. The last time I looked, Russia was not a member of the EU. Nor is Turkey, where another of your stars is located. The greatest risk for the European Union is the one-size-fits-all concept. The EU's future depends on the extent to which it moves from a plaything of politically correct politicians to a union of the people. European parliamentary elections will be held in 2004. I hope large numbers of European citizens will use their voting rights! This is not a time for Euro-fatigue and Euro-apathy. For example, how many people know that every EU citizen can vote even if they reside in another EU country? I am all for a strong, democratic, and equitable European Union of sovereign member states -- as long as we keep our feet firmly on the ground and motivate the ordinary people of Europe who, so far, have been totally ignored in the process. Karl H. Pagac Villeneuve-Loubet, France The Euro Zone Is a Straitjacket In the letter "What the euro zone does -- and doesn't -- have going for it" (Readers Report, July 7) regarding "Britain is smart to hold off on the euro" (Editorials, June 16), the writer applauds the Continent's expensive public services. But for how long? The euro zone's growth is practically nil, and unemployment is some 10%, with no end in sight. And they can do little about it! Why? Incredibly, they have passed monetary control in perpetuity to unelected, unaccountable officials in the European Union who dictate the interest rate to each country and what can be borrowed and spent. Thus far, it's a very painful experiment. Hence, a deflationary euro zone. We've fought too many wars to follow that crazy path. Robyn D.M. Grant Bramley, England   South Korea Is Far beyond "Poverty and Backwardness" In your June 30 Readers Report, you published a letter under the headline "Why privatizing education in South Korea is a bad idea" (re "South Korea: How to keep the miracle going," Economic Viewpoint, June 9). The letter writer states that South Korea "is barely emerging from poverty and backwardness." This is the most outdated and irresponsible statement I have heard in the past 10 years. In terms of gross national income in 2001, Korea is the 13th-largest in the world and has per capita gross domestic product of more than $10,000. The country has the highest Internet usage rate and one of the highest literacy rates in the world. Last year, it successfully hosted the World Cup with its neighbor, Japan. This description of Korea calls for an apology to the people of Korea. Yu-Kyung Kim Senior Vice-President, Research and International Korea Stock Exchange Seoul Iraq Needs Help, but from Where? The outstanding article, "What Iraq needs most is pro-market reforms" (Economic Viewpoint, June 30), gives me relief. Gary S. Becker demonstrates a realistic understanding of the culture, religion, history, and economy of the Middle East. If I have to add anything, I would say that the Middle East is living in the Middle Ages and needs time and effort to catch up with the developed world. The Middle East has been depressed for centuries. It is the responsibility of Europe and the U.S. to help. In the Middle East, we do not need weapons. We need schools, hospitals, industry, etc. Adel-Mostafa Alexandria, Egypt I have read with interest the Economic Viewpoint from Gary Becker on Iraq. Even a free-market economist cannot neglect the legitimacy problem. Have the coalition forces the legitimacy to apply pro-market reforms in Iraq? I don't think so. Besides, the Iraqi economy, because of oil, is fully a rent-seeking economy. And we know that classical privatization policies just don't work in this case. Thierry Coville Créteil, France Who Invented TV? More Detail for the Debate Britain's EMI was indeed a pioneer in electronic TV, but Philo T. Farnsworth invented the technology ("Television's history -- or myth?" Readers Report, July 21 re "Summer reading, heavy to light," Books, June 30). Farnsworth's first demonstration of TV scanning, transmission, and reception happened on Sept. 7, 1927, as detailed in his lab notebooks. The U.S. patents on this system were issued to Farnsworth in 1930. As detailed in my book, The Last Lone Inventor, RCA later based aspects of its TV system on Farnsworth's designs. As a corporation, Britain's EMI didn't come into existence until 1931. That year, EMI licensed TV technology from RCA. Isaac Schoenberg's team at EMI first began experiments with electronic scanning in 1932. Your reader is correct that the BBC's first regularly scheduled TV broadcasts in 1937 beat RCA's NBC network by more than two years. Evan I. Schwartz Brookline, Mass.
| | |
 Copyright BWStory.copyright, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of Use | Privacy Policy |
Printer-Friendly Version
