EU sets rules for USA : LUSENET : Freedom! self reliance : One Thread

There was a good article in todays Wall Street Journal on how the EU is increasingly governing everything here in America. From farming to food to software to our cars we drive. The story tells about a Indiana farmer who hasn't planted insect-resistant corn for the past four years because of regulations written by EU bureaucrats 4,000 miles away in Brussels. Also the Illinois Dept. of AG. worried about trade relations with Europe,have asked their farmers not to plant Monsanto corn because they are not approved by the EU. Because of the EU, Microsoft has had to modified contracts with software makers and Internet providers. Because of the EU, McDonalds has stopped serving soft-plastic toys with its happy meals. Carrier Air conditioning company has to redesign their units to comply with EU recycling laws. And last year if any of you remember,it was because of EU regulators that General Electric (A American Company)could not acquire Honeywell (A American company)although it was approved by US officals. GE now states that eventually 99% of all new regulations will come from the EU.

The article gos on about more stuff and its too bad its not available on-line unless you have a on-line subscribtion to WSJ.

We're losing our country's sovereignty big time and we don't have enough fight in us to stop it.

-- TomK(mich) (, April 23, 2002


This is a slippery slope, as they say, that will only be a detriment to our society. People who say that the New World Order is something out of the x-files have to wake up and smell the coffee. Not only are we losing freedom, we will be going down the tubes financially, morally, and spiritually.

Talk to you later.

-- Bob in WI (, April 23, 2002.

Most of what you mentioned, Tom, I think applies only to companies that do business overseas (or ship overseas), if you don't, they don't apply so much, if at all.

-- GT (, April 23, 2002.

It all comes down to corporations taking over the farming. I bet Joel can expound upon that to a fair degree. Basically the different corporations dictate nearly every aspect to the producer and if hey are held under the EU guidelines, then that's all she wrote for the producer. The UN agrees that food is a viable weapon.

-- Doreen (, April 23, 2002.

The "EU" sure picked the right acronym. They STINK with what they're doing to the world.

-- Jay Blair in N. AL (, April 23, 2002.

I just love it! At last the world has another trade bully to even things up a bit.

-- john hill (, April 24, 2002.

I'll start with a few question for John. What is the current price of a bushel of corn in New Zealand ? What is the current price of diesel fuel (per liter) ? What is the current wage of the average man ( what we call "minimum wage" ) ? If the answers aren't self fullfilling than I'll write my Thesis.

-- Joel Rosen (, April 24, 2002.

I don't want to get into a debate about the pros and cons of the EU, but do need to make one observation...U.S. manufacturers have always had to make modifications to their products in order to market overseas. My husband sold security equipment to foreign markets during the 80's and each individual market had it's own demands, to which the makers had to comply. This is nothing new, just a larger body doing the demanding. And as for genetically modified corn and other plant products, at least they had the nerve to stand up to Monsanto.

-- melina b. (, April 24, 2002.

GT,The problem the companys are running into is they can not do things both ways any more, have one set of standards for USA and another set for Europe,so it has come down to the companys are having to follow the standards that the EU sets and not what US sets. A example is the bumper rule set up by EU, in the article,Robert Lange from GM says they have to retool their Corvette factory in KY,because the cost of designing and specials parts for Europe is to costly so american made cars are being design to EU standards and not US.

melina, you are right about this is just a bigger group doing the demanding,but this bigger group is poised to demand the world do what they want or else. And its not just us but Britan,Ireland and several others are not liking it either. They are saying that the EU is now impinging on their national sovereignty. In Britan especially the EU has said they can't use imperial measurements anymore and must use the metric system. That ban on IM by the EU is also in the making for the USA depending on how the suit gos down that 4 British grocers have started against the EU.

Basically what it comes down to is, at some point in the future we as Americans will soon be under the control of a foreign enterprise who will be making all our rules and setting our standard of living.

-- TomK(mich) (, April 24, 2002.


Diesel fuel is mostly imported so we pay the world price for that plus whatever is added in taxes, if you are paying less than world prices it is being subsidised by someone.

Dollar comparisons are only part of the story, for example the per capita income of NZ is about 60% of the USA (depending on who you take the figures from). However we own a three bedroom modern house (which I had built), fully carpeted (wool carpets of course). Filled concrete block construction on one floor, solid timber construction on the upper floor. Three garages, office space, small workshop, 700sq metres of lawn and garden space plus an extensive ocean view and we are 4 minutes from the city centre. For an average working man to buy this house would cost him about 5 years wages. So how does that compare?

A US urban housewife cant buy meat or grain from NZ (or Australia) at the price we would like to sell it because such things are subject to US quotas and tariffs. When the city or ghetto mother does buy imported meat or grain products she must pay extra to support inefficient US agricultural producers.

If I had the capital to set up a factory making some article I would have to compete with US imports. If my government introduced tariffs to protect me the US representatives would scream bloody murder and increase the tariffs on our meat, wool and grain etc.

Our only steel mill has just had a 40% cut in production because of introducted 'protection' for US steel producers.

When the US manages to upset so many people that some resort to acts like the WTC attacks the first thing your government does is contact the whole world shouting that we are either 'with him or against him', the implied threat is not military rather it is a threat to trade.

No doubt your media tells you that all is well in Afghanistan, that a great victory has been won, I doubt they even mention the troops from EU countries, Canada, Australia and NZ. They certainly don't tell you those troops are there because of threats made to those countries' trade with the US.

Like I said, two bullies are better than one!

-- john hill (, April 24, 2002.

TomK, it all goes back to no one is forcing them to sell products or do business in Europe. They want to make money overseas, they should expect different rules. We would expect other countries to follow our rules when here, don't we? The US has rules and regs that other countries find onerous, but they either put up with it or choose not to do business here.

-- GT (, April 24, 2002.

The problem isn't different counttries having different standards of production, it is this complete lie of "free trade' which is really just a ploy to make people think they can trade more with less restrictions therefore making more money. It would more truthfully be called "global governance making corportaions the owners of all and bullocks to the rest of you". Just think on it for a few seconds. The US has only 3% of it's population that is in farming and most of those are now under the thumb of the likes of Monsanto.

Sorry I haven't got much time to expand on my thoughts here-but two bullies are not better than one. It's all about complete control from both sides.

-- Doreen (, April 24, 2002.

I take - (GT,john hill and melina)- are in agreement that having a one central body that would set rules and standards for the world is ok?

For my part as to a one world ruling body,I can only repeat what Thomas Jefferson said,

(Peace,commerce and honest friendship with all nations,entangling alliances with none.)

(It should be our endeavor to cultivate the peace and friendship of every nation...Our interest will be to throw open the doors of commerce,and to knock off all its shackles,giving perfect freedom to all persons for the vent of whatever they may choose to bring into our ports,and asking the same in theirs.)

But,theres only one problem with his advice and that is Human Greed will ruin it everytime!

Do any of you see somewhere in the future, a one block nation that would be made up of Mexico,USA and Canada?

-- TomK(mich) (, April 24, 2002.

Not at all, TomK, I think each country should set its own rules. I do not agree with the GE/Honeywell decision, but they should sue over it, or get out of those other countries if they don't like it. As to the food, if they have a drought or other disaster over there, I'm sure they won't be worrying over whether it is Monsanto corn or not. And to automatically condemn anything that comes out of the EU as bad, without analyzing it, is wrong.

John Hill made a good point--every time "they" do something, "we" do something--and vice versa. What about those who promote boycotting because they don't like this or that work practice in some country? Is that right or wrong? What about all the price supports in this country? I'd like to see the tobacco subsidies stopped, myself.

-- GT (, April 24, 2002.

Doreen, two bullies are better than one because it gives the other parties a choice of which to deal with. None would be better.

TomK, if there is going to be one body to control world trade I want it to be one than I have at least some representation in, not the government of the US, which apparently even many americans feel they are not represented in.

-- john hill (, April 24, 2002.

Please don't put words in my mouth! I didn't say I thought it was ok, just that individual nations have been dictating to us for many years. It's always been one of the costs of international trade.

-- melina b. (, April 24, 2002.

To be a corn farmer in the USA you must produce between 80 to 160 bushels per acre to survive. However, the game is rigged !! If you have a good year than your crop will bring a $1.50 a bushel and if you have a bad year than it might go to $3.00 a bushel. Either way the profit margin is around .40 cents a bushel. So your average profit is 48.00 an acre. As a farmer, we all dream of $5.00 a bushel corn, it has brought that in the early 1980's.

Now, as Tom has told us it is a high dollar commodity to the world. I can believe that our government is getting $10.00 a bushel and the buyer is paying the transport costs. Who thought we had free enterprise ? I'm sorry but the agriculture system in the grain market of the USA is a communist, socialist system and we the american farmers are just serfs to King George II. Do you think they might have thought of starving the world into submission ? You bet your sweet bibby they did, they do, and they will !!

I had hoped that Tom could tell me that Corn was $12.00 a bushel, fuel was $1.00 a liter, and farmers made $5.00 an hour, than the numbers would tell you that a EU farmer could hope to make $50,000.00 a year on an average farm, while on a comparative farm the american farmer made about $17,000.00.

I could talk farm politics all day and it would get me so angry that I would need 10 Valium just to feel normal. There is really only one solution. While my Uncle Sam is out spreading greed and starvation to the rest of the world than we at home must practice a little starvation of our own ! STOP PLANTING and starve old Sam himself ! Beat your plowshares into swords and behead the beast !!! End of Rant.

-- Joel Rosen (, April 24, 2002.

On trade in general--The standards and tolerences on manafactured goods are now universal. It is called ISO 9002 and that is how I make a living now. Each company calls their process to comply with ISO a unique name. G.E. calls it's "Six Sigma". but it is all really SPC ( Statistical Process Control ). What it really means is we don't test anything anymore. We know which ones are bad by numbers--LMAO--it means we know it is a bad unit when you call us and tell us IT WON"T WORK !!!!

-- Joel Rosen (, April 25, 2002.

Joel, those figures you asked for...

Diesel is retail about 28 cents per litre (excluding taxes etc)

I am not sure what a 'bushel' is (maybe my 87 year Dad would know as we used to use those measures) and I am unsure what you call 'corn'. To my mind 'corn' just means grain while 'sweet corn' is (or is very similar to) maize. We are not big maize producers but farmers receive about $120 per tonne for wheat. (A 'tonne' is 1000 kgs, not 2240 pounds but I think they are very close).

How did that house comparison stack up?

-- john hill (, April 25, 2002.

John, our country has differring real estate prices depending on which section or state you choose. The average for a 3 bedroom "ranch style" home with basement (as you described) in my area of Virginia is $140,000.00. Around Washington D.C. that home and lot could sell for 450,000.00 and in a more depressed area such as Iowa--29,000.00. As for wages they vary from area to area. I'll just be blunt so you can see--my wife and I together make 90,000.00 a year (she makes 10,000.00 more than myself). On paper it appears we could buy that home in two years but in reality we would struggle to pay for it in 15 years. After income and witholding taxes our 90,000.00 becomes 50,000.00 and than we lose another 15,000.00 to various other taxes at the state and county levels.

Would someone please call a Doctor for GT. I fear he is slipping into a time warp or Altimzers is setting in for---we have not to my knowledge had Tobacco Subs since 1975. GT, tobacco built this country, bought your freedom through many a war and we are paying for every necessity of the government today. You may hate the thouht of me growing it, and that is fine, but if everyone stopped producing and importing tobacco the entire Federal system would be bankrupt in month. We ought to own this country but you make us sound like unwanted step children.

-- Joel Rosen (, April 25, 2002.

Ok thanks Joel, I was using just one wage in my example and the figure was after tax had been deducted.

-- john hill (, April 25, 2002.

Whether it is price supports or subsidies doesn't matter (sugar and milk also get them, as do other products), and if people can sleep at night knowing they help produce a product that kills people, well, what can I say? And I don't agree that tobacco is the foundation upon which this country was built.

It is too bad tobacco farmers are not allowed to switch to growing industrial hemp (not the bad stuff) instead--it is a far more useful product.

-- GT (, April 25, 2002.

Industrial hemp was grown I do believe up until around the 1940's or 50's. I also think that cotton played a role in helping to fiance this country.

-- TomK(mich) (, April 25, 2002.

Ya'll have to remember that I do not recogonize a Federal Government--so--Virginia is my country and tobacco built it !

-- Joel Rosen (, April 25, 2002.

Hello Folks,

One of the problems that Americans face is in it self responsible for the EU's widening grip on us. Americans want to be able to eat anything they want regardless whether it is in season here or not. They buy corn in the dead of winter. We do not grow corn then. It is grown in another country. They buy Kiwis and other stuff that we do not grow here as well. Those countries that grow stuff during our out of season times of course control the price of it and our demand keeps growing. However, when the American Farmer starts to sell his produce, he is competing with the other countries that have already "locked in" their prices. Thus, he suffers at a loss.

Many farmers here in the US contend that it is cheaper to "plow their crops under" than to settle for the low prices that they are offered. This only adds more of a grip to the EU contracts for their foodstuffs. The cycle is destroying what little American Farmers we have left. Eventually, we will have no farmers and the EU will sell us their foods at whatever cost they deem profitable. Making the once Proud Food Providers Of The World into beggars.

I am sorry that we can not do anything about it. The best thing is for use to eat locally grown foods that are in season and not purchase anything that is considered "out of season". This would turn EU around quickly and the American Farmer will again be able to survive and maybe be able to profit again!



-- (, April 28, 2002.

Ernest, I believe the EU is the "European Union" and as far as I know the growing seasons there coincide with those of the USA.

For most primary produce exporting countries the USA is a huge market and the buyer sets the price using whatever influences and pressures he can.

I can't understand how the US farmers cannot produce and put their produce on their local market to match the price of the foreign producer unless it is that the US farmer is inefficient, growing the wrong crops or maybe just plain greedy.

No doubt someone will claim the 'foreign' farmer is operating under a protective umbrella of subsidies etc, this is certainly true in EU countries but not so in countries such as Australia and NZ.

-- john hill (, April 29, 2002.

Why does VW and BMW have to produce cars that met DOT standards? why does Nokia have to make phones that meet FCC standards? Whys does Phillips TVs have to have a UL listing? Why does Gillette pharmacuticals products have to meet FDA standards? Why do Airbus have to meet FAA standards. Why do Glock guns have to meet ATF standards? Because Americans have standards. Why can't Europeans have their own standards? If they don't want a certain type of gain; why should they buy it. The EU is the second largest consumer in the world. The USA should position itself to sell to that market. Just like EU and Asia positions themselves to sell to this market. Simple world trade.

-- Jason (, December 20, 2003.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ