Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The euro and its impact
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The euro and its impact
Working unitedly is a basic thing to do if you have one to 10 people, but with almost a whole country working as a union is a significant and a spontaneous deal. Which Union am I talking about? The European Union, of course! This Union holds virtually all of the European Countries with 28 countries. Unfortunately, some countries never did join because of losing sovereignty. Furthermore, Norway didn’t join because they do not want to give up their independence. Small countries such as Portugal, Greece, Italy joined so they could be more powerful and wants more money. Still, does do the advantages of being in the EU excel the sacrifices? Honestly, I would say yes; essentially for economic competition, peace and security, and cultural diversity. …show more content…
With a GDP of 18.3 trillion US dollars for the EU, that is, a quantity of money and about one trillion dollars higher than the US! (Document A)! According to Document A, the European Union's highest GDP is 3.9 trillion and Germany in the lead! Germany had essentially joined the EU because for more money. There are a lot of benefits of joining the EU, maybe just to have a lot of money, or be a more powerful strong country and not to be a hovel. Said in Document B, it shows a graph of Greece, Portugal, Czech Republic, and Hungary. It displays their synthetic GDP and their GDP when they joined the EU. As for all instead of Greece, their money increased, but Greece decreased. Even though joining the EU may be a good advantage for a lot of money, it may be sometimes a bad idea, because, for instance, Greece started off with about 35 trillion dollars for their GDP per capita in 2010, but after they joined, their GDP went lower to 25 trillion dollars (Document B). If you now look at Poland, it’s not a strong country. With a high GDP of 547 billion dollars, Poland needed help. Fortunately, said in Document C, Germany helped Poland in many ways. Now, in the past two decades, Poland reached 62% of the level of the comfortable a country at the core of Europe(Document C). To conclude, if you join the EU in any conditions, your GDP may grow to a higher rank, but with challenging circumstances to
The benefits of the European Union outweigh the costs. Ever since the end of World War II, countries in the EU have been helped economically, politically, and culturally.
Prutha Patel Mr. Lougheed Social Studies 09 February, 2016 Has Europe United? Do you believe that the European Union has united Europe? A supranational cooperation is when countries give up some control of their affairs as they work together to achieve shared goals. The European countries have used supranational cooperation to create the European Union because they want to prevent future wars, and rebuild the weak economy that had formed after the two wars. The European Union has united Europe because it has made Europe have a common currency called the Euro, has a common “government” for the European Union, and has all of the countries influenced when one country that is part of the European Union is in “trouble”.
In conclusion, the benefits of the UK’s membership in the EU outweigh the costs. The most significant benefit is the access they have to the single market as this has managed to benefit quite Access to single market is aiding this inward investment
Some reason some countries might want to join the EU are for trade acts, since that can easily increase the economy of the country and other things such as peace treaties so the country doesn't have to live in fear of being taken over easily by its enemies.
satisfied and in doing so, they created a new and improved Poland. Previous to the formation of
In order to be a member of the European Union, an applying nation must first meet the requirements of membership as described in the Copenhagen Criteria. There are geographic, democratic and economic criteria. Geographically, the applying nation must be classified as a European nation, as exemplified by Morocco’s rejection. The applying nation must also have a secure and functional democratic government that only acts in accordance with the law. This means that any citizen should be able participate in the political system and that there are free elections with a secret ballot. The government must also respect human rights and have protection policies for minorities, meaning that a persons’ inalienable rights are protected by law and minority groups can retain their culture and language without discrimination. Economically, a country must have a functional market economy on which it can feasibly support itself and other member nations if need be. The country’s economy needs to be able to compete on a global scale and deal with economic pressures. There are also separate guidelines for countries wanting to convert to the Euro. Finally, countries that want to join must agree to uphold laws and regulations t...
This would contribute to a large group of people, Member States, which would work together as one. The idea of having a unified Europe was seen to emerge significantly in Western Europe following World War I.
Europe will not run the 21st century because of a combination of economic, institutional, and cultural factors. However, for the purpose of this paper, I will focus on the economic aspects of European society that will impede EU ascendency. I do not believe that the EU will cease to exist in the coming century, but I do believe it will become obsolete because it will be unable to make the necessary changes to their demographic problems, defense policies, and economic culture in response to the increasing American ascendency. Europe has long been known as the continent home to the great powers of the world. From Caesar to Napoleon to the British Empire, the European empires have continuously been at the helm of the ship of progress. The wars of the 20th century however, left Europe in a wake of destruction and chaos period before. The continent was devastated and had little hope to recover. In this new era of European descent, the great American Era came into existence. The US, one of the remaining superpowers, became the helping hand that Europe needed. With the aid allocated by the Marshall Plan and the creation of programs and institutions, Europe had a future. The creation of the European Union (EU) united the European countries over the common goal of preventing war another war. The United States intended for these programs to be a stepping-stone to build the economic and institutional powers of Europe, because a stronger Europe was good for the US. However, instead of using these as a springboard to create self-reliant union, the EU remains reliant on US military and hard power to support them their social efforts.
These are very exciting times for our country, we are now part of the largest economic community the world has ever seen, opening the doors of opportunity for us, the Irish citizens, everywhere we look. Ireland's membership of the EU is seen by most to be of great benefit to the country as it will solidify the foundations of our economy as well as increase the awareness of Ireland as an investment opportunity for multi national companies; however, some will argue that the change would be detrimental to our nation in the long run.
Eurozone crisis has had huge impacts not only on the economy of the UE but also on the other countries who have economic and financial relations with the members of the union. The reason why we have decided to examine the Eurozone crisis in detail is to have a better understanding of the mechanisms behind this extremely important and complex problem and also to make accurate inferences about the solution alternatives. In our pape...
After WWII, many politically influential people saw a need to create some form of interdependence between the nation states of Europe as a means to preventing further war (Watts, 2008: p6). In 1951 Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg all signed the Treaty of Paris creating the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC); the beginnings of an integrated Europe which has seen many changes since its creation (Thody, 1997: p1). Today it has become the highly integrated European Union with 28 member states, 18 of which share a single currency (Archick, 2014: p1). The process of EU integration is a complex one, as can be seen in its history and will surely be seen in its future. There is no simple explanation that can successfully explain the growth of the EU from a economic community of six nation states to the political and economic union it has become today. However there are two competing theories for explaining EU integration that give opposing views on the matter, neo-functionalism and intergovernmentalism. In this essay I will examine both theories and attempt to reach a conclusion if either successfully explains EU integration.
Despite being one of the wealthiest areas in the world, the EU faces the growing problem of prolific inequality in wealth and competitiveness across the diverse group of countries. This is dramatically represented in the differences of income between Europe’s richest and poorest regions: inner London and Romania. Inner London’s per capita income is a staggering 290% of the EU’s average versus Romania with a per capita income of a meager 23% of the EU average. The European Union has recognized this problem and has taken action by implementing “Cohesion” policies intended to encourage economic convergence, competiveness and financial unity. To reach these goals the EU has allocated a significant part of the taxes levied on member nations to the “Structural Funds.” These funds are comprised of three financial instruments amounting to a total of around €308 billion: over a third of the EU budget. The Structural Funds are designed to help areas in need, generally with GPD’s of less than 75% of the EU average. They are supposed to direct the money in ways to capitalize on the economic comparative advantages of the different areas in the EU through the financing of projects ranging from: improving education to investing in infrastructure to environmental protection. Supporters of the funds define these projects as an “inherent part of the European idea and European project” (Hubner) and point to areas that have exhibited high growth, like Ireland, as proof of its success. To what extent, however, are these claims true? Looking past the glorified and falsely correlated successes in the EU, a careful observer can see the flaws in this policy and would question how much these funds actually improve the state of the European economy.
“From time to time it is worth reminding ourselves why twenty-seven European nation states have come together voluntarily to form the partnership that is the European Union.” 1
The enlargement of the European Union (EU) in 2004 and 2007 has been termed as the largest single expansion of the EU with a total of 12 new member states – bringing the number of members to 27 – and more than 77 million citizens joining the Commission (Murphy 2006, Neueder 2003, Ross 2011). A majority of the new member states in this enlargement are from the eastern part of the continent and were countries that had just emerged from communist economies (EC 2009, Ross 2011), although overall, the enlargement also saw new member states from very different economic, social and political compared to that of the old member states (EC 2009, Ross 2011). This enlargement was also a historical significance in European history, for it saw the reunification of Europe since the Cold War in a world of increasing globalization (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). For that, overall, this enlargement is considered by many to have been a great success for the EU and its citizens but it is not without its problems and challenges (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). This essay will thus examine the impact of the 2004/2007 enlargements from two perspectives: firstly, the impact of the enlargements on the EU as a whole, and thereafter, how the enlargements have affected the new member states that were acceded during the 2004/2007 periods. Included in the essay will be the extent of their integration into the EU and how being a part of the Commission has contributed to their development as nation states. Following that, this essay will then evaluate the overall success of the enlargement process and whether the EU or the new member states have both benefited from the accessions or whether the enlargement has only proven advantageous to one th...
Influences Polish MEPs' Perceptions of Poland's place in Europe’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, vol.11, no.4, pp.358-375.