Why we should talk more about the European parliament?

Why we should talk more about the European parliament?

Nationalism is a big threat for the European Union, and what we must realize when we are talking about European parliament? That parliament has only an advisory role in the European Union, and that's why this thing is sometimes left out from the public media. But when we are thinking about the advisory role in the European Union, the salary of that job is really big, the 9000 euros per month is very big money to almost every person in the world, and there would be some other benefits about this job.

This is the thing, what people normally forget when we are talking about the European Union and the role of the parliament in this system. Sometimes political leaders are hiding back of that kind of organizations, and they just accept things, what are made in the European Parliament, appealing that the parliament or European Union has been forcing them to do those decisions, and then they hadn't got any change to say a thing against those persons, who are sitting in European Parliament.

European parliament would get a very high salary

9000 euros per month is big money. That means that there is "lots of people" who want to go to that place. This is the thing, what makes so difficult to make decisions what is concerning this thing because if the MEP (Member of the European Parliament) wants to divorce, that means that this person would lose the 9000 euros salary. This kind of things is really interesting things to think when we are thinking about personal relationships with the European Parliament.

When we are facing populism and so-called easy solutions, we must realize that the relationship with the EU is Complicated than we ever can imagine. When people would get a place in the European Parliament, they forget the thing, what they said during the campaign. And in the modern time, we have new threats, what we must face.

One of them is international global warming, where we must find solutions at the International level. For handling that kind of things, we must have an international forum, where we can discuss that kind of things. Could that forum be the European Parliament or some other actor is the thing?  That we or political decision makers must think.

We would need concrete decisions in many things at international level

When we are thinking about the green energy and military systems that hydrogen very suitable fuel for military jets and high power turbines, and that material can produce by using electrolysis in the aircraft carriers. If the hydrogen-powered aircraft would have also oxygen tanks, it can fly higher than any other aircraft in the world.

And what kind of thing that forum could be? Could it some kind of building, or the virtual workspace, what is like some kind of Second Life, where the members of this panel would meet together in the virtual world, where they can share thought together. Or could it be some Facebook group, where those people can write and talk about things?

And in those places, we must make real decisions for handling that kind of things. Maybe we can order things like pollution taxes. In this model, we could determine the pollution frames for each nation, and that means that we can determine the level of pollution for each citizen. That level could be shown as points, and things like owning a car could bring more points to that thing, and if somebody would not own a car, that means that somebody else could buy those free points. But this is the steel wire model about those things.

Crisis in the European Union (The influence of the climate changing)

Crisis in the European Union (The influence of the climate changing)

The problem in the head of the state is that thing is made for giving a response to crises, and the thing in the crises is that they are giving the utility to the nations because under the threat of foreign enemy the nation must keep together. And the long term peace was the thing, what gave the people reason to start doubting and criticizing their own government.

And that's why somebody has been said sarcastically, that the war and crisis are the best things, what the dictator can hope. The enemy what is out of the border is a good reason to destroy democracy, and give the justification for the persecution of the opposition. The long-term peace causes always the situation, that the demands of the changes in the government, and also the things, what are made during the crisis are sometimes demanded to investigate.

In the European Union is one problem, there is no enemy out its borders, what would cause need to resist it by calling millions of people to arms. The traditional way to silence the opposition is all the men to the arms, and in the military forces is not tolerated to make politics. And that thing was a very effective way to make the reporters keep their mouth shut about the social faults. But when we are seeing things, which is very embarrassing and one is the warming of the atmosphere.

That kind of things has not a solution in guns and military forces. The strong leadership about the cases like growing sea level, polluting groundwater and releasing the basils from the sewer system in the lakes and areas, where people are getting their drinking water are really bad things. The groundwater would also be polluting because the sea water would rise to the groundwater areas. The climate changing is the problem what we must realize, and what touches every person on this planet.

If we think that Scandinavia is somewhere, where is not problems with climate warming, we might remember that the 1,5 meters rise in the sea level would have also influenced the Baltic sea, and also the low-level land areas in the Baltic States, Finland, Sweden, Danmark, and St. Petersburg region in Russia would face the really bad problem. And when we are thinking one of the most devastating targets for the terrorist attack, that target could be the polder-dam in the Netherlands. That kind of dams are planned also in some other places, and that means that those dams could be very interesting targets for terrorists.

But in real life, climate-changing would cause the refugee problem in Europe, and that thing is that if the simultaneous repeating storm would cause the living near the rivers like the Thames, Seine, Rhine, and Elbe is turning dangerous because of the tidal waves, the people, who live near those rivers might need to change their home to the another place. And the most populated cities are at the borders of those rivers. The tidal waves can be deadly, and in 1962 the great flood what had an effect everywhere in the North Sea region caused the death of 315 people in Hamburg, and the homes of 60 000 people were destroyed, when 5,7 meters wave rose in the Elbe river. And in Great Britain, 170 000 houses were damaged. That thing was probably one of the first warnings about the climate changing.

When we are thinking the situation, that the tidal waves are a very often repeating phenomenon, the people who live in Rotterdam, Hamburg, London, and Paris must move somewhere, there are no tidal waves. And this is the problem in the climate changing. It will cause a very big catastrophe also somewhere else than in the Maldives. And one of the most problematic things what would happen is connected the storms in the arctic areas. If the tidal wave what is about 6 meters tall would hit to Murmansk region, the radioactive material like radioactive sand and metal bites on the borders of that bay would be released to the Arctic Ocean, where it would come to our fish menu in the restaurants. And this is one of the worst nightmares, what we can imagine.