Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
> Also forced EU voters to consider how much they value these services

It's been a while since I left Europe, and I'm rusty on that particular layer of civics. Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation? Or is it all decided on the executive side which is only accountable to member states and not to individual citizens?

It might be that we have a say, but there are a lot of decisions happening in Brussels that it "feels like" we, EU voters, don't have a say in. Such as: - Chat Control - Vehicle regulations (mandates on "eCall", disturbing audio visuals and other "safety measuers) in Regulation (EU) 2018/858 - Eventual upcoming ethanol restrictions - Ban on plastic drinking straws - Drink caps that are stuck to the bottles - Ban on plastics with one hand, on the other handd there are huge plastic enclosers for batteries, scissors and in countries with a "green" profiles, such as Netherlands it seems impossible to just buy one or two apples - you have to buy a emplastered six pack of apples (lots of waste if I just wanted one apple).
Maybe this is just a fantasy, but drink producers were previously responsible for their "waste". Bottlers would pick-up and recycle glass bottles, but the onus shifted completely to the consumer - first with a glass bottle deposit, then with the advent of disposable plastic containers. Glass bottles largely didn't require a straw, unlike the latest frappuccino, which generally comes with a plastic container, lid, and soggy paper straw.

Instead of banning plastic bottles or unrecyclable plastic-lined paper cups (or, as you mention, apple blister packs...what?) where the vast majority of plastic resides, we now have paper straws to deride. Each time you peel your lips off a dry paper tube, you're reminded of your personal culpability in the global waste shell game.

The only viable solution seems to be to stop consuming (see 'fantasy' in the opening line). I'm guilty as charged, BTW, but will politely decline paper straws (I have my own stash of plastic straw contraband).

Don't know where you get your apples but I can buy 1 if I want. Just not at the supermarket since they optimise to sell you more than you need. No regulation involved here.
I can also buy 1 at the supermarket
Have to say I love the drink cap thing. It makes a lot of sense. The caps wind up everywhere so the regulation probably/most likely does some good (have not seen any data so who knows). But once you get used to it you appreciate not being able to lose the cap. Straws seem pretty useless to me in general so why not avoid plastic? but that is probably a me problem. Plastic on fruit is annoying as hell but it is not a mutually exclusive problem.
If you don't personally find straws useful that's fine but why should something like that be dictated for everyone else let alone at such a high level of government and without a direct vote by the citizens?

To make matters worse the expected environmental impact is miniscule and the entire thing is predicated on a popular misconception that gained virality. It's a perfect example of the government failing to function well.

Is that really a perfect example of a government failing to function well? In what country government does every action require a direct vote? Representative democracy is by definition imperfect.

Bet you can think of a better “perfect” example of a government failing to function well. It all depends on which government you are referring to but the best example to me would probably be a government needlessly bombing another country. Not a ban on plastic straws.

loading story #48469345
> It might be that we have a say, but there are a lot of decisions happening in Brussels that it "feels like" we, EU voters, don't have a say in.

Well... your government certainly has a say in Brussels. Often enough, national politicians use "Brussels" as a scapegoat... nothing can happen in Brussels if national governments (or the Commission) don't propose it first, the Parliament has no right to initiative.

If people would stop electing dumb fucks to national governments or to at least hold their dumb fucks in national governments accountable (yes, it is possible, even Hungary managed to do so), you'd get a lot less "Brussels" bullshit.

(And yes, I am aware, this statement is particularly ironic given I'm German and we were utterly infamous for shipping off utter wastes of space to Brussels)

> and in countries with a "green" profiles, such as Netherlands it seems impossible to just buy one or two apples - you have to buy a emplastered six pack of apples (lots of waste if I just wanted one apple).

That's a Dutch specialty. Here in Germany, I can buy single apples, pears, bananas or whatever just fine if I want - although I don't because apples suck.

If I were to guess, it's a logistics thing. Sixpacks of apples are easier to handle and transport than a bunch of loose apples.

>Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation?

Barely.

>Or is it all decided on the executive side which is only accountable to member states and not to individual citizens?

It's decided by a mix of unelected bureucrats and opaque procedures people track even less than their national politics.

They do have a say. They can elect representatives who could change the legal framework and the incentives for the bureaucrats, or even remove the ability of the bureaucrats to regulate certain things. Then these regulations would not get passed and that would be that.
We have a say at a 4th level of derived decision, which is 2 levels more than what people call a democracy. Also, the other political party will do it too.

= We don’t have a say. We voted NO to the new EU treaties in 2008 and the new president decided that electing him meant that we approved the same treaties.

They only let us vote when we agree, anyway.

The lower chamber of parliament that votes on the regulation is directly elected and can rewrite and amend proposals. The higher chamber (EU Council) is comprised from government (or state?) heads which are either directly of indirectly elected with a length of 1. The commission (executive branch) that drafts the laws that are amended and passed by the parliament is voted in by a parliament which is directly elected.

Where do you get 4th level of deriviation exactly?

It's even less direct than national parliaments, which already are a joke.

And the unelected bureucracy, careerists, and 2-3 big country interests pressuring others under the table, are driving the show...

It’s just as direct as national parliaments. Citizens vote for MEPs.
But MEPs can't even introduce legislation, they have to get all of Parliament to ask the European Commission to initiate legislation, and the Commissioners are pretty far removed from direct election. Nobody elected by the citizens can initiate legislation.
Not sure what other mechanism would be possible for creating a rule system like the DMA presuming that the EU countries remain independent. Treaties are too slow, and direct democracy on an issue this complicated is the realm of science fiction (see Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space universe for a take on this -- particularly the Demarchist faction).
Voting the world over is a joke. IIRC it was Carlin who said “if voting mattered they wouldn’t met us do it”.
People the world over: (die for the right to vote)

One comedian: LOL they only killed them to make you think it was valuable.

The Internet: (sagely) What a wise assessment by a wise man of wisdom.

Carlin was excellent at delivery, but don't confuse clever delivery with wisdom.
You get to vote for one of ~5 alternatives every 4 years. This then propagates to hundreds of decisions in a way that dilutes your influence to practically nothing.
EU has a parlement and a commission.
> Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation?

EU voters don't have any saying in any EU level regulation. The EU regime do basically what they want.

None. The EU is getting more and more un democratic by the year. More power centralized in the bureaucracy vis regulations and other mechanisms.
You have anything to back up that claim, or is it just knee-jerk drivel with no evidence based on your feelings and distrust of scary government bureaucrats?
Why is chatcontrol being pushed every year by the european commission, while people and their representatives are in majority against it?

Besides given the amount of lobbying in the EU institutions, it's obvious that citizens don't have a chance against corpos with infinite money.

And how is that different from any other governmental level? Seriously, we in Berlin got a freeway that nobody I know wanted or wants. It's not the EU's fault.
In a classic democracy, the Parliament can repeal laws, unlike in the EU.
Because puritans gonna puritan and security services want to read your comms. That's like any day of the week everywhere since forever.
Do you have any evidence supporting the notion that EU decisions process is democratic?