[Googloo]

there are good reasons for the CAP, just not good enough to spend billions on

[austrian guy]

(Original post by Googloo)
there are good reasons for the CAP, just not good enough to spend billions on

Exactly. Spending 45% of a budget on the CAP is really over the top. Although the idea is is to decrease this, it will still be the largest point of the EU spending.
Furthermore as soon as the rural areas are fully developped they will have to spend the same amount again for the rural development of Romania and Bulgaria, and maybe even Turkey, who has a major agriculture.

[Ace2Heart]

Can I join? I want to be a member.

Errr... I'm a newbie so please forgive me if you find this offensive. I think the manner of conducting the debate is a bit too unorganised. A maximum of a certain number of post should be given to a person in the debate. Also, the topics should be an evaluation question from one of the past papers. Moreover rules should be created on commenting. If comments are not moderated than they will go on forever and no side (anti or pro) will ever seem to win. I'm extremely sorry if my idea seems to offend anybody.

Maybe I just read too much about the need for organisation in businesses...

[Apagg]

I'm of the opinion that the CAP is indefensible. Protectionism is only justified if it is undertaken to protect a country from dumping by another country.
Besides which, the CAP doesn't really do its job. It maintains price stability, but at a much higher level than prices would be in a free market, so consumer surplus is vastly reduced. It allows grossly inefficient producers to survive, whilst at the same time being beneficial mainly to large farmers - it is not safeguarding a way of life, just the incomes of big companies, especially in France.
Added to that the point (already mentioned) that it will be unsustainable if all the new members are to receive it, as well as the distorting impact on world trade and the implications for poverty, and I can see no reason for keeping it.

[Nuheen]

Well you seem to have started the debate already. Is there anyone here against protectionism? I cant find a theory how protectionism could be good for developing countries. So actually there will be no debate is no one talks for it.

Can I join? I want to be a member.

Errr... I'm a newbie so please forgive me if you find this offensive. I think the manner of conducting the debate is a bit too unorganised. A maximum of a certain number of post should be given to a person in the debate. Also, the topics should be an evaluation question from one of the past papers. Moreover rules should be created on commenting. If comments are not moderated than they will go on forever and no side (anti or pro) will ever seem to win. I'm extremely sorry if my idea seems to offend anybody.

Maybe I just read too much about the need for organisation in businesses...

Welcome to our society, your name is on the members list. About the debating system, we lack a judge whose decision will be granted without question. I suggest that three judges from us be appointed. They will vote it out. What do you think?

The debate will also have a fixed time period. The post declaring the topic will have a list of people who are debating on each side (for or against) . People on the winning side will get an additional eco point.( If you are for this then name three people from our society who will be appointed as judges)

I am sorry that I disappoint a few of you about the point system. It is very difficult to mark and I am prepared to accept that I can make mistakes. Three judges for marking I believe will create too much confusion and complexety.

[austrian guy]

So actually there will be no debate is no one talks for it.

Well. Not if one is in our position, because we all live in regions that don't survive because of its agriculture. It is very important for the new member states, that they recieve subsidies for their rural development.

An idea: How about, appointing each member to a side, so everybody has fixed positions. This will help as the pros and cons could be equal and people are more likely to think about the topic, if it's not their general opinion.

Edit: Question: Are the judges allowed to participate in the debate?

[Nuheen]

I judge the eco point system so I dont debate. I guess the judges shouldn't be allowed to debate. But I dont think they will like that. So I may have to be the single judge, though the decisions are likely to face arguments.

How about, appointing each member to a side, so everybody has fixed positions. This will help as the pros and cons could be equal and people are more likely to think about the topic, if it's not their general opinion.

Good idea. Everyone pm me about their choice (pro or con). The members list will be updated likewise.

P.M. We still dont have a debate topic. But that can be decided after the system is set up properly.

[Ace2Heart]

I will be pro whatever the topic is.

Concerning the judges, I think the judge should be appointed based on degree of knowledge (should have passed A Levels in Economics with a distinctive grade or mark) and should be critical in his analysis, should harshly criticise both sides and not be opinionated.

Also on the method of conducting the debate, one member should be given a respective number of posts he can post during the debate (like a candidate in a debate is only given 2 chances, with one to present his reasoning and other to counter the other sides reasoning. If an unlimited amount of post chances are given, then the debate will become too long and an exact decision on deciding a win will become too hard. I think it will also be helpful to not involve statistical data the sources of which are not reliable, and we should also keep outside weblink involvement to a minimal. We should employee economic theory and logical reasoning more than bringing outside judgement into our analysis.

Also, if the judges find it too hard to decide upon the victor, they can question either sides debater's given points. If judges were given marking criteria, it would also be helpful, i.e. Each debater is marked upon criterias such as the number of points given (knowledge), critical analysis of the pros against the cons or the cons against the pros, etc.

I guess the debate system should be something like this. Well, that is my opinion...

[Nuheen]

It is hard to find 3 people like that. I am studying AS myself. I think i will start a poll in another thread. You people vote for the one whom you think should be the judge. All members are candidates. The three people with most vote will be appointed judges if they consent. Judges must not take part in a debate. I will post an update on the debate system after the judges are sorted out.

A rough view of the new debate system:
1. Three judges
2. Two posts per user during a debate. You should mention Post 1 or Post 2 on the top of the post to be considered as a part of the debate.
3. When a person becomes a member he or she must state whether to support for or against. Existing member should pm me about their choice.
4. Three days limit for the debate.

See if this is OK with you.

[austrian guy]

Question: So every User is pro or contra no matter which theme?

O.K: You won't find many who want be be contra, so I'll be contra.

EDIT: Maybe there could be a change after a few months or so, lets just see how it developpes.

[Nuheen]

DEBATE

FOR

1.Ace2Heart
2.Wizard



AGAINST

1. Austrian Guy

[__WiZaRD__]

hey nuheen, ill be pro., and also how will debate topics be chosen?

[Nuheen]

Debate topics will be chosen as par your suggestions. i will select a topic from them which has a lot of debating opportunities.

People who wants to be a judge say so in the judge election thread. By the looks of the poll the election has to take place again.

I have included a question paper provided by Ace2Heart in my site. Check it out. At present there is a unit 1 question paper (june 2004) but more along with markschemes will be added soon.

http://nuheen.0moola.com/

[no1topman]

add me as a member

regards

[JSB19]

I started reading 'The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money' by Keynes the other day, working my way through it now, v interesting, wish I had more time to do more reading like this. Damn uni work!

[Nuheen]

Sorry i was away for two days, and I am afraid hat I will not be able to come ere for the next few days. I am very busy right now and not even in my house, and it is likely that this situation will continue i the next few days. Sorry again.

[Book]

Hope all works out for you.

[Nish05]

may i be added :-)

thanks

[Nuheen]

Apagg you are the vice president. I give you the task of selecting the two judges apart from me. And if anyone doesnt want to be judge,I will be the only one then. I will check back here in a few days.

By the way, thanks book . I will add you nish.

[Apagg]

Ok...but we'll have to change judges occasionally I'd assume, as they may want to debate themselves from time to time. I'll be a judge for a while, if no one has any objections.
Is there anyone else who would like to be a judge?