After the latest US' internal supra-state budgeting debates, the world is gradually coming to learn the word "shutdown" in another 23 languages, varying from technical or emotional "blackouts" to more legally tuned "closures" in accordance with the variety of linguistic cultures the EU houses. Via the mouth of its present presider, the European Commission has dropped a note that unless an additional € 2.7 billion is transferred from member states' national treasuries, it will be unable to meet normal payment terms already in November. Worse, the threatening shortfall is presented along with a victimizing observation that the commission already has felt forced not to engage in any new contract for the time being.
Before we continue to question where these governors believe a world is or should be moving to, I would find the momentum appropriate to revisit where they (think they) come from. I will be happy for Mr Barroso to join my dinner table at home, on an occasion where I discuss the connection between earning and spending with my 5 to 7 year old children.
In what world, small or large, public and/or private, can someone feel surprised or upset for not being able to sign for future financial endeavors if the viability of running projects prove to be questionable, whether due to lack of profit or less direct benefits or indeed budgetary mistakes.
By all means, let' s proceed with instantly canceling all non-essential services and servants dependent on the European Commission and get a clear visual on how wide and relevant that turns out to be for day-to-day life throughout the EU, including the effectiveness on projects beyond the EU's borders. We may actually find the sum of EU institutions running at a surplus, distributable back to where monies came from in the first place.
Now would be a good time to open up while shutting down or to just shut up.
