|
| EU Goods in Foreingn Markets | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 12 2015, 07:41 AM (226 Views) | |
| Litos | May 12 2015, 07:41 AM Post #1 |
|
Itō Hirobumi
|
Reinhard Silberberg EU Representative Germany would like to bring to the attention of the members here the competitive advantage EU goods have the potential to have in foreign markets which are either of low quality and high production with low costs, or of low production but high costs and quality. In both these market,s Europeans have the chance to shine but our goods are overshadowed in places like China by Americans, who have more judiciously negotiated trade deals. Let us remember that Bessemer Steel in the United States was outcompeted by our companies here in Europe. We propose parts of the European budget from our least efficient programs, say the CAP, are brought instead to industrial modernization by loans to companies applying to reduce their costs to the lowest possible average costs, increasing efficiency. Meanwhile, we ask that all delegates work on negotiating trade deals with China, the USA beyond ITTP, and Canada. Edited by Litos, May 15 2015, 06:15 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Litos | May 15 2015, 06:53 AM Post #11 |
|
Itō Hirobumi
|
Reinhard Silberberg EU Representative Sure, we suggest we talk more extensively about the CAP after expanding the EIF. While we hold that CAP funding should stay the same to avoid popular backlash and backlash from lobbies, we would understand the need to talk more about a highly controversial structure. We call for now a vote on the second subject, unless there are any changes anyone would like to make. |
![]() |
|
| Sadar | May 15 2015, 12:46 PM Post #12 |
![]()
|
We propose the following amendments. Vote on the second subject
What do you think of this changes? |
![]() |
|
| winisle | May 15 2015, 01:11 PM Post #13 |
![]()
|
Looks good. The UK seconds the move to vote on the matter, in the format presented by France. |
![]() |
|
| Litos | May 15 2015, 06:11 PM Post #14 |
|
Itō Hirobumi
|
We agree with the second but 5% of the capital of the EIF is a massive amount to dedicate to entrepreneurship classes: This would be like running an entrepreneurship division in a top-level business school, but the courses will be far more short term since this will allow businesses to be opened quicker, and aspiring entrepreneurs likely do not have time to pursue a full four year degree. 30 million euros should give us the right balance. |
![]() |
|
| Sadar | May 16 2015, 12:25 AM Post #15 |
![]()
|
In our point of viee it means financing business schools across countries, not offering courses. That way the EIF sustains from educational level to startup level. For example by supporting Strathclyde business school with investing 2 mn pounds in it. We meant it that way, not the EIF becoming a university. |
![]() |
|
| winisle | May 16 2015, 02:33 AM Post #16 |
![]()
|
Business schools is all good, but not all that start a small business can go to business school. We also need to cater to, perhaps more so, the young baker that wants to open up his or her own shop. There we need targeted and practical courses and advice, on an ad hoc and case to case basis... Use funds to finance that, so the small business owners and starters has someone to look to for help and advice, not a diploma. |
![]() |
|
| iceviking | May 16 2015, 03:56 AM Post #17 |
|
Italy agrees we should be helping smaller businesses. We need also to cut on corruption , something we are doing in Italy. We need to be seen to be the place that helps companies in Europe, set up, employ and develop. Europe has advantages over India and China, in the fields of technology. Markets and cash flow. |
![]() |
|
| Litos | May 17 2015, 10:00 PM Post #18 |
|
Itō Hirobumi
|
We concur with the British position that practical knowledge could greatly enhance our short term prosperity. We hope France can see this from an economic perspective, with basic practical courses generating great improvements in small business productivity. While, surely, to be a perfect businessman, advanced courses are better, the resources and time invested are less efficient as a ratio than giving small business owners practical knowledge. We therefore call to a vote the following measure: The amendments from the french amendment include increase in funds (9 billion will have very little effect) and use of membership dues plus donations, as in our budget constrained times, without fair and equitable charge, there will be very little contribution. The EU Adopts the following changes to the EIF: a. Increases funding by 100% to a total authorised capital of EUR 15,000,000,000. Increase of fund will come from increase in membership fees and public-private capital partnerships, plus voluntary contribution. -a.1: Structure of fund voting rights: EIB 38%, EC 13%, private financial institutions 49%. b. Contributes 30 million euros per annum to develop entrepreneurship education in countries with the least entrepreneurial activity, balancing the scales and making EIF membership charge fair. c. Lends money / invests in SME / start-ups at beneficial rates to the extent of its liquidity capacity, being granted the correspondent ownership on the company it lends money to / capitalises, respecting its liquidity ratios for a AAA-rated fund. i) Seeks two objectives: 1. Reduction in WACC in companies it funds. 2. Start up of new businesses with new methods. Edited by Litos, May 17 2015, 10:07 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Sadar | May 18 2015, 10:12 AM Post #19 |
![]()
|
Frances supports the text and votes AYE.
Edited by Sadar, May 18 2015, 10:12 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Litos | May 18 2015, 08:09 PM Post #20 |
|
Itō Hirobumi
|
Germany votes AYE |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Round 5 · Next Topic » |









6:37 AM Jul 11
