ywuoiaz
ywuoiaz t1_j1v5t1m wrote
Reply to comment by Philosophile42 in ELI5 the EU and how it works by Is_Rosen
> but when we travel between states we all use the same money
I think you're significantly exaggerating how close-knit the EU is. Its member states are generally more closely aligned on economic matters than in other areas, but not all of them even use the same currency. Currently, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Sweden all have their own free-floating currencies, while Bulgaria, Croatia and Denmark have currencies that are loosely pegged to the euro. In areas such as criminal law, social policy and national elections, the EU has basically no say whatsoever and the member states are free to do what they want. The member states are also free to leave the EU, and their national governments have a much bigger say over the EU's decision-making than US state governments have over the US federal government.
ywuoiaz t1_j1v7u04 wrote
Reply to comment by r3dl3g in ELI5 the EU and how it works by Is_Rosen
I think you're a little bit too hung up on your US comparisons. Just because the EU has a superficially similar structure to two forms of government that were briefly used in the US hundreds of years ago, doesn't mean it's the same in every respect or that it will have the same fate. Tbh this is something I see from Americans a lot: whenever you see a political situation going on in another country, you seem to have an instinct to imagine something similar happening in the US and assume everything will play out the same as it would within the US system.
> By comparison, in the US our government actually has two speeds; glacially slow, and lightning fast. Generally, Congress does nothing, but in genuine emergency situations consensus emerges pretty quickly and Congress can pass legislation in the blink of an eye. The EU has no such ability, because it's own bureaucracy and laws stand in the way of the EU central government by design.
The EU can make arbitrary changes very quickly if all member states are in agreement, simply by agreeing new treaties. In contrast, the US is stuck with its Constitution, and it seems that the only realistic way to change it is by gradually appointing Supreme Court justices who you think will eventually "interpret" it in a slightly different way.
You could point to the sudden changes in economic and military policies in the EU following the invasion of Ukraine as an example of the EU reacting quickly to something.
Though I think it should also be borne in mind that the EU's strictly limited competences (i.e. policy areas where it has power) limit the kinds of emergency situations in which it is even relevant. For example, it doesn't have a military or police force to speak of, and it has little involvement in public services and social policies.