2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? (This question only has to be answered once for Vogel.)
The author of this article is not known, but supposedly he or she is a Wall Street Journal journalist. The WSJ is an international daily newspaper based in New York City and published by Dow Jones & Company, which is part of News Corporation, the world’s second-largest media group. The WSJ focuses on economic, international business, and financial news and issues.
3. What are the topics of the text?
The article “European Imperialism” is an opinion piece that expresses concerns with the EU’s regulations blocking American business.
4. What is the main argument of the text?
The text argues that in several sectors, the EU has been blocking international trade through unfair regulations masked under the idea of public health and safety.
5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
The article cites an EU ban on chicken meat that has been cleaned with anything other than potable water, despite the EU’s Food Safety Authority declaring the US’s chemicals harmless, leading to a loss of $63 million in 2005 alone.
The article cites the EU’s move to force any airline flying to or from Europe to join their carbon cap-and-trade scheme by 2012.
The article cites how the EU requires foreign cosmetic companies to register all the chemicals they use 3 years earlier then EU national companies.
6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
“The larger theme here is that unelected officials in Brussels, and protectionist politicians in EU capitals, are using their regulatory power as a tool of economic nationalism.” Para. 9 “The result is a quiet but concerted war on non-European commerce, and especially on U.S. companies.” Para. 3 “European poultry farmers love this absence of American competition. But the larger EU motive is to force its environmental standards on the U.S.” Para. 6
7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
Why is the response to another country’s choices over health and safety outrage? Isn’t this a violation of the freedom of another country to choose its governance?
How might the UN force the EU’s regulations to be globally accepted in order to even the playing field, while not disadvantaging non-EU countries in the transition?
Why do we clean our chicken meat with something other than water if that is good enough for the entire EU?
8. What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your perspective on environmental risk and precaution? (Provide citations, with a brief explanation of what you learned. One of these should be fully annotated, as your second required reading for each week.)
Johnson, Renée. “US-EU Poultry Dispute” (2010). http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R40199_20101209.pdf.
I looked more into the ban on US chicken, and found a report for congress dated 1 year after the ban (2010). The article is a background and summary of the issues thus far, meant to be presented to the US Congress. The article notes that the EU has blocked all US chicken trade into the EU, however the US is still the second largest chicken exporter globally after Brazil. The article makes it seem like no compromise is likely due to the differing food safety methodologies.
I decided to look more into this concept “Their control over access to a consumer market of 500 million lets them try to force the rest of the world to play by its cumbersome rules.” That the command of the consumer market allows for a bullying of the world. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, in 2009 the United States commanded a Consumer market valued at around $10,000 billion, having the highest collective buying power relative to all other nations, with a growing population that is per capita consuming more then any other nation. Following this logic, I would conclude that the argument of the journalist is turned on its head as the US is trying to force the EU to discard their laws and regulations based on their large market share. Mataloni, Lisa S. Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter 2009 (Advance Estimate) News Release. Burea of Economic Analysis, January 29, 2010. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2010/pdf/gdp4q09_adv.pdf.
- 1. Full citation.
“European Imperialism.” Wall Street Journal, October 31, 2007, sec. Review & Outlook. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119379374505577052.html.- 2. Where did/does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? (This question only has to be answered once for Vogel.)
The author of this article is not known, but supposedly he or she is a Wall Street Journal journalist. The WSJ is an international daily newspaper based in New York City and published by Dow Jones & Company, which is part of News Corporation, the world’s second-largest media group. The WSJ focuses on economic, international business, and financial news and issues.- 3. What are the topics of the text?
The article “European Imperialism” is an opinion piece that expresses concerns with the EU’s regulations blocking American business.- 4. What is the main argument of the text?
The text argues that in several sectors, the EU has been blocking international trade through unfair regulations masked under the idea of public health and safety.- 5. Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
The article cites an EU ban on chicken meat that has been cleaned with anything other than potable water, despite the EU’s Food Safety Authority declaring the US’s chemicals harmless, leading to a loss of $63 million in 2005 alone.The article cites the EU’s move to force any airline flying to or from Europe to join their carbon cap-and-trade scheme by 2012.
The article cites how the EU requires foreign cosmetic companies to register all the chemicals they use 3 years earlier then EU national companies.
- 6. What three quotes capture the message of the text?
“The larger theme here is that unelected officials in Brussels, and protectionist politicians in EU capitals, are using their regulatory power as a tool of economic nationalism.” Para. 9“The result is a quiet but concerted war on non-European commerce, and especially on U.S. companies.” Para. 3
“European poultry farmers love this absence of American competition. But the larger EU motive is to force its environmental standards on the U.S.” Para. 6
- 7. What three questions about environmental risk and precaution does this article leave you with?
Why is the response to another country’s choices over health and safety outrage? Isn’t this a violation of the freedom of another country to choose its governance?How might the UN force the EU’s regulations to be globally accepted in order to even the playing field, while not disadvantaging non-EU countries in the transition?
Why do we clean our chicken meat with something other than water if that is good enough for the entire EU?
- 8. What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your perspective on environmental risk and precaution? (Provide citations, with a brief explanation of what you learned. One of these should be fully annotated, as your second required reading for each week.)
Johnson, Renée. “US-EU Poultry Dispute” (2010). http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R40199_20101209.pdf.I looked more into the ban on US chicken, and found a report for congress dated 1 year after the ban (2010). The article is a background and summary of the issues thus far, meant to be presented to the US Congress. The article notes that the EU has blocked all US chicken trade into the EU, however the US is still the second largest chicken exporter globally after Brazil. The article makes it seem like no compromise is likely due to the differing food safety methodologies.
I decided to look more into this concept “Their control over access to a consumer market of 500 million lets them try to force the rest of the world to play by its cumbersome rules.” That the command of the consumer market allows for a bullying of the world. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, in 2009 the United States commanded a Consumer market valued at around $10,000 billion, having the highest collective buying power relative to all other nations, with a growing population that is per capita consuming more then any other nation. Following this logic, I would conclude that the argument of the journalist is turned on its head as the US is trying to force the EU to discard their laws and regulations based on their large market share.
Mataloni, Lisa S. Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter 2009 (Advance Estimate) News Release. Burea of Economic Analysis, January 29, 2010. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2010/pdf/gdp4q09_adv.pdf.