Mastodawn

SterbeProzess(FirstTrötLesen)5d ago

@EUCommission ja das seht ihr richtig aber das kann nur mit mehr sozialer Gerechtigkeit gelingen wenn die Armen die Chance haben ihr Potential auch auszuschöpfen könnten aber hier wird man nicht daran arbeiten viel mehr schauen das die Menschen den es gut geht mit Subventionen gefördert werden.

ferrie=differentieel🔻in

5d ago

@EUCommission i like to contribute - let me show you a futuristic idea about transportation

like to see it?

tell me

ww 🩶5d ago

@EUCommission historically, some of the worst atrocities happened because europe thought it was time to scale

@ww @EUCommission, fortunately, we have learnt quite a lot. See ekz. Positive Peace Index, World Values Survey, Spiral Dynamics to see how much Europe progressed in peacefulness ☮️

ww 🩶5d ago

@kubofhromoslav @EUCommission i don't think it matters a whole lot what values europeans hold if they live in a bubble where frontex or even racism itself doesn't exist in europe, and all the neocolonialism is supposedly done by the united states only. that peacefulness does nothing to stop the eu from funding authoritarian north african countries' coast guard so they could shoot at search and rescue missions done by NGOs, or bribing and blackmailing poorer countries into increasing their border enforcement and accepting deportations, or funding ai drones that surveil palestinians, or trying to become the broker that facilitates deportations from third countries to other third countries (which, wtf?). it's different from before, sure, but it's not like europe ever decided to stop being fucked up to other people, or even just reflect on its colonial history at a large enough scale.

Passenger 4d ago

@ww @EUCommission

New and unrivalled efficiencies in drowning refugees in the mediterranean, giving weapons to Israel, coddling fascist political parties and giving people's identifying data to Peter Thiel.

@EUCommission As if that is the real problem people of Europe are facing today.

Petr Ferschmann 5d ago

@tdr @EUCommission I think we really face that today. When you want to expand, we have to enter 27 different markets and register 27 branches. When you are in USA or China, you need only few branches.

So let's solve this.

@fersman @EUCommission The proposed EU Inc. framework misses the main concerns of most EU citizens. People are primarily affected by rising living costs, housing shortages, high energy prices, and pressure on public services and not by the legal complexity of setting up cross-border companies. (1/4)

The EU has already introduced similar instruments, such as the European Company (SE) and the European Cooperative Society (SCE). These were meant to simplify cross-border business, yet their practical impact has remained limited. The reason is simple: the real obstacles are different tax systems, labor laws, and administrative practices and they still exist and are not fundamentally addressed by EU Inc. (2/4)

In reality, the proposal mainly benefits startups, investors, and larger companies seeking easier expansion. While faster digital registration sounds efficient, it does little to reduce the broader regulatory and economic burdens businesses face across member states. (3/4)

At the same time, the focus on corporate flexibility and investment conditions highlights a policy priority that is more aligned with capital markets than with everyday social and economic challenges. As a result, EU Inc. risks becoming another technical reform with limited real-world impact, rather than a solution to the structural issues affecting most people in the EU. (4/4)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, definitely do not expect one piece of legislation to magically solve everything. It solves problem in its field. Let's celebrate this 🎉

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission Sure, it solves a problem, in its own narrow field. For most businesses and especially for the European citizens, the real obstacles remain untouched. And of course, one can celebrate everything funded with taxpayer money.

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, real societal obstacles are touched and solved by a long series of improvements, such this one. Some improvement here and there, for long time, combined and accumulated, standing one on another is what pushes society forward.

As you evidently want improvements in other area, the healthy way would be to celebrate the start of EU Inc and supporting your representatives to do even more improvements.

If you want better Europe, don't be grumpy about real improvements 😊

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission This isn‘t about being grumpy. I’m questioning whether this is actually a meaningful improvement. Small steps only matter if they address the real bottlenecks, and here many of the core issues remain untouched. And as a citizen, I’ll question that, especially when taxpayer money is involved and the issues people are actually facing right now aren’t being meaningfully addressed. I guess critical thinking isn’t always as fun as celebrating 😊

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, ah, I think that now I understand better!

From my point of view this *does* help with some bottleneck. And I celebrate 😎

The question is whether this specific bottleneck is relevant or meaningful *for you*. If you believe that not, than, first I invite you consider how your life could be better if Europe would have stronger enterprises, and in the same time I generally better get your frustration.

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission Companies will be fine, many in Germany and the EU are still performing solidly even in a difficult environment. I’m more concerned about citizens, because they’re the ones a state is supposed to serve and for them, things are clearly getting tougher. (1/2)

Making it easier to set up companies in 48 hours, fully online, without capital requirements doesn’t fix that. We’ve tried similar models before with the Ltd. and UG, and it mainly led to a race to the bottom. That doesn’t improve life for residents, and capital, as always, is the first thing to leave; people can‘t. 🙂 (2/2)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, part of possible solution for citizens is stronger (and ethical) commercial sector. For example, now Europe as a continent is paying cca 7 billion euros every single month for just couple of IT services by USA companies. Imagine how much societal development we could fund if that money would stay in Europe. Things are connected.

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission I get your point about keeping value in Europe but what does that have to do with EU Inc. and these specific measures? Faster company setup, fully online processes, and no minimum capital don’t solve the issue of public money flowing to US tech companies. (1/2)

That’s primarily a public procurement problem. Authorities often choose non-European providers, even when alternatives exist. There are already European solutions, just look at Schleswig-Holstein, which is actively moving public administration toward open-source and European IT systems. So the issue isn’t the lack of companies, but how decisions are made and contracts are awarded. (2/2)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, EU Inc (not only in the specific wording by EC) is part of making setting up and scaling up companies easier, so to increase productivity. Eg. now it is hard to raise funds to start and scale company across borders (to big extend because investors are usually not deeply familiar with laws of every European country). Also that should be addressed sometime 🤔

Petr Ferschmann 5d ago

@tdr @kubofhromoslav @EUCommission now it is expensive to create alternative to eg. Netflix. I wanted to use european alternative. But there is none. I can use streaming service in my country but I can't use Germany's. And EU Inc. will make easier to expand in Europe. And then we will have stronger companies that can expand overseas like Spotify. It small step by small step.

@fersman @kubofhromoslav @EUCommission I think you’re mixing up two different things. The streaming issue is about the Digital Single Market and licensing, not about company formation. EU Inc. doesn’t fix cross-border access to services.

And Spotify actually proves the opposite point, it succeeded without EU Inc. The real barriers in your example aren’t about founding companies, but about regulation and market structure. So I don’t see how this proposal changes that. 🙂

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, the wider proposal for EU Inc is to provide a framework where regulation is same while providing goods and services in any EU country. So no more need to deal with many different regulations for the same thing.

But the original proposal is not necessary the same thing that EU will adopt..

Bogdan Buduroiu 5d ago

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission are people ready to face down the fact that welfareism and an upside down triangle population pyramid cannot coexist tho?

European Commission 5d ago

Hi @tdr, a good administration is capable of doing more than one thing at a time. We have experts working on all kinds of issues, like keeping Europe safe from threats, and making life more affordable for people who live here. Just last week, we put forward some initiatives to boost investment in homegrown clean energy solutions, increase resilience and lower energy bills for our citizens. You can read more about it here: https://link.europa.eu/vc4M4x

@EUCommission Sure, the EU can do more than one thing at a time. But citizens are still facing high energy prices, housing shortages, and rising living costs. All issues intensified by the Ukraine war and global supply risks.

In that context, it’s fair to ask whether something like EU Inc. is really a priority for people, or more of a technical reform with limited immediate impact for the citizens. 🙂

@tdr @EUCommission, I have been and still am leading world-wide non-profits based in Europe and can assure you that fragmentation of Europe is definitely pain in a tail... In order to be able to do more good / provide value, it is very beneficial to have less administrative burden and be able to just work more. Remember that especially for innovation is needed high quality attention, so let's not waste it on byrocratic shit.

@kubofhromoslav @EUCommission I get your frustration with fragmentation. But isn’t your case exactly one this doesn’t really solve? EU Inc. targets startups and for-profit entities, while non-profits remain tied to national systems, especially when it comes to tax status and recognition. So the core complexity you’re describing would largely stay the same.

@tdr @EUCommission, from my nonprofit work I know some struggles of for-profit companies, what enables me to empathize with them. I am very happy for them and for the general societal progress than can stem from that. I personally may benefit non-directly, what is much better than not benefiting at all, while other doers will just have easier life.

It is what it is, I accept it and don't require it to be something more. Some devil may be in details, but we can solve it later and it seems great!

Justi 5d ago

@tdr @EUCommission I'd say staying competitive economically is definetly a real problem concerning the people of Europe. Especially today when big power politics is the new normal.

@justive @EUCommission I agree that economic competitiveness matters. The question is whether this is really a key measure to achieve it. Making it possible to start a company in 48 hours, fully online and without capital, may sound good, but we’ve already seen similar approaches with the Ltd. and the UG. It mainly lowered entry barriers, created more finacially unstable or shady businesses, but didn’t fundamentally strengthen competitiveness. (1/2)

If we’re serious about competitiveness, the bigger levers are things like energy costs, taxation, infrastructure, access to capital, education, and innovation capacity. Compared to those, this feels like a marginal tweak rather than a core solution. (2/2)

Josh 5d ago

@EUCommission
Life isn't supposed to be competition. It is supposed to be for living. No matter how much we "compete", prosperity is denied us. You don't win the game of capitalism by playing it.

tldr: eat the rich.

mazzoo 5d ago

@EUCommission so this is our future?

/o\

ifrauding 5d ago

@mazzoo
Eschers cogwheels. 🤷

If you still think logically, you can't work for EU, I guess?!
@EUCommission

Lazy B0y 5d ago

@mazzoo

not exactly future…

we are already in that state since a long while.

and a EU commission with a president who wasn’t even able to order guns that can shoot straight, is hiding information about buying extremely overpriced vaccines, and comes from the party responsible for decades of stagnation will surely not help us

jfml - Jonas Laugs 5d ago

@mazzoo @EUCommission Yeah, I thought the illustration was rather unfortunate as well. If this isn't slop I wish the designer / illustrator had put some more thought into it (something humans can do, if they are paid ok and have the time which might not have been the case).

But disconnected and non-functioning cogs are not really a good look +___+

marcus 5d ago

@mazzoo
Wouldn't it be a sign of great competence if the EU commission would hire a graphics designer who knows about how gears work? 🙂
https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/164714/why-do-so-many-graphic-designers-suck-at-making-gears

Why do so many graphic designers suck at making gears?

Disclaimer: Post contains rantish tone, possibly even sarcasm! Lazy designers or those with feelings that bruise easily may take offense. 🤣 I see it all over the place. Like 9 out of 10 gear icons (

Graphic Design Stack Exchange

bovaz 5d ago

@EUCommission Know what this feels like?
https://xkcd.com/927/

Lazy B0y 5d ago

@bovaz
but companies are not standards.

i surely dont want one big company selling me everything without competition.

BUT also i don’t want a wave of small startup style companies that have no other goal than constructing an illusion that let’s the founders make an exit by selling a pointless business to investors for some millions more than they put in

we need companies deliver societal value.

Colin Rowat 5d ago

@EUCommission a decade ago, I started a company one Sunday evening in the UK: about to go to bed, I thought I'd take a look at the documentation requirements, so I could start collecting them. Twenty minutes and £20 later, I was a CEO. No capital requirements.

Stefan Ihringer 5d ago

@EUCommission @can So if there are no minimum capital requirements, you can’t sue for damages? With old school German GmbHs you at least knew that the company had 20.000€

Lazy B0y 5d ago

@compfu
sounds like the long existing UG

@EUCommission @can

can 5d ago

@lazyb0y @compfu @EUCommission Exactly, German UG also doesn’t have a minimum capital requirement. As don’t many other entity forms in other countries like UK. In Germany, as an UG, you need to build reserves from your profits and once you have 20k €, it automatically converts to a GmbH. Maybe there will be a similar mechanism with EU Inc, who knows. In any case, I am curious to see the details and how it will work with existing accounting and tax laws in each country.

@EUCommission, great news! Go Europe 🇪🇺 Go entrepreneurs! Go innovation 💡

Brynawel 5d ago

That small outer left gear, that is Germany killing two innovative industries - and with that destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs - for the sake of an ancient technology - which is also dying and destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs.
The Altmeier/Reiche-Effect.

@EUCommission This seems like the type of thing that makes it easier to start pointless ventures where we can only hope the thoughtlessness doesn't cause too much harm. We don't need founders, we need thoughtful leaders making long-term decisions.

@munin @EUCommission I understand that LARPing the 'murican vernacular is cringe, most people working in EU institutions come from cringe Atlanticist countries that would even now be happy to be the 51st American state. But do you think Europeans will magically stop sinking billions into American-controlled tech overnight? What's your alternative plan to unhook our Union from dependency on their tech?

@Veza85UE @EUCommission It will not stop overnight, which is why I think our decisions must be focused on the long term. When we buy (either with our money or through our time using it) technology, our leaders should consider the long term effects and costs of both the technology itself and where it comes from. Absolutely, people with good ideas in Europe should be able to make those ideas happen. But making a worthwhile idea happen is not about speed.

@munin @EUCommission What is it about then? Because the EUropean tech bros pushing for this measure absolutely do not want to deal with 27 registrars and the thicket of BS national regulations that give them a fragmented market in which they cannot develop products at scale and can thus not compete with American tech.

@Veza85UE @EUCommission I don't really know enough about the specifics of the different countries to comment on that part of it. And hey, maybe having an EU-wide structure for making companies is a great thing. It just seems to me that being able to start a company with next to no friction is not conducive to people being thoughtful when building a company or a product. I don't want a "fail fast" mentality building our infrastructure or even our social media.

@munin @EUCommission That's what you already have. Except a handful of us here, every single government in the EU communicates with journalists (it's their self-sustaining loop) via American fascist tech bro-owned platforms. I don't think EUropean tech bros are much better (though some have better education behind them), but unless you plan on nuking the internet in all 27 EU member statelets or put them in reeducation camps, what's the alternative?

@munin @EUCommission Also, I'm not sure I understand the pro-🇪🇺 market fragmentation take here. What's the argument? Does passing through multiple hoops of paperwork that make your product late and more expensive build character?

@Veza85UE @EUCommission It seems like you are adding things to my take. "Start a company with no capital in less than 48 hours all online" and "EU needs founders" is what I disagree with. Beyond that, I don't know enough to comment.

@munin @EUCommission I can understand the lofty academic debate type argument behind "the EU does NOT need founders", one can agree or disagree, but at least it's a take that makes sense to me. What I'm struggling with is this one: "Start a company with no capital in less than 48 hours all online"

EU Inc. is geared towards online companies. I mean sure, the internet is fake and capital is fake and money as a concept is fake, but again, what is the benefit of NOT being able to do it in 48h?

@Veza85UE @EUCommission Maybe no benefit? I'm not sure. I'm not even sure how it currently works or what kind of approval process is in place, but I think friction is always a good place to stop and think about the big picture. If a thing isn't worth doing because you have to wait a bit, maybe we don't need it? Unfortunately, I can't offer much more than a vague disagreement with the sentiment of wanting founders to move fast.