> who also fill the tank in countries with far cheaper gas
So we are talking here about inter-country transport, right? Because I don't think it's very econimical to fill up your gastank in Poland if your driving deliveries locally inside Sweden? That will probably not be a net-win.
If you are a Swedish company importing from for example Poland you could always let a Polish transport company handle the transport. The EU didn't change much about that. A Swedish trucker driving to Poland could also fill up it's truck in Poland with cheap gas.
So what did the EU do that made cheaper gas more of an competitive advantage then it was before?
BTW gas prices are something that Swedens goverment themselve handle...
I'm not a trucker, so you would have to ask them about the gas they complain about. But there are others more obvious issues mentioned by the unions by international trucking - they have to compete with companies utilizing slave labour and sometimes even cases of trafficking. Hence my point that benefits of the EU is highly individual. Many have surely won, such as large companies, and many have lost.
>So what did the EU do that made cheaper gas more of an competitive advantage then it was before?
Enable all european truckers to work anywhere.
>BTW gas prices are something that Swedens goverment themselve handle...
I don't see how this is relevant to anything said previously, and yes, that is quite obvious.
> I'm not a trucker, so you would have to ask them about the gas they complain about.
You presented it as a (I presume good) example of your point. So I'm asking you because it definitly does not sound logical.
> Enable all european truckers to work anywhere.
That's not an answer to the question what the EU has to do with cheap gas prices in countries like Poland being a issue for a Swedish truck driver. A Polish truck driver working in Sweden is going to bring his own cheap gas from Poland and undercut Swedish transport companies? It just doesn't make sense how that is related to allowing to work everywere.
The wages could be a problem, sure, but that gap has also been largely plugged [1]. But gas prices...?
> I don't see how this is relevant to anything said previously, and yes, that is quite obvious.
Its relevant because if it's a real problem Sweden can lower taxes on the gas prices in order to remain competitive. That's not something the EU needs to do.
My point is that local politicians are quick to point to the EU. However it wasn't local politicians that managed to for example get the mobile roaming fee's gone for good. If you want to have a laugh just look at the UK. Vodafone et al said the roaming costs wouldn't return after brexit. Yet somehow the roaming costs are back for UK citizens...
I think the underlying problem is that Sweden taxes gas very high, very good reasons. Poland, being a regressive climate denying conservative place, relatively speaking, lets gas be at a natural price.
In the US trucking companies would just relocate to a state with cheaper gas, but maybe Swedish people dont want to move to Poland, and they also want fossil fuels taxed across the entire EU, so they feel aggrieved.
>You presented it as a (I presume good) example of your point. So I'm asking you because it definitly does not sound logical.
It doesn't sound logical to you that companies based in Sweden who endure some of the highest gas prices in the world does not want to compete with companies based out of eastern european companies with far cheaper gas - because they could just fill the tank outside of Sweden themselves?
As I said previously, I'm not a trucker myself, so I don't wanna go into the specifics, but that is one reason their union cites among others. And I don't find it THAT hard to imagine that no, it is not as simple as to just fill your tank outside of the country where the competition does.
> but that gap has also been largely plugged [1].
Your source is a proposal, critized by western unions as mentioned by your own posts. The proposal went through a compromise but is still being challenged in court by eastern european nations [1]. Anyway its too late, considering the EU is currently in a trucking crisis, that's what happens when you undercut a workforce for decades and suddenly demand increases rapidly.
>Its relevant because if it's a real problem Sweden can lower taxes on the gas prices in order to remain competitive. That's not something the EU needs to do.
And Sweden has high gas prices to try combat climate change, but it can lower those measures to be able to be competetive with the EU? How does this lead to an overall 'net benefit' through the EU, generally and individually, when the ecosystem collapses?
>My point is that local politicians are quick to point to the EU. However it wasn't local politicians that managed to for example get the mobile roaming fee's gone for good. If you want to have a laugh just look at the UK. Vodafone et al said the roaming costs wouldn't return after brexit. Yet somehow the roaming costs are back for UK citizens...
I was in UK when brexit came through and I still remember all the headlines about how severe and devastating the consequences were gonna be, yet I've still to see them realize. My question is, in the case of Vodafone, why wouldnt one company just not use roaming costs and undercut the competitors?
So we are talking here about inter-country transport, right? Because I don't think it's very econimical to fill up your gastank in Poland if your driving deliveries locally inside Sweden? That will probably not be a net-win.
If you are a Swedish company importing from for example Poland you could always let a Polish transport company handle the transport. The EU didn't change much about that. A Swedish trucker driving to Poland could also fill up it's truck in Poland with cheap gas.
So what did the EU do that made cheaper gas more of an competitive advantage then it was before?
BTW gas prices are something that Swedens goverment themselve handle...