EU countries should unite and form a single state

Thanks the comment, I am glad to help out! Just typing it out as I am treating you as a fellow human being, so sorry if I seem 'blunt' and 'not polite'. 1. Actually, Germany wasn't that bad when West and East joined together, I didn't say what happen fully when the East joined. The jobs in the West flowed to the East and the Eastern economy took off like a rocket. East Germany was as weak as West Germany, but overall the East didn't strain on West Germany. It united the people, it created a task: To help their fellow Germans in the East. It showed the world that even a place like the East to flourish and spread. West Germany and East Germany combine and was successful, it is a great story to this day. 2. You're not making a clear point of this superstate, no offense. I will respond in two forms: 1. Is the superstate a state as a whole, meaning these countries are to be 'annexed' or a superstate as a series of states under one central government. If you mean as the superstate as a whole, the need to 'bail out' would be nulled, there is no more countries to bail out, there is no other federal government to loan money to. If you mean the superstate as in states under one government, then still you're not paying the federal, you're only paying the local government. The United States have 50 states, the states run themselves (each have their own laws, norm, and even their own arm forces) and a federal government to make choices to the nation as a whole.. now let shall say.. Alaska economy is falling and need a bail. Should the central government and even the local government ignored it? Bailing out provided the people with care and if you don't bail out the people than you simply showing them that you don't care. 3. Wrong, I am very sorry to say that! A prime example is the United Kingdom, each with their own countries located inside of the British Isle: Wales, Scotland, England, and Northern Ireland each with their own culture. They all are under a Union as well. They are all difference in their own ways, but yet pulled together for the greater cause. In the EU superstate, that would be military and economic causes. 3.1 You made a point about nationalism and here where I stop you, nationalism only start popping its ugly head when two things happen: One if the people are being opposed or treated as 'second class' compare to the main accepted culture. Or when the people face a massive government problem: government failed, famine, bloody civil war, etc. Yugoslavia is a prime example, with a VERY high culture, language, and religion differences. But, nationalism only started when Serbia tried to create a 'greater Serbia' Language will not be a problem, in most case: English is the spoken language, in every countries, states, etc. English is chosen, but you need to look at a country that is known to be of peace: Switzerland. Switzerland is surrounded by many countries and they are not just taught Swiss, they are taught Italian, French, German, etc. They are successful at teaching people. Also when a child is surrounded by languages, the child will easily learn it. It's not like you and me struggling with a language, the child are raise by it. A child suck it up like a baby with milk (bad example. :P) 4.Same thing of all countries, you can't please everyone, you can't please all parties. But you also forgot what feed the country and I am surprise you forgot about it already: taxes. A country get the money from the people. Trade and taxes are two slices of the pizza. A large population means more money in your pocket, more people means you don't have to tax as high as compare to where I live (Israel) which have a tiny population, but have to pay a good amount of taxes. Less taxes on the people means that people have more money in their pockets and they'll spend that money, this increase your economy greatly and this encourage businesses to boom, which create jobs. A country understanding that their people will improve with jobs, money, and protect from other countries will increase the change of a 'superstate'. 5. The United States (Yes, I will be using this a lot. :P) have laws varies of each states, some states give out more budget than others. In the case of the EU superstate it wouldn't control the entire thing. That would be stupid. (See 2 as I am confuse!) The superstate regardless will allow the states (or area if annexed) to keep their laws. But, federal laws would be a problem, against this is will you get a simple set of rules and allow the 'states' to run themselves. The federal government doesn't have to control EVERYTHING, but simply hand the power stick to the people. 6. You can't blame the economic policy on the bank itself, the policy is flawed, but like the Chinese Great Leap Forward or the US plan, they recovered and they learn from their mistake. If a superstate is formed the bank would be needed anymore, thus removing that risk again. The countries keep their own bank services OR form a series of banks like that United States does. And you're very welcome, I know I am a terrible debater, hehe! Hope my English is good!