|
Cat Mattress posted:And that's a huge mistake. On the other hand, David Cameron said he absolutely wouldn't resign if he lost the EU referendum and resigned within hours of the result.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
Some sane economists (as opposed to Mark Blyth above) have a cool analysis of the Greek crisis. http://voxeu.org/article/greek-crisis-autopsy quote:Summarising, our model makes it possible to quantify the role that different factors played in driving macroeconomic dynamics during the Greek crisis. We find that, while an unavoidable fiscal consolidation was the most important factor driving the drop in output, it accounted for only for half of that drop. Much of the remainder can be explained by the higher funding costs of the government and the private sector due to the sudden stop. Lower leverage would have cushioned the Greek economy somewhat from the sudden stop. The peak-to-trough decline in output would have been smaller by about a third if Greece’s levels of debt were half of their pre-crisis values. More flexible prices and wages would also have softened the effects of the drop in domestic demand – the peak-to-trough decline in output would have been smaller by about 40% if prices and wages could adjust twice as fast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Majorian posted:e: Also they are capable of dealing with displays of freedom on a European beach. They're not the ones calling for bans on types of swimsuits. You are. Yes, Muslims are known for being very open minded about public displays of bare skin, in general.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Some sane economists (as opposed to Mark Blyth above) have a cool analysis of the Greek crisis. Grouping prices and wages together in the adjust faster bit is weird. Wages are notoriously sticky, and sudden wage drops results in a huge crisis for leveraged households. Prices are much more variable in their stickiness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Yes, Muslims are known for being very open minded about public displays of bare skin, in general. Are they the ones banning types of swimsuits that make them uncomfortable in Western countries? Like, I'm not sure how you're not getting this. The people in countries that call themselves modern, developed, permissive, and open-minded, yet are making discriminatory laws, are not the Muslims. Is this just about punishing Muslims, for you? Is your mentality, "Hey, some Muslims are really, really evil towards people who aren't like them in the Middle East, so I'm going to punish other Muslims who move into the West"? Majorian fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Is this just about punishing Muslims, for you? Is your mentality, "Hey, some Muslims are really, really evil towards people who aren't like them in the Middle East, so I'm going to punish other Muslims who move into the West"? it's also the fact that they're forgetting that the people they're targeting are FRENCH CITIZENS. French as the Eiffel tower. for some reason that fact keeps flying over their heads as if they're dealing with a foreign body.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Speaking of the French... They've joined the esteemed club of Iran in trying to ban Pokemon go. https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/17/french-mayor-bans-pokemon-go-in-his-town/
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Speaking of the French... They've joined the esteemed club of Iran in trying to ban Pokemon go. France has something like 35,000 municipalities. One mayor for one hamlet of 800 people (out of a total population of 66 million) banning Pokemon Go does not equate to "the French banning Pokemon go".
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Is this just about punishing Muslims, for you? Is your mentality, "Hey, some Muslims are really, really evil towards people who aren't like them in the Middle East, so I'm going to punish other Muslims who move into the West"? It's about banning the symbols of oppression existing around the world this very moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:It's about banning the symbols of oppression existing around the world this very moment. Well, you're quite directly aiding and abetting in oppression, so...congratulations?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, you're quite directly aiding and abetting in oppression, so...congratulations? Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
I hate replying to the Grammar Troll butTesseraction posted:Generally I've been hard pressed to find a Muslim who supports Daesh whether refugee or long-term economic migrant. Take Scherbeek and Molenbeek in Belgium for example though, it doesn't seem the jihadists/recruiters are exactly driven out of the neighbourhood is it? And the population of Molenbeek certainly did not co-operate with officials en masse, even though it was apparently public knowledge among the "community" certain individuals were hiding there. This doesn't make everyone a pro-Jihadist, and I'm pretty sure just by "feelz" that plenty of Molenbeek residents would rather not have Allahu bomb kit men hiding there, but they still have enough support to do that, and the environment they live in is obviously such that the locals show more loyalty to their ethnic group, terrorists or not, than the surrounding society. Yeah I know, you will blame racism for this but doesn't change the fact. (edit: I suspect it might very well be out of fear as much as group loyalty; rat your on "own people" and you'll get in trouble with the more extremist portion of the local society.) quote:Honestly given how we've been assured all Muslims are secretly programmed to ackbar us at the slightest opportunity none of my prodding or poking or screaming blah blah blah blah Oh shut up. What the hell is it with the pro -migration/leftie -posters and totally idiotic hyperboles here. Who, exactly, assured you of that again? No one. We all know that. So why do you have to make these "sarcastic" and "edgy" posts so frigging often to begin with, that is, if you are not posting about "white people" and "brown people"... (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
 History of Italian opinion polling on Renzi's referendum. I didn't realise he'd been behind for a few months.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:07
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:
Ever since he connected his future with the outcome of the referendum the polls were trending in the direction. But Renzi is a leftist-populist rear end in a top hat anyway who annoys me to no end, so it's not really a surprise that he looked at the polls and thought "well, let's get double or nothing" and tried to use the referendum to legitimize himself further, even though anyone with 2 functioning brain cells could have known that it's a huge mistake. Geriatric Pirate posted:Some sane economists (as opposed to Mark Blyth above) have a cool analysis of the Greek crisis. Mark Blyth is filling the whole Varoufakis left when his speeches and interviews became to expensive.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Are they the ones banning types of swimsuits that make them uncomfortable in Western countries? Yes? They get into fights over it, and unmodestly dressed women are harrassed (not only at the beach!) and some of them want to segregate swimming pools. It's bizarre of you to think the more conservative and orthodox Muslims (i.e. the kind that would encourage or force their wives, daughters or sisters to completely cover up or be shunned) are the open-minded ones here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Yes? They get into fights over it, and unmodestly dressed women are harrassed (not only at the beach!) and some of them want to segregate swimming pools. That's great and all that they have lovely opinions. Guess what? lovely opinions aren't laws. The laws and ordinances that the government has in place are the ones directed against Muslims, not in favor of them. It's still codified discrimination in favor of a white majority. quote:It's bizarre of you to think the more conservative and orthodox Muslims (i.e. the kind that would encourage or force their wives, daughters or sisters to completely cover up or be shunned) are the open-minded ones here. Neither I, nor anybody here, has suggested anything of the sort. My point is that the discriminatory laws in place right now are those supported by the white, Catholic/atheist majority, and are targeted against a non-white minority. That's not something that a modern, open, human rights-valuing society does, sorry to break it to you. That's what fascists do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's great and all that they have lovely opinions. Guess what? lovely opinions aren't laws. The laws and ordinances that the government has in place are the ones directed against Muslims, not in favor of them. It's still codified discrimination in favor of a white majority. They are targeted against an abusive practice that does indeed occur with non-zero frequency. If a white Frenchie decides that his daughters are property and should have a sack over their head at all times, it will apply to them also. The goal is to reach a point when Muslims and Christians will be equally unlikely to act in ways that require the state to step in and issue specific laws to protect its citizens. Only if you assume that Muslims in France are inherently predisposed to being extremely patriarchal, and that this can't, or shouldn't be changed, does your opinion make much sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Are they the ones banning types of swimsuits that make them uncomfortable in Western countries? Not through laws., through actions. The article you probably couldn't read because it wasn't in English described how "youths" had thrown stones at a woman who was not decently clad enough. She had to flee. Also, you asked me about citation about the US being pickier than Europe way back. I'll gently point you towards the Immigration Act of 1924 that was specifically aimed at keeping swarthy people out of the US and only fully repealed in 1978. This law restricted immigration into the US on the basis of the percentage of population they had in the US in the 1890ies. As there were few Muslims in the US in the 1890ies this effectively made it near impossible for Muslims to immigrate to the US until the law was repealed. I'd call that "picky". Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 10:06 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Mark Blyth is filling the whole Varoufakis left when his speeches and interviews became to expensive. Mark Blythe is getting press because the conclusions of his previous research and book have been increasingly validated by the events of the last 2 years. I guess you should be blaming reality for not living up to your expectations? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:54
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:They are targeted against an abusive practice that does indeed occur with non-zero frequency. If a white Frenchie decides that his daughters are property and should have a sack over their head at all times, it will apply to them also. The goal is to reach a point when Muslims and Christians will be equally unlikely to act in ways that require the state to step in and issue specific laws to protect its citizens. Only if you assume that Muslims in France are inherently predisposed to being extremely patriarchal, and that this can't, or shouldn't be changed, does your opinion make much sense. Is this the point when you start accusing other people of the things you yourself believe? Because the only way a legal ban makes sense is if you assume that Muslims in France are inherently predisposed to being extremely patriarchal, and that this can't be changed. Also a blanket law obviously needs a bit more rationale behind it than that it's targeted against an abusive practice that does occur with non-zero frequency. Otherwise you might end up having to support some pretty bad things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
Pluskut Tukker posted:France has something like 35,000 municipalities. One mayor for one hamlet of 800 people (out of a total population of 66 million) banning Pokemon Go does not equate to "the French banning Pokemon go". I would prefer to state "Europe is in process of banning Pokémon Go" since it might happen in a part of the western end of Eurasian continental plate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:41
|
|
|
El Perkele posted:I would prefer to state "Europe is in process of banning Pokémon Go" since it might happen in a part of the western end of Eurasian continental plate. I think the proper term would 'the world' in this case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I think the proper term would 'the world' in this case. no that's some global politics/leftism/accelerationism thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Is this the point when you start accusing other people of the things you yourself believe? Because the only way a legal ban makes sense is if you assume that Muslims in France are inherently predisposed to being extremely patriarchal, and that this can't be changed. I believe clothing-related abuse is a thing that happens, and given some time + effort it need not happen in the future. Is a ban on swimwear a key step in the strategy of eradicating regressive personal politics? No. Is it a symbolic gesture with a marginal practical effect? Yes. Will it be counter-productive and fuel resentment? Maybe, hopefully it will not. I guess in other words I think it's a waste of time, but the sentiment behind it of fighting enforced modesty is good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:but the sentiment behind it of fighting enforced modesty is good. Racism level: 110% 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:56
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Even if everything happened exactly as described by the lynch mob, of which I'm more than a little dubious, how is banning certain swimwear an appropriate response? Does the mayor suspect that when a woman puts a burkini and is exposed to a high level of UV rays she transforms into a man and starts attacking Westerners? 1- ban burkinis 2- ultra-orthodox women stop going to the beach 3- ??? 4- VICTORY! Whaaaat? e: steinrokkan posted:I believe clothing-related abuse is a thing that happens, and given some time + effort it need not happen in the future. Is a ban on swimwear a key step in the strategy of eradicating regressive personal politics? No. Is it a symbolic gesture with a marginal practical effect? Yes. Will it be counter-productive and fuel resentment? Maybe, hopefully it will not. I guess in other words I think it's a waste of time, but the sentiment behind it of fighting enforced modesty is good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:How do you feel about nuns?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I believe clothing-related abuse is a thing that happens, and given some time + effort it need not happen in the future. Is a ban on swimwear a key step in the strategy of eradicating regressive personal politics? No. Is it a symbolic gesture with a marginal practical effect? Yes. Will it be counter-productive and fuel resentment? Maybe, hopefully it will not. I guess in other words I think it's a waste of time, but the sentiment behind it of fighting enforced modesty is good. So you believe that the oppression of women is such a huge problem that France needs to make an entirely symbolic gesture against it? Well, that sure makes perfect sense. EDIT: Not to mention the inherent idiocy of making a symbolic gesture that will reasonably harm both those who choose to dress modestly and those who are forced to. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 10:09 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:So you believe that the oppression of women is such a huge problem that France needs to make an entirely symbolic gesture against it? Well, that sure makes perfect sense. As I said, it's pointless, and not part of addressing the issue effectively.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:As I said, it's pointless, and not part of addressing the issue effectively. So why are you so adamant in defending it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:So why are you so adamant in defending it? I'm more against calling people racist for supporting it than being in favor of it myself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
How about we just call those who support it 'loving idiots' and then those who think it's a bad idea for various reasons can all be in agreement and nobody gets their feelings hurt?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I'm more against calling people racist for supporting it than being in favor of it myself. If the measure is, as you note, obviously useless and isn't going to improve the lot of any woman (rather the opposite, in fact) one cannot be reasonably motivated by reasons of women's liberation to support it. So what likely motivations does that leave us for supporting the ban besides sticking it to the muslims?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:So what likely motivations does that leave us for supporting the ban besides sticking it to the muslims? Much would be won, if people would stop atrributing this misogynistic piece of clothing to "the Muslins". Only a very small minority of hardcore radicals is wearing it. This is like calling a hypothetical ban of the Ku-Klux don as "sticking it to the Whites".
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
So you'd ban Holy Week in Spain because some hardcore racists wear something similar and that scares you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:Much would be won, if people would stop atrributing this misogynistic piece of clothing to "the Muslins". What if muslin is the material.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:Much would be won, if people would stop atrributing this misogynistic piece of clothing to "the Muslins". Only a very small minority of hardcore radicals is wearing it. This is like calling a hypothetical ban of the Ku-Klux don as "sticking it to the Whites". This is the most low-rent concern trolling I've ever seen, and I post in Finpol.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:This is the most low-rent concern trolling I've ever seen, and I post in Finpol. Of course, it'd be easier if we all simply discarded disagreeing people's arguments as insincere or obtuse. But that's the solution of people who prefer to live in a echo chamber or filter bubble. I am actually concerned that the butthurt feelings of a small and reactionary minority are used as a pretext to somehow construct this as an assault on an uninvolved majority. This is how political cleavages are made. YF-23 posted:What if muslin is the material. Wouldn't prevent people from somehow turning it into a political slap fight. Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 11:46 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
Ligur posted:I hate replying to the Grammar Troll but I actually corrected your diction, not your grammar, although your grammar is comically broken half the time. Ligur posted:Take Scherbeek and Molenbeek in Belgium for example though, it doesn't seem the jihadists/recruiters are exactly driven out of the neighbourhood is it? And the population of Molenbeek certainly did not co-operate with officials en masse, even though it was apparently public knowledge among the "community" certain individuals were hiding there That's nice dear but Friendly Humour was talking about the fact that refugees by and large loving hate Daesh. I additionally mentioned the economic migrants because I'm talking about people I've interacted with in real life. I know the concept of socialising is alien to you but some of us do it, and because I live in a utopia of high diversity (or a cesspool of miscegenation as you'd call it) I encounter a lot of the fabled Muslim, none of whom I've found supports Daesh. This isn't to say some of them don't have questionable views on Israel, but even the most openly racist ones has not shown any allegiance to terror groups and considers them un-Islamic. Ligur posted:Oh shut up. What the hell is it with the pro -migration/leftie -posters and totally idiotic hyperboles here. Who, exactly, assured you of that again? No one. We all know that. So why do you have to make these "sarcastic" and "edgy" posts so frigging often to begin with, that is, if you are not posting about "white people" and "brown people"... Because people like you come out with dumb poo poo and I find it funny to mock you. If I felt you had the mental capacity to be convinced that Muslims aren't the most imminent threat to the west I'd be more charitable to your views. Hell, in my lovely shithole of a country you're far more likely to die homeless than in a terror attack. Tesseraction fucked around with this message at 12:12 on Aug 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:
Crikey what happened between March and April?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 12:11
|
|