Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: Nenonen)
What should the presidential powers be in 2020?
This poll is closed.
UNLIMITED!!!! URKKI 2.0!!!!!! 3 23.08%
Sauli should be allowed to telecast to our homes whenever he pleases, but that should be the limit. 2 15.38%
He should be limited to writing mildly worded letters to HBL and other provincial newspapers. 2 15.38%
None. More power to Sanna & Katri & Maria & Li & Anna-Maja & Jenni! 2 15.38%
Unlimited, but every decision must be subject to a plebiscite. 0 0%
None, but the president's life must be video streamed 24 /7 for the duration of their term, with no censorship. 4 30.77%
Total: 13 votes
[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

 
  • Post
  • Reply
Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

Siivola posted:

Siis joo totta kai työn hinta laskee jos työvoimaa on liikaa, mutta eikö sitä muka ole ihan liikaa jo nyt? Ihan yhtä vähän työsuojelulaista tietää se lukiojonne, joka haluaa tehdä varastoduunia kaks kesää ja mennä sen jälkeen kiskomaan viinaa korkeakouluun. Perheellisillä aikuisilla olisi edes jokin syy yrittää pysyä työssään ja liittyä liittoon. Rajapolitiikasta itkeminen alkaa olla tässä kohtaa ihan turhaa persuretoriikan hokemista.

ef uusi sivu

Se on kyllä sääli että se itku on tällä hetkellä suosituin puolue :ohdear:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

endlessmonotony
Nov 4, 2009

by Fritz the Horse

Rappaport posted:

ef uusi sivu

Se on kyllä sääli että se itku on tällä hetkellä suosituin puolue :ohdear:

Ei merkkaa kyselyt mitään, vain äänestykset.

Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

endlessmonotony posted:

Ei merkkaa kyselyt mitään, vain äänestykset.

Muistamme toki kaikki soinismit, mutta tuollakin metriikalla itkulla pääsi aika pitkälle

SnowblindFatal
Jan 7, 2011

uncop posted:

People should be taught at school that there is always a target unemployment rate and once it is crossed, financial operations are performed to inhibit investment in labor. As is, it's way too easy to fool people to blame immigration for the historical appearance of that persistent unemployment rate. As is, the unnegotiable first priority is that a large enough proportion of people are unemployed so that wage levels stay under control. As long as that policy is in effect, what immigration actually does is pretty much the opposite of what it's accused of doing: instead of taking jobs from you, they open space for new jobs that you are statistically more likely to get than them.

Haha ok but that sounds like then we're just condemning the newcomers to be hated unemployed outsiders and that doesn't sound like a very fruitful scenario either.

Otherwise what you say makes sense but I don't have the data to know whether it's true or not. I'd question politicians' abilities to be able to maintain even a relatively steady level of unemployment, but the world is a hosed up place so what do you know.


Siivola posted:

Jos edes Suomessa syntyneet duunarit ei osaa liittyä liittoihin, liitot voi esim. mennä itteensä.

Siis joo totta kai työn hinta laskee jos työvoimaa on liikaa, mutta eikö sitä muka ole ihan liikaa jo nyt? Ihan yhtä vähän työsuojelulaista tietää se lukiojonne, joka haluaa tehdä varastoduunia kaks kesää ja mennä sen jälkeen kiskomaan viinaa korkeakouluun. Perheellisillä aikuisilla olisi edes jokin syy yrittää pysyä työssään ja liittyä liittoon. Rajapolitiikasta itkeminen alkaa olla tässä kohtaa ihan turhaa persuretoriikan hokemista.


Mistä tulikin mieleen, vittu että vituttaakin kun en koskaan hankkinut ammattitutkintoa. Ei saatana.

Kyseisen aviisin perusteella noin 70 % kantaväestä kuuluu liittoon verrattuna maahantulijoiden 30 %:iin. Jos vielä kolmannen kerran luotetaan tuohon lehteen ja todetaan, että liittoon liitytään yleensä suvun tai kavereiden suosituksesta, eikö silloin ole erityisen tärkeää, että väestö jo lähtökohtaisesti koostuisi enimmäkseen liittoon kuuluvista, koska käännyttäminen on niin vaikeaa? Jos maahantulijoissa oletusarvona on, että ei kuuluta liittoon ja näiden kaverit ja suku on samaa maata, sisäänajo suomalaiseen kulttuuriin esimerkiksi juuri tämänkaltaisessa asiassa on vaikeaa. Lopputulemana työnantaja voi matalan koulutustason alalla polkea työoloja heikon järjestäytymisasteen vuoksi.

Eikä tässäkään ole tarkoitus syyllistää ketään. Lähes kaikille meistä lopulta perhe ja kaverit ovat ne isoimmat auktoriteetit, eikä siinä auta jos joku virastotäti tai liiton agitaattori (lol oliski) selittää jotain.

Lisäksi huomauttaisin, että jos täysin avoimien rajojen vastustaminen tarkoittaa, että "itkee rajapolitiikasta", toteutetaan juuri sitä "poliittisen korrektiuden" mekanismia, josta vasemmistoa pilkataan, ja joka saa kovatki herravihaajat kattomaan, löytyisikö se pienin paha sittenkin jostain toisesta puolueesta.


...kts. langan otsikko

Siivola
Dec 23, 2012

:qq: vassarit huumorisivustolla sanoi pahasti, tän takii meillä on natseja kaduilla :qq:

Voi vittu nyt oikeesti.

DanTheFryingPan
Jan 28, 2006
https://twitter.com/PS_Nuoret/status/1129657878413885440

Both sides, etc.

No. 1 Callie Fan
Feb 17, 2011

This inkling is your FRIEND
She fights for LOVE

I thought we wanted to be black.

Triple A
Jul 14, 2010

Your sword, sahib.

Siivola posted:

:qq: vassarit huumorisivustolla sanoi pahasti, tän takii meillä on natseja kaduilla :qq:

Voi vittu nyt oikeesti.

tää sivusto ei ole ollut humoristinen koko tämän vuosikymmenen

Catpain Slack
Apr 1, 2014

BAAAAAAH

Triple A posted:

tää sivusto ei ole ollut humoristinen koko tämän vuosikymmenen

Enpä tiedä, sun postaushistoria on kyllä yhtä vitsiä.

fart_man_69
May 18, 2009

SnowblindFatal posted:

joka saa kovatki herravihaajat kattomaan, löytyisikö se pienin paha sittenkin jostain toisesta puolueesta.

You've been repeating this silly theory over and over and it's simply not true. Those people are not herravihaajia, just vihaajia in general. Immigration (or talking about immigration) does not create right-wing political sentiment - its basis is in the suffering and ignorance of the population. Most people who say they might vote for the left if it weren't for this or that person's or party's position on immigration are merely attempting to justify to others what they know to be a selfish and nihilistic worldview. Some are just completely clueless and genuinely scared, but not one of them is someone who wishes to challenge authority in favour of justice.

Darkest Auer
Dec 30, 2006

They're silly

Ramrod XTreme
Missä on Ilmaista kaljaa kaikille -puolue?

germlin
May 31, 2011
Fun Shoe
Maahanmuuttajat joivat sen ilmaisen kaljan.

Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

https://twitter.com/iinapalo/status/1130163010306236417

quote:

Paikallinen nuorisojoukko tappoi torstain ja perjantain välisenä useita kissoja raa asti Inarissa. Viisi 14--17-vuotiasta nuorta murtautui Inarin kirkonkylän tuntumassa olleeseen kesämökkiin ja tappoi raa alla tavalla kesämökillä olleet kissat.

Poliisin mukaan osa kissoista tapettiin mökin sisällä ja osa ulkona lyömällä puisella esineellä. Tappamisen jälkeen koulupojat polttivat kissojen ruumiit. Inarin poliisin vanhemman konstaapelin Anssi Teittisen mukaan kissoja oli alle kymmenen. Pojilla ei ollut mitään suhdettä kesämökin omistajaan. Nuorisojoukko kävi mökillä useampaan otteeseen.

Kesämökin paikkakuntalainen omistaja löysi kissojen jääneet tullessaan mökille. Omistaja ilmoitti asiasta poliisille, ja poliisi sai pojat nopeasti kiinni. Sunnuntain poliisikuulusteluissa pojat tunnustivat teon. Juttu etenee syyttäjälle ja poikia tullaan syyttämään eläinsuojelurikoksesta.

Äänestys: Kumpi on pahempi, kissojen tappaminen vai pahasti sanominen netissä?

Arvasitte oikein, PAHASTI SANOMINEN NETISSÄ on kaameaa!

e: ei jumalauta miten lol

Rappaport fucked around with this message at 20:21 on May 19, 2019

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa
On porukan vietävissä tyhmyyksiin, mutta onneksi europarlamentissa on vain fiksuja ihmisiä ja siellä myös puututaan rivakasti alkoholiongelma.

Tosin uskon kyllä että ihminen voi muuttua aikuistuessaan, mutta aika moni on sellaisia Hakkaraisia jotka eivät koskaan kypsy. Hakkaraisen kohdalla se on tietysti vain eduksi.

Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

Nenonen posted:

On porukan vietävissä tyhmyyksiin, mutta onneksi europarlamentissa on vain fiksuja ihmisiä ja siellä myös puututaan rivakasti alkoholiongelma.

Tosin uskon kyllä että ihminen voi muuttua aikuistuessaan, mutta aika moni on sellaisia Hakkaraisia jotka eivät koskaan kypsy. Hakkaraisen kohdalla se on tietysti vain eduksi.

Niin, kyllähän Amerikassakin lynkataan

3D Megadoodoo
Nov 25, 2010

Pröööhh!

SnowblindFatal
Jan 7, 2011

fart_man_69 posted:

Immigration (or talking about immigration) does not create right-wing political sentiment - its basis is in the suffering and ignorance of the population.
I fully agree here. However, immigration as it is provides such an easy target for an opportunistic politician to grab onto and is linked to such primitive fears in the human psyche that there are many dangers involved. People are less eager to pay taxes for the welfare state if they feel like the money is going to people they don't approve. Again, right wing and anti-immigration parties benefit. Those parties in turn implement policies which further hurt the economic and educational status of people with low income or who are unemployed, etc.

fart_man_69 posted:

a selfish and nihilistic worldview.
As opposed to what? Once you attach some objective meaning to human societies and ultimately life itself, you're already deluding yourself. Likewise, to claim that not each and every person is selfish is serious misconception. We do things that make us feel good, and thus it is important to guide people to have experiences where they feel good by being respectful and helpful to other people. Judging by the nature of all human societies and our close fellows from the animal kingdom, it appears obvious that our species is built to feel good about being nice to others as long as some basic conditions apply and there isn't a conflict of interest. Being friendly feels good and that's why I do it. Likewise it feels good to be an rear end in a top hat in a heated argument where both parties feel the other is to blame (better to be avoided, sure, but let's be honest here).

The reason so many people hate is because they've never known love. A human being cannot really imagine something that he hasn't experienced himself. We base our actions on how we imagine the world to be.

What is the goal here? Is the ultimate justice whatever action produces the best odds for human species to survive? Minimising the amount of suffering and maximising pleasure for the currently living population? What is the goal of justice?

Since there is no truth but the subjective one, it turns out that justice is exactly what any person is doing at any given time. No one feels like their actions are unjust. There are always good grounds or special circumstances that support your current mode of operation.

No. 1 Callie Fan
Feb 17, 2011

This inkling is your FRIEND
She fights for LOVE
Looks like the government talks are reaching a crisis of some sort, with some leakers attributing the fault to a lack of leadership. That's probably the case when you have a weather vane like Antti Rinne on the helm.

endlessmonotony
Nov 4, 2009

by Fritz the Horse
That, or it's just Sipilä throwing a tantrum to the media.

Forktoss
Feb 13, 2012

I'm OK, you're so-so
https://www.is.fi/politiikka/art-2000006114592.html

quote:

Hämmennystä on herättänyt myös hengennostatustilaisuus, jonka Rinne järjesti tiistaiaamuna Säätytalolla kaikille neuvottelijoille.

Rinne huudatti neuvottelijoita kysymällä heiltä ”halutaanko me tästä hallitus?”.

Antti is taking the Hulk Hogan approach to hallitusneuvottelut

fart_man_69
May 18, 2009

Forktoss posted:

https://www.is.fi/politiikka/art-2000006114592.html


Antti is taking the Hulk Hogan approach to hallitusneuvottelut

What the gently caress is wrong with that idiot lol

bloom
Feb 25, 2017

by sebmojo
Maybe we deserve kokperskusta mk2 after all.

SnowblindFatal
Jan 7, 2011
https://www.hs.fi/paivanlehti/21052019/art-2000006111867.html

Joo eli demarit olisi hilpeästi vain jatkaneet valtion omaisuuden myymislinjalla samoin ku vihreät ja kaikki muutki paitsi vassarit. Jos lainaa saa 0 % korolla ja siitä saa > 0 % tuoton niin hmm...

fart_man_69
May 18, 2009

SnowblindFatal posted:

As opposed to what? Once you attach some objective meaning to human societies and ultimately life itself, you're already deluding yourself. Likewise, to claim that not each and every person is selfish is serious misconception. We do things that make us feel good, and thus it is important to guide people to have experiences where they feel good by being respectful and helpful to other people. Judging by the nature of all human societies and our close fellows from the animal kingdom, it appears obvious that our species is built to feel good about being nice to others as long as some basic conditions apply and there isn't a conflict of interest. Being friendly feels good and that's why I do it. Likewise it feels good to be an rear end in a top hat in a heated argument where both parties feel the other is to blame (better to be avoided, sure, but let's be honest here).

The reason so many people hate is because they've never known love. A human being cannot really imagine something that he hasn't experienced himself. We base our actions on how we imagine the world to be.

What is the goal here? Is the ultimate justice whatever action produces the best odds for human species to survive? Minimising the amount of suffering and maximising pleasure for the currently living population? What is the goal of justice?

Since there is no truth but the subjective one, it turns out that justice is exactly what any person is doing at any given time. No one feels like their actions are unjust. There are always good grounds or special circumstances that support your current mode of operation.

Your definition of selfishness is broad enough to encompass all human thought and is completely useless. By your thinking there is no point to moral philosophy or even a general assertion of morality. I used to entertain thoughts like that when I was younger but please realize that you're just painting yourself into a corner.

Likewise, how you treat the concept of justice is abstract and divorced from actual human experience. There is a common, shared understanding of justice among all mature humans (excluding disturbed individuals). Anthropological research concerning extant hunter-gatherer tribes (who are free from state control) proves this. The innate human conception of justice is full democracry and full equality in all things political. You can use google to find overviews of the existing literature.

Worrying about the subjectivity of truth is utterly fruitless. It's a philosophical dead end and reveals absolutely nothing about life as it actually is.

Lastly, everyone, excluding psychopaths and other similarly hosed up individuals, feels and knows when their actions are unjust. That's what feelings of shame and guilt signal to you. This goes back to our commonly shared human understanding of justice. It is only in highly privileged (edit: or materially deprived and desperate) people that there might be genuine confusion as to what is just and what is not. But that's not their fault. It's the ignorance I mentioned in my previous post - the root of dissonance.

fart_man_69 fucked around with this message at 16:58 on May 22, 2019

Herman Merman
Jul 6, 2008

fart_man_69 posted:

Anthropological research concerning extant hunter-gatherer tribes (who are free from state control) proves this. The innate human conception of justice is full democracry and full equality in all things political.

You're going to have to provide some references for that, because it's so far removed from the reality of every single human society in existence it's not even funny.

pigdog
Apr 23, 2004

by Smythe

quote:

Anthropological research concerning extant hunter-gatherer tribes (who are free from state control) proves this. The innate human conception of justice is full democracry and full equality in all things political.

Literally all of human existence has taken place in hierarchical structures. Not even human existence, but all animal existence for that matter.

Sulphagnist
Oct 10, 2006

WARNING! INTRUDERS DETECTED

Leaking stuff from the negotiations when you are not having your way is part of the routine; if I were Rinne I'd tell my people to start leaking anonymous poo poo too because right now all the attention is on whispers from what are probably a handful of hard-right Kepu MPs who want to stir poo poo.

The EU elections are not making things any easier. I think Rinne wanted to get this done before those because Kepu might start getting second thoughts after getting savaged a second time in the EU elections, which lead to this implausibly tight schedule that is gonna fail anyway.

It'd be tempting for SDP to just kick the can if Kepu throw their toys out of the pram but the next government will oversee the sote reform and you really don't want to let the foxes into the henhouse for that.

pigdog posted:

Literally all of human existence has taken place in hierarchical structures. Not even human existence, but all animal existence for that matter.

Nah. Agriculture and urbanization have hosed us up.

Sulphagnist fucked around with this message at 17:50 on May 22, 2019

Andrast
Apr 21, 2010


Sulphagnist posted:

It'd be tempting for SDP to just kick the can if Kepu throw their toys out of the pram but the next government will oversee the sote reform and you really don't want to let the foxes into the henhouse for that.

Not being in the government is not tempting for SDP

uncop
Oct 23, 2010

Herman Merman posted:

You're going to have to provide some references for that, because it's so far removed from the reality of every single human society in existence it's not even funny.

Makes me think of something like this.

quote:

Delving into a research database on cross-cultural variation called the Human Relations Area Files (HRAF, hosted by Yale University), Curry and fellow researchers sought to explore the theory that morality evolved in human cultures to promote cooperation.

To do so, they scanned for evidence of seven discrete moral behaviours across over 600,000 words of ethnographic accounts.

These cooperative behaviours and rules – the proposed universal moral code – are the following: helping family, helping your group, reciprocating, being brave, deferring to superiors (respect), dividing disputed resources (fairness), and respecting prior possession (property rights).

In their analysis, the team found that these seven rules were uniformly considered positive and morally good across the different cultures surveyed – never being construed as morally bad.

A thing to keep in mind however is that the practical application of these kinds of moral heuristics invariably leads to contradictions between them, meaning different societies and political blocs within those societies would interpret them differently in a way that produces success and order within their concrete social context. Humans and animals generally are internally contradictory beings that follow numerous inbuilt and learned heuristics that don't agree with one another, the idea of a harmonious semi-static whole is a fiction that we are also biologically wired to produce about ourselves. Unlike SnowblindFatal says, we can both hate and love even the same person with fluctuating intensities at different times, like the person who stays with an abusive spouse for years and then ends up stabbing them to death.

pigdog posted:

Literally all of human existence has taken place in hierarchical structures. Not even human existence, but all animal existence for that matter.

You have to define hierarchy in a way that makes it completely useless as an analytic concept to be able to make that claim. A meaningful definition of social hierarchy considers it more than just structure with differentiated social roles, and more than structure that contains subordination relations between those roles. The continuation of those subordination relations has to be in control of the dominant party, it has to be able to defend its position against the will of the subordinate party if necessary. Common ant-colony analogies and the like don't fit. And while our great-ape ancestors lived in hierarchical structures, human hunter-gatherer societies did not work like that because they could not work like that, humans evolved to be too social and cunning and so well armed that a small child could kill the strongest adult in the right conditions. Human societies required the ability to produce professional militaries with their command absorbed within a ruling elite before stable social hierarchies could be sustained again.

uncop fucked around with this message at 18:43 on May 22, 2019

endlessmonotony
Nov 4, 2009

by Fritz the Horse

pigdog posted:

Literally all of human existence has taken place in hierarchical structures. Not even human existence, but all animal existence for that matter.

You couldn't be more wrong about this, and that's a pattern for you.

Dry-nosed primate evolution defaults to cooperation and doesn't like fighting or hierarchies when there isn't a clear advantage. It does include equality and comparable outcomes in the innate concept of justice, and this predates talking.

Even the reason is simple. Grudges are expensive, and helping others usually means they help you in return. Humans can accomplish so much more cooperating instead of pointless fighting for positions of authority.

The only reason society shapes the way it does is because it's way easier to be lovely to people you don't have to cooperate with. And who don't have direct access to your food storage. Once you shrink down group size enough, our hierarchies vanish.

Animals, meanwhile? Hierarchies are absolutely the exception, much less hierarchies not based on physical fitness.

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa
omg Siniset still exist and are in a tv debate right now

e: unfortunately, Marco deTwit also still exists in this spiderverse

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa
and Paavo starts ranting about presidential elections without being asked :jerkbag:

No. 1 Callie Fan
Feb 17, 2011

This inkling is your FRIEND
She fights for LOVE

Nenonen posted:

and Paavo starts ranting about presidential elections without being asked :jerkbag:

That's our Paavo. Can't squander any chance to paint himself as a victim.

fart_man_69
May 18, 2009

pigdog posted:

Literally all of human existence has taken place in hierarchical structures. Not even human existence, but all animal existence for that matter.

You're wrong.

No. 1 Callie Fan
Feb 17, 2011

This inkling is your FRIEND
She fights for LOVE
The youth organization of the True Finns tweeted this some time ago:



This etno-nationalistic take has created unintended consequences in the effect of officials rethinking about their funding. Halla-aho and his ilk have condemned the tweet, hoping they'd "grow up" and that this might be the "countdown for misogynists to leave". How much this is actually a thing remains to be seen.

No. 1 Callie Fan fucked around with this message at 08:06 on May 23, 2019

pigdog
Apr 23, 2004

by Smythe

endlessmonotony posted:

Dry-nosed primate evolution defaults to cooperation and doesn't like fighting or hierarchies when there isn't a clear advantage. It does include equality and comparable outcomes in the innate concept of justice, and this predates talking.

Even the reason is simple. Grudges are expensive, and helping others usually means they help you in return. Humans can accomplish so much more cooperating instead of pointless fighting for positions of authority.

Humans (and all social animals) simply compete dominance once or every once in a while, establish the hierarchy, and then cooperate under the terms of the dominant individual. That's how it worked in the stone age, that's how it works in modern democracy.

Nobody actually wants equality. The strong and the rich obviously don't want equality. Even the weak and the poor who would benefit from equality, don't really want equality, more likely they just selfishly want more stuff. Everybody, every organism is selfish. Every ideology that tries to ignore or change that fact, fails spectacularly.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Herman Merman
Jul 6, 2008

You too need to provide the references because this also sounds like it's 100% informed by ideology and not grounded in reality or research.

DarkCrawler
Apr 6, 2009

by vyelkin

pigdog posted:

Every ideology that tries to ignore or change that fact, fails spectacularly.

This is the most equal era that has ever existed by almost every single metric and it has more or less been achieved in two generations, a lightning speed ridicolous success. All ideologies that have and continue to contribute towards that have made such resounding victories that they are accepted as status quo in most of advanced world.

That things aren't PERFECT doesn't mean they have not IMPROVED. That SOME things take setbacks doesn't mean ALL are. That nobody hasn't achieved ABSOLUTE equality doesn't mean they haven't massively INCREASED it.

endlessmonotony
Nov 4, 2009

by Fritz the Horse
Well I knew that trying to talk sense to anyone with that rapsheet would be pointless.

But an innate sense of justice and equality *is* selfish.

There's no hierarchy and the dominant individual doesn't have any pull outside direct interactions with them, and that's because it's dangerous to challenge them.

Only the broken ones (like you) don't want equality.

And that's because it's not selfish to go full fygm - it's stupid. You want to take care of your immediate needs, then share with the group, because the group is the biggest source of strength by a very large margin for humans. There's no true altruism but generosity and a sense of justice is hardcoded toward your fellow humans because a better world is nicer to live in, and makes it more likely your offspring will also be helped by the group. The group is "all of humanity" by the way.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

DarkCrawler
Apr 6, 2009

by vyelkin

endlessmonotony posted:

Well I knew that trying to talk sense to anyone with that rapsheet would be pointless.

I mean its pointless because you get just *crickets* in response. That's no fun.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply