|
V. Illych L. posted:in denmark, Venstre is the mainstream right, in norway Venstre are the Liberals (social-liberal/libertarian educated middle-class party), in sweden Vänster are the party to the left of the social democrats Finland also has the same as Sweden, though it is super weird that they're so controversial to the Centre in Sweden that there has to be a specific policy in them not influencing government?
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
the swedish social democrats have been leaning heavily on liberal coalition partners and are taking V for granted. the centre parties will have wanted guarantees that the social democrats not get roving eyes and start depending on anyone of which they don't approve to pass budgets and laws etc
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 19:02
|
|
|
Venstre in Denmark used to be called Højre (right), presumably because they thought that the average Dane is dumb enough to think that'd make them more socialist?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Finland also has the same as Sweden, though it is super weird that they're so controversial to the Centre in Sweden that there has to be a specific policy in them not influencing government? They too probably bet on V not being able to to launch a vote of no confidence on their own. They didn't expect SD to support V (even if it's for different goals). Collateral Damage fucked around with this message at 11:57 on Jun 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 20:13
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:Venstre in Denmark used to be called Højre (right), presumably because they thought that the average Dane is dumb enough to think that'd make them more socialist?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:in denmark, Venstre is the mainstream right, in norway Venstre are the Liberals (social-liberal/libertarian educated middle-class party), in sweden Vänster are the party to the left of the social democrats Thanks for the explanation (and thanks to the other Scandinavians here) but God drat is this confusing for a foreigner looking in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 22:41
|
|
|
They say that leftists are splitters and we all know fascists are messy bitches, but it seems like any self-declared centrist party tends to blow itself up almost immediately.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 10:02
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:No. Højre became the conservatives, all the various forms of Venstre have always had Venstre in the name. Which is why you have both Venstre and Radikale Venstre today. is Radikale Venstre then the same as radical centrists
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 10:29
|
|
|
Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 10:45
|
|
|
Swedish centre party is even worse, as they have the most extreme right position on economics of any swedish party (an-caps and libertarians basically).
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 11:02
|
|
|
Denmark On the left, we got: The Social Democrats have drifted right, and has gotten into means-testing... "both sides, but Israel has right to be secure behind their borders" I've heard 'Radical Left' (Radikale Venstre) refereed to as "Café latte socialists", and It might not be entirely wrong. "both sides, but it doesn't matter, Israel is still wrong" then there is 'Socialist People's Party', they are to the left of Bernie Sanders. (but aren't full socialists) "sanction Israel" then there is 'Unity List' UBI, Duty to accept ALL refugees. "Israel are commiting warcrimes" Not even going to discuss the right, they are all pro Israel
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 11:09
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:They say that leftists are splitters and we all know fascists are messy bitches, but it seems like any self-declared centrist party tends to blow itself up almost immediately. I remember reading someone opine about this in the 90's or so that "centre-branded" parties are a mostly Scandinavian thing in Europe. What the parties branded as "centre" do politically is a completely arbitrary thing, it seems, but for example here in Finland we've had the "centre" party in government for most of my adult life. I don't know if it works exactly the same in Sweden etc., but the "centre" party here is very much rooted as the "agrarian" party (whatever that may mean), so they have a lot of voters from rural areas. Of course with the up-swing of fascism in Europe, this bit of political living space is being eaten by the populists!
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 11:19
|
|
|
There's also the old Zentrum in Germany, which was mostly Conservative party but specifically courting the catholic population and regions in Germany. Anyway both with them and the Scandinavian Center party they aren't really "centrist" in the way that term is used alot today, typically they are characterized by representinting some group of voters or specific issues that aren't necessarily defining or points of contention between the big parties on the left and right (and they usually got their name back when "right" meant establishment bureaucrats and nobles vs the "left" generally those in favor of increased democratization in various ways). In Norway the center party has been definied by it beginning its existence as "bondepartiet", the farmers' party, and their thing has been being anti-centralizaion, anti-EU and generally pro rural agricultural and industrial subsidies, and generally also opposed to privatization and NPP in general. They also happened to be the party that our WWII era fascist movement spawned from.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 12:11
|
|
|
SniHjen posted:Denmark Kind of odd how your purity test is a stance on Israel, something that has about 0 implications for domestic politics. Then again, there is an increasing correlation between being pro-Israel and espousing horrible right-wing politics at home, so you're probably not entirely wrong to highlight this. Rappaport posted:I remember reading someone opine about this in the 90's or so that "centre-branded" parties are a mostly Scandinavian thing in Europe. What the parties branded as "centre" do politically is a completely arbitrary thing, it seems, but for example here in Finland we've had the "centre" party in government for most of my adult life. I don't know if it works exactly the same in Sweden etc., but the "centre" party here is very much rooted as the "agrarian" party (whatever that may mean), so they have a lot of voters from rural areas. Of course with the up-swing of fascism in Europe, this bit of political living space is being eaten by the populists! Centre parties in the Benelux are also rooted in agrarian Christian parties. I suspect that a major difference between Christian-inspired parties in, say, Poland or other countries is that the Christian movements in most of Germanic Europe accepted some basic precepts of socialism (e.g. through the papal letter De Rerum Novarum for Catholic countries) while in other countries they mostly remained forces of reactionary conservatism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 17:04
|
|
|
Pope Hilarius II posted:Kind of odd how your purity test is a stance on Israel, something that has about 0 implications for domestic politics. Then again, there is an increasing correlation between being pro-Israel and espousing horrible right-wing politics at home, so you're probably not entirely wrong to highlight this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 17:21
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:goon: I wanna sleep with (famous actress/model). I should divorce. People seem to be forgetting how the EU actively, explicitly turbo hosed the south of Europe permanently and how this "economic bazooka" comes with a massive consequence that will be paid with future austerity and it really shows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 19:29
|
|
|
Mans posted:People seem to be forgetting how the EU actively, explicitly turbo hosed the south of Europe permanently and how this "economic bazooka" comes with a massive consequence that will be paid with future austerity and it really shows. Please explain in as much detail as you can how the EU actively, explicitly turbo hosed the south of Europe permanently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 06:33
|
|
|
The introduction of the euro completely demolished the low-value currency economic model they had been relying on, for one thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 08:22
|
|
|
The lack of fiscal transfers in a fixed exchange range regime built up massive credit imbalances. The enforced austerity ruined productivity and weakened private and public sector institutions. The enforced fire-sale of assets to pensioneers and China.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 09:17
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Please explain in as much detail as you can how the EU actively, explicitly turbo hosed the south of Europe permanently. Love to smugly ask this question in the timeline where Greece happened
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 09:20
|
|
|
Read the letter that the ECB sent to the Zapatero government ffs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 09:34
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Please explain in as much detail as you can how the EU actively, explicitly turbo hosed the south of Europe permanently.  Please tell me you're a 16 year old German who has been completely and utterly ignorant of any consequences of this institutionalized mafia ring. The EU has destroyed the economies of the peripheral countries, who were fondly called GIPSI (the EU apologists are such a class act  ) and If I have to describe not only the social, political and economic disaster that was auserity but the actual human cost, then I seriously hope that you were a kid and simply don't recall what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 12:40
|
|
|
Wasn't it PIIGS. But I don't think their economies are destroyed exactly, at least any more than in recent history. Especially Ireland but the others have mostly recovered as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 12:43
|
|
|
both GIPSI and PIIGS were used the recoveries in the southern countries in particular have been, shall we say, incomplete. there's still ludicrous unemployment, for instance, and what little remained of italian democracy is basically in total tatters at this point; whatever welfare state was in place has been fatally undermined, and they're denied the use of effective industrial policy. enormous sums of education have been spent on youth who've pretty much picked up and left because there are no jobs the situation isn't as totally precarious as it was during the acute crisis, but "recovered" is imo too strong a word for how the mediterranean countries have developed
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
I mean yes it's been mismanaged (or underfunded rather), but it's worth remembering those economies have had rough times before as well - Italian unemployment is still lower than for the period of 1995-2000 for instance, and that's including the effects of Covid-19.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 13:17
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:I mean yes it's been mismanaged (or underfunded rather), but it's worth remembering- It's really not. The 00's ended over a decade ago, keep up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 14:46
|
|
|
"Yeah, I beat him to pulp. But let's not forget, he tripped once."
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 15:16
|
|
|
Beat him to a pulp = commited 0.5T euro in bailouts, most of which was written off. I know I'm not going to win that argument here though, so it's besides the point. The austerity was bad but the EU genuinely tried to help, at least within what their electorates allowed them to do. Also note that was not money that has been printed for that purpose (for better or worse, but ECB is not under EU jurisdiction) but came from the member states for the most part. Also more generally lots of eastern europe was badly hit by the crisis too but received nothing and had to contribute to the bailouts instead. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jun 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Beat him to a pulp = commited 0.5T euro in bailouts, most of which was written off. And Germany tried to help by purchasing up all of the Greek airports for debt collection.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 15:41
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:And Germany tried to help by purchasing up all of the Greek airports for debt collection. You mean it was forced to privatise them and then German multinational bought them. The truth is that you'd need the member states to contribute perhaps ten times as much as they had (so 5T or so) if you wanted to subsidise the previous spending, the scale of which has been hidden by the governments in question - including on the lossmaking airports. And no other country was going to do that, especially when half of the EU is poorer (some significantly so) than Italy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Beat him to a pulp = commited 0.5T euro in bailouts, most of which was written off. This is absolute horseshit. The money went to satisfy debts held by private parties, mostly banks, and as such was a massive transfer of public -> private funds, and the following austerity was a further resource grab. If that's help, I'd like to see what harm looks like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Osmosisch posted:This is absolute horseshit. The money went to satisfy debts held by private parties, mostly banks, and as such was a massive transfer of public -> private funds, and the following austerity was a further resource grab. If that's help, I'd like to see what harm looks like. What should have been done? The problem was that the national debt interest rates have ballooned up to unsustainable levels. We are talking up to 30% interest on borrowing for Greece. Your options are a) go bankrupt or inflate away the debt, which means zero deficit or possible hyperinflation, since it won't be possible to raise any more capital via the national debt - and doing this will also wipe out the national banks and pension funds (and severely damage banks in other EU countries, true). b) massive spending cuts, several times what was required by the EU, to eliminate the deficit and ensure immediate surplus, which is not easy to do in the middle of the crisis c) get money from other EU countries and use it to refinance the debt, which does bail out investors, banks and pension funds and also gives some leeway in not needing to have completely balanced budget right away or require you to explode your economy via hyperinflation and quitting euro d) get permanent transfers from rich eu countries, allowing to keep the level of spending prior to crisis Unfortunately d) is impossibly unpopular in the countries that would be paying. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Jun 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Beat him to a pulp = commited 0.5T euro in bailouts, most of which was written off. 1. the eu bailout went to repaying debts to that same eu, all they did was transfer even more burden onto the greek taxpayer while helping their own out 2. aren't eastern euro states net recipients of euro money since forever
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:08
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:1. the eu bailout went to repaying debts to that same eu, all they did was transfer even more burden onto the greek taxpayer 1. much of the debt was owned by banks and funds within the countries 2. not during the bailouts, and if you multiplied those several times and made them transfers instead they would be significant net payers Also "even more burden" - we are talking about a country with a significant tax shortfall, which is the whole problem. There's even some justification for that as a way to pay off the nationalist interests going back to the former dictatorship. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 16:13 on Jun 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:11
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:1. much of the debt was owned by banks and funds within the countries 1. wow great, so the capitalists helped their greek brothers and left the people holding the bag, big difference 2. i don't think anyone except you is talking about permanent transfers
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:13
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:What should have been done?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:13
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:The austerity was bad but the EU genuinely tried to help, at least within what their electorates allowed them to do. It really didn't. As we know today the ECB and Germany prolonged the eurocrisis for over half a decade as the multiple sovereign debt crisis's and their fallout were in themselves a result of the ECB not acting when it could have. As it does today, the ECB just sets the rates. It wasn't an accidental shitshow, Germany wanted to "discipline" the southern member states and several EU-institutions and member states were very willing to play ball. This is all rigourously covered in Blyths Austerity and Tooze's Crashed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
Again the austerity measures were bad (my preferred solution would be higher taxes in the indebted countries instead) and ECB (which isn't the same thing as EU) could have done more by allowing some degree of printing money to pay for the debt. Though it would go against the laws that underpin its existence (largely formulated at the behest of Germany, but that's how it happened back when euro came into being). But that doesn't make the EU as a whole culpable nor does it detract from the central point that some deficit reduction to bring down the interest rate was necessary and it was always going to be painful. Unless you wanted to go bankrupt, but that would be very painful too. Even if you increased taxes to pay for the deficit you'd still have negative effects, but you could have targeted those more at the rich and wealthy, admittedly. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Jun 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Again the austerity measures were bad (my preferred solution would be higher taxes in the indebted countries instead) You're describing austerity. That is what that term means. Cutting spending and raising taxes are both examples of austerity. Private Speech posted:But that doesn't make the EU as a whole culpable nor does it detract from the central point that some deficit reduction to bring down the interest rate was necessary and it was always going to be painful. Yes it does. That the EU is a boondogle of intertwined institutions rather than a single one doesn't change the fact that the common currency area is a core pillar of the entire union. Almost every member state is tied to the fixed exchange policy, which makes parliament the arbiter of transfers and the ECB arbiter of monetary supply. The ECB botched the crisis. Read some of the literature as it is very clear you know very little on this topic. Yield curve control is not a hypotethical question anymore, it's not 2011. The ECB, just like the Fed, decides with messaging (and purchases if necessary) what the interest is on sovereign debt in its denominated currency. The ECB is a sovereign institution just like most modern central banks, it needs no ones approval but its own. It didn't need to be painful, it was decided that it was going to be. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Jun 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
MiddleOne posted:It really didn't. As we know today the ECB and Germany prolonged the eurocrisis for over half a decade as the multiple sovereign debt crisis's and their fallout were in themselves a result of the ECB not acting when it could have. As it does today, the ECB just sets the rates. This is what drives me insane, this is settled.proved.a fact. A matter of public record. loving Mario draghi was the most sane leader in the eu in the past decade, that should be a damming indictment of everyone involved.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2021 16:30
|
|
