EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

Vincent Van Goatse: Nov 8, 2006; Enjoy every sandwich.; Smellrose

Doctor Malaver posted:

There was a feminist protest in Zagreb recently, under the slogan "To negotiate doesn't mean to surrender, to arm doesn't mean to win".

The problem with this slogan is that negotiation can only happen if both sides actually want to negotiate.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 09:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 01:02

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

If your call for "negotiations" doesn't involve a credible plan to get Russia to the negotiation table, and a way to protect Ukrainian civilians from the genocide Russia aims to commit, I think it's absolutely fair that your motive is questioned.

And quite a lot of people aren't thrilled about having to do this all again when Russian tanks roll into Moldova, Lithuania�

# ? Mar 6, 2023 09:17

forkboy84: Jun 13, 2012; Corgis love bread. And Puro

Antigravitas posted:

If your call for "negotiations" doesn't involve a credible plan to get Russia to the negotiation table, and a way to protect Ukrainian civilians from the genocide Russia aims to commit, I think it's absolutely fair that your motive is questioned.

And quite a lot of people aren't thrilled about having to do this all again when Russian tanks roll into Moldova, Lithuania�

Russian tanks are definitely going to roll into a NATO country, this is a very smart post by a person with opinions worth listening to on international affairs.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Mar 6, 2023 10:41

DarkCrawler: Apr 6, 2009; by vyelkin

Blut posted:

Yeah absolutely, its in smaller numbers, but its still worrying. Its disappointing to see anyone who would call themselves left-wing voting consistently along with the AfD, Le Pen's NR, the Freedom Party of Austria etc - literal cartoonishly evil fascists.

Luckily that is mostly oldies with Soviet nostalgia, the terminal anti-American strain is present in few youth.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 11:11

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

forkboy84 posted:

Russian tanks are definitely going to roll into a NATO country, this is a very smart post by a person with opinions worth listening to on international affairs.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

That is exactly the worry of the Baltics. If Russian aggression isn't met with a determined response, Russia may very well reason that if there's no response to territorial aggression, NATO members may not care enough about smaller member states to actually go to war over territorial incursions. That's why EFP forces are stationed there in response to 2014.

Hope that helps you understand the worries of Russia's smaller neighbours.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 11:18

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

Doctor Malaver posted:

There was a feminist protest in Zagreb recently, under the slogan "To negotiate doesn't mean to surrender, to arm doesn't mean to win". I don't know Sinčić personally (nor do I vote for him) but I do know some of those women and I guarantee that they're not pro-Putin.

In 1991 when the Yugoslav wars were starting, UN passed the arms embargo resolution for Yugoslavia -- when Serbia had almost the entire Yugoslav Peoples Army and Croatia had police. While this benefited Milo�ević enormously, I wouldn't call the politicians from China, UK, USSR, France and USA "pro-Milosevic". Similarly, I wouldn't call the US congressmen who passed the Neutrality Acts in 1937 as "pro-Hitler".

You can hate the politicians who disagree with the West's current approach to war as much as you want, but labeling them all pro-Putin is inaccurate and lazy.

If they're protesting under a slogan thats pushed by Moscow to support Moscow's war aims then those people are acting to support Putin, whether they're aware of it or not.

Calling for an end of supplying weapons for Ukraine to defend itself with, and calling for Ukraine to enter negotiations right now while the Russians still occupy 17% of their country and are committing genocide to the people in it, is being pro-Putin.

Putin can enter negotiations and end the war whenever he wants to by pulling his troops out of Ukraine. Anyone calling for anything other than that is legitimizing his war.

When you're arguing a position thats primarily supported by parties like Le Pen's NR and the AfD then its probably time to sit down and re-assess what you're calling for. Fascists are rarely on the right side of history.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 13:01

Regarde Aduck: Oct 19, 2012; c l o u d k i t t e n; Grimey Drawer

Antigravitas posted:

That is exactly the worry of the Baltics. If Russian aggression isn't met with a determined response, Russia may very well reason that if there's no response to territorial aggression, NATO members may not care enough about smaller member states to actually go to war over territorial incursions. That's why EFP forces are stationed there in response to 2014.

Hope that helps you understand the worries of Russia's smaller neighbours.

Their worries are dumb and not worth caring about. It's like giving a gently caress about people who think gravity is going to reverse and send them all tumbling into the sky.

Russian tanks crossing into the Baltics would most likely send us hurtling into nuclear war. Like they're already in NATO but this isn't enough? It's almost like they want this defensive alliance to be something more. Or maybe they think it already is?

# ? Mar 6, 2023 13:24

mobby_6kl: Aug 9, 2009; by Fluffdaddy

Moldova isn't in NATO.

And considering the weak-rear end response to the 2014 invasion and complete inability to ramp up support to necessary levels within a year, I think it gives pootie plenty of reason to think he might get away with more poo poo.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 13:31

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

According to Russia it is a conspiracy by global capital to strangle the last pure bastion of white Christian culture in a world of degeneracy.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 13:32

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

Regarde Aduck posted:

Their worries are dumb and not worth caring about. It's like giving a gently caress about people who think gravity is going to reverse and send them all tumbling into the sky.

Russian tanks crossing into the Baltics would most likely send us hurtling into nuclear war. Like they're already in NATO but this isn't enough? It's almost like they want this defensive alliance to be something more. Or maybe they think it already is?

There is no credible nuclear deterrent without a credible conventional deterrent.

The weak response in 2014 didn't deter Russia from starting an all-out ground war. A weak response to Russia's imperial conquest would absolutely invite Russia to test how much NATO members care about incursions into the smaller, weaker member states.

Russia has been pretty clear that it considers Moldova and the Baltics to belong to Russia. They have ample reason to be worried.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 13:44

VictualSquid: Feb 29, 2012; Gently enveloping the target with indiscriminate love.

Antigravitas posted:

There is no credible nuclear deterrent without a credible conventional deterrent.

The weak response in 2014 didn't deter Russia from starting an all-out ground war. A weak response to Russia's imperial conquest would absolutely invite Russia to test how much NATO members care about incursions into the smaller, weaker member states.

Russia has been pretty clear that it considers Moldova and the Baltics to belong to Russia. They have ample reason to be worried.

Yeah, and the Ukrainians spend most of 2014 to 2022 begging to be let into NATO. They did that because they believe that Putin would not attack NATO that directly and they believed that Putin absolutely would invade them further if they aren't in NATO. They were obviously correct on the second part despite NATO disagreeing with them, and I do think they are also correct about the first part.
Just like the Finnish post 2022 position.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 14:59

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

Regarde Aduck posted:

Their worries are dumb and not worth caring about. It's like giving a gently caress about people who think gravity is going to reverse and send them all tumbling into the sky.

Russian tanks crossing into the Baltics would most likely send us hurtling into nuclear war. Like they're already in NATO but this isn't enough? It's almost like they want this defensive alliance to be something more. Or maybe they think it already is?

Do you think if Trump, who repeatedly suggested the US should pull out of NATO and is a big fan of Putin, is back in office from 2024 he would launch a nuclear war to defend the Baltic states from a Crimea-style little green men coup?

If the US stayed neutral, do you think the UK and France would start nuclear war against Russia by themselves to defend a Riga that was already occupied before they had time to respond? If you were Latvian would you bet your life and those of your children on it?

Joining NATO is undoubtedly hugely beneficial for their defense. And it should keep them safe. But it would be extremely dangerous for the Baltic states to rely entirely on other states in NATO's nuclear umbrella as their only form of defense from Russia.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 15:20

Not So Fast: Dec 27, 2007

Antigravitas posted:

Russia has been pretty clear that it considers Moldova and the Baltics to belong to Russia. They have ample reason to be worried.

Have they? When did this happen? Is this actually serious policy outside their tabloid press?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Mar 6, 2023 15:42

Badger of Basra: Jul 26, 2007

Doctor Malaver posted:

There was a feminist protest in Zagreb recently, under the slogan "To negotiate doesn't mean to surrender, to arm doesn't mean to win". I don't know Sinčić personally (nor do I vote for him) but I do know some of those women and I guarantee that they're not pro-Putin.

In 1991 when the Yugoslav wars were starting, UN passed the arms embargo resolution for Yugoslavia -- when Serbia had almost the entire Yugoslav Peoples Army and Croatia had police. While this benefited Milo�ević enormously, I wouldn't call the politicians from China, UK, USSR, France and USA "pro-Milosevic". Similarly, I wouldn't call the US congressmen who passed the Neutrality Acts in 1937 as "pro-Hitler".

Feel like this is a weird example to use since a lot of Americans pushing neutrality in the late 30s were indeed pro Hitler

# ? Mar 6, 2023 17:13

A Buttery Pastry: Sep 4, 2011; Delicious and Informative!

Blut posted:

Do you think if Trump, who repeatedly suggested the US should pull out of NATO and is a big fan of Putin, is back in office from 2024 he would launch a nuclear war to defend the Baltic states from a Crimea-style little green men coup?

If the US stayed neutral, do you think the UK and France would start nuclear war against Russia by themselves to defend a Riga that was already occupied before they had time to respond? If you were Latvian would you bet your life and those of your children on it?

Joining NATO is undoubtedly hugely beneficial for their defense. And it should keep them safe. But it would be extremely dangerous for the Baltic states to rely entirely on other states in NATO's nuclear umbrella as their only form of defense from Russia.

Arguably, the most important point is whether the Russian leadership believes anyone would defend the Baltics. Even if you, as a Baltic leader, have full faith in NATO nuclear powers starting a nuclear war over an invasion, the most important question is whether the Russian leadership believes it. If they don't, you're left with three options:

1. Russia conquers you and no one really defends you.
2. Russia conquers you, then ends up in a war with like Poland and various other committed non-nuclear anti-Russia states which sees your country absolutely devastated and possibly still occupied by the end.
3. Nuclear war

Getting trip-wire forces into your country that convinces the Russian leadership that 3 is the most likely outcome is the only way to really make your NATO membership count. It's not like motivated reasoning can't apply to a Russian leader who thinks the Baltics definitely 100% belong to Russia, which short circuits the question of the NATO response to "Obviously they also realize it's a natural part of Russia and they only pretend otherwise because it makes Russia weaker, and will immediately crumble if their bluff is called".

Badger of Basra posted:

Feel like this is a weird example to use since a lot of Americans pushing neutrality in the late 30s were indeed pro Hitler

Yeah. Obviously not all of them were, given American political culture at the time, but committed isolationism wasn't the driving force for all of them. Even if you weren't into his racial stuff, though a lot of them were, they were definitely in favor of him launching a huge war to destroy communism.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 17:30

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

A Buttery Pastry posted:

Arguably, the most important point is whether the Russian leadership believes anyone would defend the Baltics. Even if you, as a Baltic leader, have full faith in NATO nuclear powers starting a nuclear war over an invasion, the most important question is whether the Russian leadership believes it. If they don't, you're left with three options:

1. Russia conquers you and no one really defends you.
2. Russia conquers you, then ends up in a war with like Poland and various other committed non-nuclear anti-Russia states which sees your country absolutely devastated and possibly still occupied by the end.
3. Nuclear war

Getting trip-wire forces into your country that convinces the Russian leadership that 3 is the most likely outcome is the only way to really make your NATO membership count. It's not like motivated reasoning can't apply to a Russian leader who thinks the Baltics definitely 100% belong to Russia, which short circuits the question of the NATO response to "Obviously they also realize it's a natural part of Russia and they only pretend otherwise because it makes Russia weaker, and will immediately crumble if their bluff is called".

Yeah absolutely. The thing is the Baltic states need to rely on a combination of defensive tactics, not any one magical solve-all -

- Membership of NATO for the nuclear umbrella
- Positioning of NATO forces, particularly US/UK/French, in their countries to act as tripwires
- Enough self defense capability (including the tripwire forces) so that any invasion would involve delaying actions with actual bloody fighting, so that a Russian takeover wouldn't be an instant bloodless coup like in Crimea that is harder for external powers to get involved in
- Foreign policy the prioritises strengthening their anti-Russian neighbours, and weakening Russia's military capabilities/desire for irredentism, if possible.

Relying on any one by itself would be a huge mistake. Supporting Ukraine to the maximum extent they can, and trying to convince others to do likewise, is completely logical/smart realpolitik on their part.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 17:42

slurm: Jul 28, 2022; by Hand Knit

Blut posted:

Yeah absolutely. The thing is the Baltic states need to rely on a combination of defensive tactics, not any one magical solve-all -

- Membership of NATO for the nuclear umbrella
- Positioning of NATO forces, particularly US/UK/French, in their countries to act as tripwires
- Enough self defense capability (including the tripwire forces) so that any invasion would involve delaying actions with actual bloody fighting, so that a Russian takeover wouldn't be an instant bloodless coup like in Crimea that is harder for external powers to get involved in
- Foreign policy the prioritises strengthening their anti-Russian neighbours, and weakening Russia's military capabilities/desire for irredentism, if possible.

Relying on any one by itself would be a huge mistake. Supporting Ukraine to the maximum extent they can, and trying to convince others to do likewise, is completely logical/smart realpolitik on their part.

There's a fifth pillar to this and I'm surprised no one's pursued it, especially since it basically led directly to the Ukraine mess, and that's developing an independent deterrent with second strike capability either nationally or (more realistically in this case) in conjunction with regional allies. The fact that we haven't seen any evidence of mystery tests in decades is something of a small miracle and I guess it speaks to the credibility of even Trump-era NATO when you get down to brass tacks.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 18:08

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

slurm posted:

There's a fifth pillar to this and I'm surprised no one's pursued it, especially since it basically led directly to the Ukraine mess, and that's developing an independent deterrent with second strike capability either nationally or (more realistically in this case) in conjunction with regional allies. The fact that we haven't seen any evidence of mystery tests in decades is something of a small miracle and I guess it speaks to the credibility of even Trump-era NATO when you get down to brass tacks.

Its prohibitively costly and has real negative foreign relations results. Its a huge risk to take while NATO membership is still relatively reliable.

If an isolationist American president in the future results in NATO breakdown I'd imagine regional blocs would pursue it though - an all three Baltic states + Polish nuclear program, or Scandinavian nuclear program, or similar.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 19:16

GABA ghoul: Oct 29, 2011

A Buttery Pastry posted:

Arguably, the most important point is whether the Russian leadership believes anyone would defend the Baltics. Even if you, as a Baltic leader, have full faith in NATO nuclear powers starting a nuclear war over an invasion, the most important question is whether the Russian leadership believes it. If they don't, you're left with three options:

1. Russia conquers you and no one really defends you.
2. Russia conquers you, then ends up in a war with like Poland and various other committed non-nuclear anti-Russia states which sees your country absolutely devastated and possibly still occupied by the end.
3. Nuclear war

Getting trip-wire forces into your country that convinces the Russian leadership that 3 is the most likely outcome is the only way to really make your NATO membership count. It's not like motivated reasoning can't apply to a Russian leader who thinks the Baltics definitely 100% belong to Russia, which short circuits the question of the NATO response to "Obviously they also realize it's a natural part of Russia and they only pretend otherwise because it makes Russia weaker, and will immediately crumble if their bluff is called".

Yeah. Obviously not all of them were, given American political culture at the time, but committed isolationism wasn't the driving force for all of them. Even if you weren't into his racial stuff, though a lot of them were, they were definitely in favor of him launching a huge war to destroy communism.

I have serious doubts that France or the UK would ever use nuclear weapons in a conflict over the Baltics and I think Russia considers a purely conventional war with NATO possible, as long as NATO does not cross into Russian territory. That's why a credible conventional NATO deterrent is also important. If they have to stare down a stronger and entrenched NATO force at the Baltic border they will very likely gently caress off. They wouldn't have gone into Ukraine if it the AFU had been mobilized and deployed at the border.

# ? Mar 6, 2023 20:09

mortons stork: Oct 13, 2012

So the ICE 2035 ban from the EU is meeting roadblocks.

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/03/03/eu-delays-final-vote-on-combustion-engine-ban-exposing-growing-dissent-among-member-states

Some predictable, as the result of idiot reactionaries doing it to own the libs

quote:

From Rome, Italy's Transport Minister Matteo Salvini, a vocal detractor of the 2035 ban, openly took credit for the postponement, calling it a "great signal."

"The voice of millions of Italians has been heard, and our government has demonstrated that it offers common-sense arguments (...) in defence of our history and our work," Salvini wrote on his Twitter account.

"There is still a long way to go but we will not sell out to China."

Yes gotta save our car manufacturing, which Italy barely has any of left on-shored thanks to FCA merging with American companies and loving off to the Dutch tax haven for its European seat so we also don't reap all that much benefit. :thanks:

This is so loving stupid I don't even care to make sense of it

Some less expected, like the Germans trying to sneak e-fuels in as well

quote:

German Transport Minister Volker Wissing, who hails from the liberal, business-friendly FDP party, said earlier this week he had asked the European Commission for a new proposal to introduce the e-fuel exemption but he had not received any positive feedback from the bloc's executive.

"Against the background of the enormous fleet of cars that we have in Germany alone, there can only be a compromise for the FDP on the fleet limits if the use of e-fuels is also possible," Wissing said.

It's lucky overall that Germany is unable to present an united front on the supposedly guiding issue for its Green-led government. Smart. Have to save up for the real political battles, and surely not over the thing that is driving us (heh) to extinction.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 06:53

Torrannor: Apr 27, 2013; ---FAGNER---
TEAM-MATE

mortons stork posted:

It's lucky overall that Germany is unable to present an united front on the supposedly guiding issue for its Green-led government. Smart. Have to save up for the real political battles, and surely not over the thing that is driving us (heh) to extinction.

It's a surprise to learn that our government is Green-led. I thought Scholz was a social democrat...

# ? Mar 8, 2023 07:03

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

The FDP, famously Green.

Hey, remember when they destroyed the entire domestic solar industry in Germany during their last stint in federal government? Very Green, the FDP.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 08:37

Tesseraction: Apr 5, 2009

mortons stork posted:

So the ICE 2035 ban from the EU is meeting roadblocks.

(...)

If only there was something recent and pertinent as to why relying on fossil fuels from a despotic dictatorship is a terrible idea. Even ignoring the fact that climate is so bad that over 2 million people in Pakistan lost their homes to a flood last year. Or in something our more solipsistic continent might actually care about, the thousands dead in Germany and the horrific wildfires in Italy from the 2022 heatwave.

Even in the psychopathic terms of only caring about the money this is so loving stupid.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 11:41

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

The FDP primarily defines itself as opposition to the Greens. Wissing, the transport minister, said he's the advocate of the poor oppressed car driver suffering under Green tyranny.

They got disastrous results in several state elections recently. In Berlin they failed to enter parliament, in Lower Saxony they failed to enter parliament, in Slesvig-Holsten they lost half of their votes and just barely got into parliament.

As the thinking goes in the party, they haven't been obstructionist enough, so now they are obstructing harder and holding agreed-upon EU deals hostage to play tough domestically.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 12:29

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

Theres no practical reason why new sales of ICE vehicles shouldn't be banned in Europe by 2030. EV technology is advancing rapidly and 2030 is still almost 7 years away. 88% of new car sales in Norway were EV in 2022 already.

Hopefully local city governments, which tend to be a lot more progressive on these things, do their part and charge huge congestion and parking charges on ICE vehicles long before 2035 at least. That would have a big impact on sales numbers.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 14:55

Kikas: Oct 30, 2012

Blut posted:

Theres no practical reason why new sales of ICE vehicles shouldn't be banned in Europe by 2030. EV technology is advancing rapidly and 2030 is still almost 7 years away. 88% of new car sales in Norway were EV in 2022 already.

Hopefully local city governments, which tend to be a lot more progressive on these things, do their part and charge huge congestion and parking charges on ICE vehicles long before 2035 at least. That would have a big impact on sales numbers.

Yeah, because Norway is
-very wealthy overall (second highest GDP per capita in Europe)
-gets most of it's electricity from renewable sources so has cheap electricity
-has a well maintained network of roads
-doesn't have a huge population

And I think there was either a government subsidy or some sort of tax exemption for electric vehicles there, up to 20% of the car value or something like that.

All of that is not feasible in rest of Europe. Norway is very much an outlier.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 15:03

mobby_6kl: Aug 9, 2009; by Fluffdaddy

Kikas posted:

Yeah, because Norway is
-very wealthy overall (second highest GDP per capita in Europe)
-gets most of it's electricity from renewable sources so has cheap electricity
-has a well maintained network of roads
-doesn't have a huge population

And I think there was either a government subsidy or some sort of tax exemption for electric vehicles there, up to 20% of the car value or something like that.

All of that is not feasible in rest of Europe. Norway is very much an outlier.

Other than being richer, how does everything else make a difference? Like a small population or quality of road maintenance? Keep in mind there are also factors that are traditionally considered bad for EVs: low population density, long distances, and cold weather.

Norway was successful because it was the only country that implemented a policy to make progress. We won't be if we don't.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 15:27

A Buttery Pastry: Sep 4, 2011; Delicious and Informative!

mobby_6kl posted:

Other than being richer, how does everything else make a difference? Like a small population or quality of road maintenance? Keep in mind there are also factors that are traditionally considered bad for EVs: low population density, long distances, and cold weather.

Norway was successful because it was the only country that implemented a policy to make progress. We won't be if we don't.

Small population is an advantage if production hasn't scaled up enough. You'd need like 100x as many cars to service the EU market.

That's not to say you shouldn't do it, but this is one case where population actually matters-

# ? Mar 8, 2023 15:48

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

Kikas posted:

Yeah, because Norway is
-very wealthy overall (second highest GDP per capita in Europe)
-gets most of it's electricity from renewable sources so has cheap electricity
-has a well maintained network of roads
-doesn't have a huge population

And I think there was either a government subsidy or some sort of tax exemption for electric vehicles there, up to 20% of the car value or something like that.

All of that is not feasible in rest of Europe. Norway is very much an outlier.

Norway's GDP is very high, but the disposable income per capita is in-line with the rest of Northern Europe. This is what matters more when it comes to individuals affording EV cars. Notably, its lower than in Germany and only 10% higher than in France - the two big movers of EU policy.

Norway's electricity price for consumers is broadly middle of the pack for Europe:

Norway has a low population density (bad for EVs), and a hugely spread out road network that has on average worse driving conditions than anywhere else in Europe outside of Finland. Range and cold being both very bad for EVs.

Norway's success in EV adoption is down to it consciously making a decision to do so. Theres no reason the other wealthy countries in the EU - the Scandinavian countries, Benelux, Germany, Austria, France and Ireland at the very least - can't achieve the same rapidly.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 16:22

An insane mind: Aug 11, 2018

Well it looks like the rightwing VVD is going to sweep the election in the Netherlands (it's not anything big just the...I want to say the translation would be provincial governments?...so no one will show up to vote because it's nothing important like new chamber elections) they and the new farmer's party whose party promises I have not read in its entirety but who are very angry about having to keep to the new nitrogen emmision laws. So...that's going to be fun.

Meanwhile the ostensibly 'left' parties are busy doing theater. It's all just...so great. I'll be voting for the Party for Animals because I'm weird and a hippy. (The only thing I don't agree with them on is that we shouldn't build nuclear power plants if we have the option, but I think my opinion is very skewed on that from a leftist perspective.)

# ? Mar 8, 2023 16:29

V. Illych L.: Apr 11, 2008; ASK ME ABOUT LUMBER

norway's electricity price for consumers has traditionally been quite low compared to mainland europe, especially once one accounts for purchasing power:

https://www.los.no/dagens-strompris/historiske-strompriser/

there's been a strong recent normalisation towards continental levels with the opening of major new transition cables and the geopolitical situation. norway's EV subsidy strategy was explicitly formulated in a context which assumed structurally affordable electricity, especially considering the relatively high cost of other fuels here:

https://www.ssb.no/statbank/table/09654/tableViewLayout1/
vs
https://www.globalpetrolprices.com/Germany/diesel_prices/

in a situation where the NOK/EUR rate is around 11/1

V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Mar 8, 2023

# ? Mar 8, 2023 20:17

Osmosisch: Sep 9, 2007; I shall make everyone look like me! Then when they trick each other, they will say "oh that Coyote, he is the smartest one, he can even trick the great Coyote."; Grimey Drawer

An insane mind posted:

Well it looks like the rightwing VVD is going to sweep the election in the Netherlands (it's not anything big just the...I want to say the translation would be provincial governments?...so no one will show up to vote because it's nothing important like new chamber elections) they and the new farmer's party whose party promises I have not read in its entirety but who are very angry about having to keep to the new nitrogen emmision laws. So...that's going to be fun.

Meanwhile the ostensibly 'left' parties are busy doing theater. It's all just...so great. I'll be voting for the Party for Animals because I'm weird and a hippy. (The only thing I don't agree with them on is that we shouldn't build nuclear power plants if we have the option, but I think my opinion is very skewed on that from a leftist perspective.)

Extremely same, OP.

# ? Mar 8, 2023 20:41

Cantide: Jun 13, 2001; Pillbug

Tesseraction posted:

If only there was something recent and pertinent as to why relying on fossil fuels from a despotic dictatorship is a terrible idea. Even ignoring the fact that climate is so bad that over 2 million people in Pakistan lost their homes to a flood last year. Or in something our more solipsistic continent might actually care about, the thousands dead in Germany and the horrific wildfires in Italy from the 2022 heatwave.

Even in the psychopathic terms of only caring about the money this is so loving stupid.

So do you think it's a good idea to switch the military over to EVs?

# ? Mar 9, 2023 12:47

the heat goes wrong: Dec 31, 2005; I´m watching you...

Cantide posted:

So do you think it's a good idea to switch the military over to EVs?

Military vehicles are exempt from the 2035 ban.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 18:29

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

Plus, militaries are looking at electric stuff as well. Monster torque and silent operation are appealing, especially since you can cut out gearboxes, even if energy density is a problem.

See this?

It's a Diesel-electric hybrid vehicle. It's not a big step from there to full electric.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 18:37

An insane mind: Aug 11, 2018

When the gently caress am I getting my Gundam.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 18:40

Blut: Sep 11, 2009; if someone is in the bottom 10%~ of a guillotine

Theres a good article in this week's Economist on the EV issue. Some highlights:

quote:

A clumsy attempt to scupper new European legislation at the last minute�on scrapping the sale of new internal-combustion cars by 2035, as it happens�has left fellow EU members seething. Not for the first time, the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, is accused of putting domestic political convenience ahead of the European interest.

This month would have marked something of a public-relations triumph for the EU�s regulatory machine. Seldom do laws agreed in Brussels�by 27 member states, the European Commission and 705 MEPs�draw much interest from anyone beyond lobbyists and a few Twitter obsessives. The banning of the internal-combustion engine was such a case. It points to Europe taking tangible steps towards reaching �net zero� carbon emissions by 2050, including a 55% cut on 1990 emissions by the end of the decade. Forcing change on the powerful car industry was a feature of the law: it gave the EU credibility when it demanded that the rest of the world should also take action to combat climate change.

The self-congratulations have been delayed�or perhaps cancelled, nobody quite knows. Even Brussels insiders had assumed the internal-combustion rule had been passed months ago. Only the procedural step of ministerial signatures remained, another opportunity for politicians to take plaudits for a job well done. What should have been a mere formality has turned into a giant spanner in the works. Despite German officials having been present at every stage of the law�s passage through the complex Brussels process, and having signed off time after time, Germany is now refusing to approve it. Such behaviour is just about unprecedented. Revisiting agreements once consensus has been achieved is a recipe for wrecking the EU machine, the diplomatic equivalent of pouring a glug of diesel into a petrol car.
[...]
This is not the first time Mr Scholz has put Germany�and coalition management�ahead of the European interest. In October a package of �200bn ($211bn) in energy bungs to insulate German firms and households from the fallout from the war in Ukraine was poorly received by other EU countries, which could not match such largesse. Central Europeans fume that Berlin has repeatedly dragged its feet when it comes to arming Ukraine. Mr Scholz�s propensity to focus on domestic matters has caused the Franco-German alliance, once the reliable engine of the EU, to sputter.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/03/09/germany-is-letting-a-domestic-squabble-pollute-europes-green-ambitions

The tldr is the Germans being terrible as usual basically, putting their own economic self-interest above all else.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 23:20

Antigravitas: Dec 8, 2019; Die Rettung fuer die Landwirte:

What economic self-interest?

There is zero economic reason for doing this. It's all because the liberals are all-in on culture war for vroom vroom.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 23:27

Not So Fast: Dec 27, 2007

Are there any goons from Georgia who can give some background on the recent protests?

Why now, and why over a foreign lobbying law? Was Georgia really close to getting into the EU?

# ? Mar 9, 2023 23:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 01:02

Herman Merman: Jul 6, 2008

Not So Fast posted:

Was Georgia really close to getting into the EU?

No, it only submitted an application in 2022 and is currently considered a "potential candidate" by the EU.

# ? Mar 9, 2023 23:38

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > EU Politics: I miss Renaults(don't make fun of me)

«‹›959 »