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.
 
  • Locked thread
A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

LemonDrizzle posted:

Good OP. The British press has been talking up Helle Thorning-Schmidt as a potential compromise candidate for the presidency of the commission - is she considered plausible elsewhere in Europe?
She's absolutely awful, so I don't think she can be ignored outright.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Mans posted:

This is a game of chess that must be played on the long run. No one expected any positive change in these elections, but in the future they might prove useful. At the very least they showed that for those that bothered voting, the populace is very much so on a different stance than those in power in Ireland, Greece, Spain or Portugal (in Italy they protest voted by voting on the ruling party which is weird as hell but somewhat understandable when you see that the ruling party isn't an EPP drone). France and Denmark are hosed, breaking eggs to make omelettes etc, etc...
Why do you think Denmark is hosed?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Torrannor posted:

I don't get it :confused:
Swedish politician thinking of happier times.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Lunsku posted:

Seriously though, as much as I dislike them, True Finns just don't belong on the same page there with the likes of Golden Dawn, Jobbik or NPD.
That's the usual problem with these kinds of lists/articles (or often maps.), they just kinda roll together the entire anti-immigrant spectrum into one, when there are still real differences between them. Like, some of these parties are explicitly talking of genocide or ethnic cleansing, while others are simply talking about closing borders. Still sucks, but to me it seems like a good way to obscure the fact that we're talking literal Nazis in some cases.

Lunsku posted:

As a note to foreigners, I see True Finns as a populist, conservative, economically centre-left anti-federalist party, but one that has the most of its growth come from general unhappiness with the policies of the three established cabinet parties (NC, Centre, Social Democrats) during 00s governments, and general grumbling about EU this and EU that. There's a notable but clear minority anti-immigration faction, which for sure had its ideological center elected as one of the TF MEPs, but I'd be wary to overstate how big that really is. Your general TF supporter immigration views probably don't stray that much from the conservative National Coalition (EPP) or Centre Party (ALDE, ehh) supporters.
Yeah, the Danish People's Party basically defined itself as 'the party of people who are tired of being ignored', so when the Social Democrats told their base to go gently caress themselves, they unsurprisingly went there in droves. (Not exclusively, luckily.)

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

A Pale Horse posted:

In some circles any sort of desire for immigration control is automatically branded racist and people intentionally fail to make the distinction.
I think the problem is more that people just stop at "these people are racist", ignoring the difference between nativist racism and genocidal racism. Also the whole thing about many of the voters just being people who have been thrown under the bus by the political establishment, and are willing to jump in with anyone who is willing to lend an ear. Like, Denmark only has two parties that are pro-welfare state to some degree now, at least in practice, and that's the Danish People's Party and the Red-Green Alliance. The two Social Democratic parties halfway adopted the anti-immigrant policies anyway, so when they decided that Full Liberalism was the only option it might not have seemed like that big a deal to jump over to the Danish People's Party.

YF-23 posted:

Note that this does not work when yours is a gateway country to the EU such as Greece.
The solution is to add Turkey to the EU, then they'll all just end up there.

Electronico6 posted:

So was Portugal. Morocco, Luso-African countries, South America, India, China, and during the early '00 Eastern Europeans, especially from the Ukraine. There was a boom at the turn of the century, and for a brief window Portugal(and Spain) had inverted the tendency of being a nation of emigrants, into a nation of immigrants. The crisis stopped that, with many of those immigrants returning home, and with Portugal going back to it's number one export: Portuguese.
Not anything like Greece I don't think? Like 90% of immigrants to the EU pass through (or end up in) Greece don't they?

e: 90% sounds like a lot, so it's probably only illegal immigrants, come to think of it.

A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 00:06 on May 27, 2014

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Mans posted:

How cute, a bunch of people arguing about how the only moral immigration controls are their immigration controls :allears:
I think people have mostly been talking in relative terms? I'd take putting up check points over putting down immigrants any day.

Mans posted:

There's more than enough land and wealth to accommodate people used to living in absolute squalor in war-thorn shitholes, as long as you don't gut their social support they won't turn into Front National strawmans.
Equally important; don't gut the social support of your existing population.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

kissekatt posted:

Conversely, it only includes a certain brand of Eurosceptics, the rightwing racist/nationalist Eurosceptics.
Except N (People's Movement against the EU) from Denmark, which is a nonpartisan group for all Eurosceptics outside the far right. The Red-Green Alliance doesn't even run for the EU parliament, instead it just supports this group*, so I don't think it can be called righwing.

*Which is a similar approach to the one they have with unions. They don't try to tie unions directly to the party like Social Democrats, but just work together on a direct personal level for specific causes.

Xoidanor posted:

...and right there you hit the nail on the head. The reasons these nationalistic movements grow and are so popular among disenfranchised youth is because they feel that they have not been given exactly that. They feel that they're getting coldly shoved aside by a society that doesn't want them in favor of others who weren't even born in their countries.

Their opinions are wrong for so many reasons but that doesn't change the way they feel.
I wouldn't call it for so many reasons, just one; that they identify with people of the same ethnicity over people of the same class. Pretty much all the people voting for the far right are right to be angry, they're just lashing out at scapegoats instead of the real culprits.

A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 13:47 on May 27, 2014

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Nektu posted:

While it is true that noone in germany wants to control the southern states, I guess that there would have to be some kind of compensation if the creditcard gets more use. And what else is left if not influence?
What is even the point of Eurobonds, over direct monetary transfers? Wouldn't you have to deal with so much poo poo just getting them in place that you might as well just go for that instead? I mean, people might balk at the idea of federal Eurozone taxes to pay for that, where Eurobonds would probably be less obvious, but what are the advantages and disadvantages of the two options? Or would they work well together?

e: Could Eurobonds, alongside a discontinuation of the insane austerity policies, be used to get the EU out of the current slump? And then later, when people can see things going in the right direction, a Eurozone tax and direct transfer system is introduced as a necessary measure to prevent a repeat of the original Eurocrisis? I'm basically a huge supporter of an Ideal EU, but pretty drat skeptical about the Actual EU, so I wouldn't mind hearing there are real options here if the politicians get their heads out of their asses.

A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 22:56 on May 27, 2014

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Electronico6 posted:

Paws, tentacles, what horrible lovecraft nightmare has the EU turned into?
A star-nosed mole.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

System Metternich posted:

I read an article in the German SPIEGEL magazine today which tried to list the positions of all EU member states concerning Juncker:

"Probably" Pro (in no particular order):

Portugal (conservative government)
Spain (conservative)
France (social democrat)*
Belgium (social democrat)
Luxembourg (liberal)
Denmark (social democrat)
Italy (social democrat)
Ireland (conservative)
Malta (social democrat)
Croatia (social democrat)
Austria (social democrat)
Czech Republic (social democrat)
Poland (conservative)
Slovakia (social democrat)
Lithuania (independent)
Latvia (conservative)
Estonia (liberal)
Finland (conservative)
Romania (social democrat)
Bulgaria (independent)
Cyprus (conservative)

Contra:

UK (conservative)
Sweden (conservative)
Netherlands (liberal)
Hungary (conservative)

Undecided/Unknown:

Germany (conservative)
Slovenia (liberal)
Greece (conservative)

*some of these are actually socialist parties, but I couldn't be bothered to double-check :effort:
Socialist, or "Socialist"? Because at least one of the social democrats is just "social democrats", and I would be surprised if it wasn't true for many of the others too.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

GaussianCopula posted:

And for the Keynesian theorists out there, where were you before the crisis, when according to your theory the countries should not have gone deeper into debt but should have established a rainy day found.
While I'm a member of the EC, and thus have no excuse, I would not be surprised if a lot of the posters in this thread were in school when the Euro was introduced. Expecting them to not only have a real opinion on this stuff, but to have a voice within the EU that's loud enough that you would have heard it, is frankly absurd.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Mans posted:

Because GaussianCopula is doing the same thing, only with CDU-backed entrepeneurs walking in the background carrying backs with "VIELE EUROS" written on them.
Berlin Bruno.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

CSM posted:

This statement is utter rubbish. You know nothing about economics.
He's German economic thinking personified.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Ardennes posted:

So what happens if another global crisis comes along?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Xoidanor posted:

This is why putting the ball in the parliaments court in the first place was an incredibly short sighted move.
And thus inevitable.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Randler posted:

So using your number of 4,000,000 it wouldn't be about 4,000,001 and 4,000,002 but about 40,000,000 or 400,000.
4,000,000 and 400,000, surely.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Electronico6 posted:

It wasn't like Juncker was a choice that everyone was okay with from the beginning. Sweden and Netherlands were opposed to him, France and Italy stalled on the issue for quite some time and even Hollande was throwing (dumb) names around. If Cameron was half the statesman that he believes himself to be he could've find support in the EU, to at least bring this question to a larger debate. Instead he adopted a position that would pull well with the British electorate "Juncker is a federalist! Centralization", but this didn't pull as well with the rest of Europe, with the exception of Hungary, so Sweden and Netherlands voted in support, and France and Italy votes yes so they could move on with their lives.
This shows that Cameron is in touch with his voters, ignoring or being oblivious to the reality of Europe and instead looking at it as if it was just another stage for national politics.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Reveilled posted:

Well, if you listen to those on the far right:

Croatia still resists.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Nektu posted:

Oh geez you old naysayer. Lets just introduce the euro re-industrialize europe first, the rest will just fall into place afterwards (honestly!).

Is there more information about this available? I'm kinda curious how "re-industrializing europe" is planned to suddenly work when industry has been moving out of europe into cheaper countries for a looong time now.
We'll re-industrialize by matching Russia in military spending as a percentage of GDP, buying solely domestic equipment.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Junior G-man posted:

But you genuinly cannot reduce down to 'capital' and walk away. To do that is to ignore the ridiculous complexity that exists here. I've met about as many social democrats as I have free marketeers.
Actual social democrats? Or just people from parties calling themselves "Social Democrats"?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Junior G-man posted:

I'm really not walking into a battle of ideological purity here.

Suffice to say that not all (or even a majority) are sort of New Labour/Tony Blair varietals. However, the S&D fraction (nominally the Social Democrat fraction) comprises of anything from Ed Milliband's New Labour to more traditional movements. They're the second-biggest fraction after the Christian Democrats, and will, due to their makeup, always end up more centrist than maybe you'd like.
It's not a matter of ideological purity. A "social democrat" who openly works to liberalize and privatize everything, even to the point that their traditional liberal adversaries go "wait, what?", is not a social democrat in anything but name. We're not talking people who compromise to get things done, but people who push through the very type of legislation their party had opposed for roughly a hundreds years, even if it means even their hardcore supporters start jumping ship.

Maybe some social democratic parties aren't as rotten as that yet, but a lot of them are. Identifying politicians by their party, and not their actual policies, is useless for discussion. I guess technically you did identify them by ideology, you just put the Third Way social democrats in the same ideological group as old school social democrats.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Junior G-man posted:

However, I'm not conceding the point of consigning the entire S&D fraction, with the wild variety contained therein, to the 'pretend' social democrat group.
I'm not asking you to. I just think it's worthwhile to always make the distinction between social democrats and "social democrats", given the term pretty much covers everything but the far left and far right depending on who you're talking about.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:
Nah, it's entirely appropriate for the EU to have a spirited anthem, full of lofty ideals, signifying nothing.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Orange Devil posted:

In German. Don't forget that. It's the platonic ideal of the EU anthem really.
Even better, the (German) lyrics aren't even officially recognized, but they're still being used.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Gantolandon posted:

Yes and no. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth also had a huge influence in shaping the current Polish mentality, but it was reinterpreted and fed to the Polish population mostly by writers from 19th century, like Mickiewicz or Sienkiewicz. They pretty much glossed through the ugly elements and presented it as a liberal paradise. I don't think the real Commonwealth had such an impact on the Polish culture like its Romanticist and Positivist reinterpretations, because before the Partitions pretty much no one except the nobility really gave a poo poo.
Wasn't the number of noblemen unusually high in Poland though? Obviously still solidly a minority, but maybe they can't be as easily dismissed as they can in other countries where being a nobleman was a far more exclusive thing. I mean, even if you're pretty much only a nobleman by title, that's still something to hold on to, especially if foreign occupiers start treating you like dirt.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

LemonDrizzle posted:

Spain's problem is that it really doesn't matter who it elects because the only entities capable of materially influencing its fate are not answerable to its voters or even resident in Spain.
Is there really no way for Spain to put Germany in a position where it has to reconsider its relationship to the rest of Europe? I'm thinking Spain could begin to draw up all sorts of plans to help their economy which are against the rules of the EU, and possibly implement them, and when Germany protests tell them that it's either that or Germany actually solving poo poo, now, because Spain can't wait. As Ardennes says, the Eurocrisis is hardly over. If the slow rot is going to continue anyway, making it even harder to dig ourselves out of the next hole, then you might as well start bashing away at the whole rotten system until the people in power get it through their heads that they need to build something better.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

YF-23 posted:

"Forward into more EU" would have to mean that EU institutions are strengthened and made further independent, and that member countries start putting more money into the EU and receiving more money from the EU. That cannot, in any way, not involve "German money".
I assume you mean "interdependent", but yes, moving the EU forward to the point where interdependence is a boon and not a hindrance is what I was thinking. The current situation, halfway between a free trade zone and a federation, will serve no one in the long run.

LemonDrizzle posted:

Standard protocol for dealing with intransigent periphery governments who try that sort of thing is to cut off the money supply and instigate a coup to install a more cooperative regime. Was done in Greece and they were preparing for an Italian putsch in 2012.
The Condor Legion Reborn.

Cat Mattress posted:

So the short and sweet is that if the EU wants to actually progress, it needs to boot out both the UK and Germany?

Meh, works for me.
Booting Germany out of the EU would leave a huge gaping hole in the middle of Europe though. Not that this would be impossible to solve.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

LemonDrizzle posted:

Ooops. Turns out there's a €300b hole in the EU's budget for 2014-20.

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/eu-priorities-2020/court-auditors-warns-multi-billion-eu-budget-gap-310310


That'll go over well!
Time to slash the wages of every EU official.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Phlegmish posted:

Because why the hell would you move all the way to Belgium or Luxembourg, which are really expensive places to live (especially Luxembourg), if you can make the same amount of money at home? Eurostat has the same problem, it's had a lot of trouble attracting qualified people in recent years because even Eastern Europeans are no longer willing to move to Luxembourg.
Make a proper EU capital in Prague then.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Phlegmish posted:

That's interesting, so it isn't standard procedure for banks to demand monthly down payments on mortgage loans over there? And even if it isn't, why wouldn't you want to do this anyway if you were a home owner? They must be losing loads of money paying full interest for decades.
At least here in Denmark, roughly half the total value of housing debt is in the form of interest-only loans. Basically, a bunch of people effectively rent their house from the bank, and paid twice the current value of their house for the opportunity. Should the European economy ever recover, the ECB's desire to keep inflation low will result in an increase in the interest, meaning an increase in "rent" which is unlikely to be matched by greater pay. From what I can tell, Sweden is basically the same, and possibly worse. A European recovery might implode both our housing markets, as the ECB would encourage higher interest to prevent inflation.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Phlegmish posted:

The way that mortgage loans often work here is that you repay a fixed amount each month, part interest and part down payment. The proportion of interest that you pay obviously decreases each month along with the remaining amount of money that is owed, and by the end nearly all of the money goes to repaying your loan. It makes sense as a system, even though it means that the people with the highest loans are also the ones paying them back at the slowest rate, but that's hardly a surprise.
Used to be that way too here in Denmark until 2003.

Phlegmish posted:

How will increasing interest rates keep inflation low? I have a very murky understanding of the relationship between inflation, interest and the general economy. All I know is that deflation is bad because it leads to people hoarding their money, which has a negative effect on economic activity, which in turn could lead to more deflation. Other than that it's :confused:
It works the other way too. High interest rates means people have less money to spend, and with less money in circulation, inflation is reduced. That's at least my understanding.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

nothing to seehere posted:

Increasing interest rates increases the return that people get for saving their money, and increases the costs of borrowing money to fund spending. These two effects together decrease consumption spending, and lower spending leads to a decrease in inflation, as inflation is simply the rise in demand for money, and the demand for money decreases if people are spending less.
Shouldn't inflation be a lowering of the demand for money/increase in the supply, since inflation means money becomes worth less?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Xoidanor posted:

No, with inflation the price of tomorrow will always exceed the price of today which in turn means that more money gets spent.

Just think of it as money not being invested or spent literally getting eaten up by inflation.
This doesn't make much sense to me. The price that's going up is the price of goods, relative to the price of money. More money has to be spent because money is worth less, due to an increased supply/reduced demand. Or is this some weird economist definition of things where everything makes not a lick of sense to anyone but bankers?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

nothing to seehere posted:

Inflation decreases the value of money (what you can actually buy). Because the same quantity of money from before inflation no longer buys what you bought with it before (because it has less value) you demand more money, so you can buy the same amounts of goods or services as you did before inflation took effect.
Let's say I produce counterfeit Roosevelt wheelchairs. People realize that my chairs are counterfeit, resulting in them being willing to pay only half the previous price for each chair. According to the logic you presented above, demand for counterfeit Roosevelt wheelchairs has gone up, since now people demand twice of times as many chairs for the same amount of money.

YF-23 posted:

You have 5000 Euros in cash. When are you going to be more willing to spend them, if they are worth the same tomorrow, or if they are worth 4000 today's Euros tomorrow? Contrast this with deflation - if your 5000 Euros are going to be worth 6000 Euros in a year you'd an idiot not to hold on to them. The value of money going down is an incentive to spend the money now because the same money will get you less stuff in future, and the value of money going up is an incentive to hold on to it because it will get you more stuff.
This was never the point of confusion for me. I get why people want to get rid of their money faster during a period of inflation, I do not understand why this somehow constitutes an increase in the demand for money.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Xoidanor posted:

I'm sorry, what?
Care to expand?

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

NihilismNow posted:

Only if you have a completely flexible mortage rate. Which is not very smart. Even if you don't pay down the principal on your mortage it is still possible to lock the rates for 20 years. Might be hard to offload your house for what you paid for it if mortage rates are 10% but your "rent" won't necessarily increase.
Searching for interest-only loans here in Denmark, I'm immediately greeted with the possibility of loans which have their mortgage rate readjusted every 1,3, or 5 years. I suppose that's not completely flexible, but it doesn't sound particularly great either. Not sure how popular they are, but I do recall there being a major advertising push for them like a decade ago.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:
We should invade England and depose the puppet regime. Scotland can go free.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

LemonDrizzle posted:

you and what army, sunshine?

(it is a joke about european defence spending)
We'll just send some German cops.

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Nonsense posted:

To save Europe, Germany must become many. Merkel must be stopped.
Divide Germany + Austria into 5 equal-sized countries, each of which will be very close to the average size of the members of the EU.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Ardennes posted:

Spain gets 11% of its imports from Germany tied with France. Greece gets 9.5% of its imports from Germany, #2 after Russia (I assume it is energy related). Portugal also gets 11% of its imports after Germany, second after predictably Spain.
I'm not arguing against your overall point, but I do feel like pointing out that this is a very different thing from the numbers shown in that graphic. Just because these countries get roughly 10% of their imports from Germany does not mean they're important trading partners. They might still be, but it's the numbers on the German end that really matter.

  • Locked thread