|
MiddleOne posted:The EU doesn't want the UK out, the EU wants the UK to come to heel. If the UK government suggested that as a possibility I'm sure the EU would take it but the ball is entirely in the UK's court. The EU has no responsibility to pull the trigger just because the UK doesn't feel like shooting itself. This is what it's like to be a strong empowered independent country. Take back control indeed.
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 09:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
You'd need a federal EU tax and wealth transfers directly to citizens through healthcare and social security benefits. If you transfer funds directly to countries then whatever idiot happens to be in charge in that country can use it to eliminate taxes for the rich or for graft or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Eschenique posted:What's your alternative to a free market then? The Canton model? Tariff walls? Regulated markets?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
Squalid posted:This all just seems so obvious it just feels like a no brainer. If we're staring down a WWIII situation, Trump or not, you have to ask yourself is the US really going to pull the trigger? Ultimately I don't think anybody will know for sure until it happens, so it makes much more sense not to put anybody in that position in the first place by having a credible domestic deterrence. I don't see why we wouldn't pull the trigger on some Russian armored columns. What Putin is going to start WWIII and wipe out his own country when he could just pull his forces back? As has been demonstrated bombing mercs or little green men is not an issue. Judging by Russian rate of progress in Chechnya, Ukraine and Syria it wouldn't be quick at any rate. Great at bombing and shelling fixed targets into dust over a long period of time. Not so great at rapidly advancing with minimal casualties.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 09:03
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:I would imagine having sovereignty over Greenland terrestrial and sea territories will become extremely valuable when the whole 'arctic ice' thing becomes history due to climate change? It certainly has strategic value but I'm not so sure about the economic potential.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:What you do is you say "actually gently caress you creditors you don't get to hold entire generations hostage for life, that poo poo is detrimental to the society I'm trying to build here and moreover I am the loving state, I have an army, come at me". Generally a lot of debt is domestic so now you’re cancelling debt owned by your own pension funds or banks that then fail and wipe out your own savings. On a national scale it doesn’t really matter as it just shifts wealth around within the country from bondholders to taxpayers but it’s super unpopular nonetheless. Or you just cancel foreign debt and become locked out of lending markets because foreign governments also have armies and can say “No actually your debt still exists”. So now you can’t borrow and have to cut spending a.k.a. austerity. There’s a reason Argentina eventually made deals with their creditors and Greece didn’t unilaterally declare their debts didn’t exist anymore: If you can’t borrow you’re doomed to perpetual austerity. I’m not advocating for that system but until it is destroyed it is the system we have and the reality is that you can’t cancel debt without serious repercussions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
1 President, 3 executive Vice Presidents and 5 Vice Presidents including 1 high representative. What’s up with the lack of executive vice high representatives?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:If you're doing something "sustainable in the long term" then it's just some hobby farm for kiddies that needs to be stamped out ASAP to make way for the glorious future of efficient, productive industrial farming. Farming is by definition ecologically destructive and harmful so your choice is whatever you personally feel is less bad. There's no good way to wipe out a forrest with thousands of species of plants and trees and the vast variety of insects and animals that live there in order to plant one type of grass. Ok so the grass is not genetically identical and you're not using pesticides. Fine but that forrest with all its variety is still gone. The idea that it's better is like saying a forrest fire is less bad because you didn't use chemicals to limit its spread. Sure more forrest was destroyed but it was destroyed in the right way! I don't have a problem with banning all pesticides or exclusively growing heirlooms or whatever but you're just trading one bad thing for another. You're still loving the planet just in a different position.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2019 09:43
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:This would have been a literal non-issue if the EU followed a humane immigration/refugee policy. It's only an issue because we've been convinced that foreigners are bad and that the state is fundamentally incapable of undertaking any serious crisis management project. It's not inability. It's unwillingness and hostility. We're not doing it because the European electorates keep voting for people who say they won't do it. The peoples of Europe will rather let these people rot in refugee camps than let them in. It's not apathetic politicians or incompetent bureaucrats. It's deliberate decisions driven by popular votes. It's who we are.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:Deutsche bank can, and has, wreck entire countries, they don't need broom battalions. You're not going to convince the north, Germans or otherwise, to pursue a policy that will erode their savings. Evidently the south can't be convinced to run economies that doesn't require perpetual high deficits. As such we're at an impasse and we ought to go our own ways.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:I wish your spoiler were true, but their love of flooding the world under trillions of litres of pesticides is something very recent, historically speaking -- it's a 20th century innovation. Doesn't explain GMO opposition. If the EU is opposed to pesticides they should ban them. Banning GMOs in order to ban the subset of pesticides that use GMOs is an absurd roundabout method to use.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:the pollution thing isn't really a point anyone much cares about, for practical purposes it's a lever for city-dwellers to make their lifestyle the ethical one and it's stupid as poo poo because it creates severe and unnecessary divisions. i don't think anybody is proposing we abandon paris, just that continually undermining people's ability to live where they grew up is bad How are we underming it? Agricultural subsidies are a non-trivial part of the federal and EU budgets and infrastructure in rural areas are subsidized by city dwellers in that it costs more to service rural areas but everybody pay the same taxes. Services like ambulances, policing and fire fighting are similarly subsidized. Realistically you can't place public institutions in every little village. Manufacturing generally prefer to locate at trade hubs aka cities so they can ship their goods while service based companies favor large populations for the specialized labor. Not a lot we can do about that. Meanwhile automation is decimating jobs in the primary sector. That we can do something about but I doubt anyone really want to. So what du you propose we do?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Yeah. Also Hjalmar Schacht, who was a stubborn proponent of austerity and deflation until the Nazis got into power, and then had a change of heart and became a big fan of public spending and investment to put the country back on its feet. Kind of like if the plan all along was to weaken the Weimar Republic with austerity and deflation so as to allow fascism to take control, and then, once this goal was achieved, the self-sabotaging stupidity of austerity was abandoned because they always knew it cannot work. The nazis were thoroughly bankrupting Germany though. It only avoided collapse because it could loot annexed or occupied territories and the property of undesirables. They were practically bankrupt in 1938 but on 9 november there was a sudden and fortuitous influx of cash. Nazi economic policy was, like most things they did, insane.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2020 18:05
|
|
|
Venomous posted:The entire talk is absolutely worth a watch, but that part has always stuck in my mind. Austerity breeds fascism, all the time. Sure but it's not like Fascism was some isolated event in Germany at the time. There was also fascist or at least fascistoid Italy, Spain, Austria, Portugal, Greece and Yugoslavia. The nazis didn't exactly have a problem finding foreign volunteers for their armies and kill squads either which implies some degree of wider popular support. Rather than looking for the root causes of fascist sentiments by arbitrarily examining just Germany it's probably more sensible to look at Europe more generally.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Merkel said this is the biggest challenge since WW2. We're not trying to maximize Howitzer production. We're trying to limit it so people don't get infected while making them. Planned economies are approximately as ineffective as the alternative when the factories are closed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2020 18:05
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:You're actually making the same error the Dutch CB president is here. Deflation and inflation are obviously related concepts that are quantitatively different from one another, but affected by the same factors. Hyperinflation is something qualitatively different. High inflation doesn't lead to hyperinflation. A collapse in public trust in the currency/government leads to hyperinflation. Basically if you don't believe you'll be able to fulfill your tax obligations using euros next year, or if you believe your neighbours no longer believe they will be able to fulfill their tax obligations in euros next year, is when you'll see hyperinflation. Ok but can't high inflation lead to a collapse in public trust in the currency?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:The graph is crappier than I first noticed. The fact is the harder you austerity the lower your GDP goes the runaway effect is your debts are harder to pay with a shrinking economy. The solution is more debt thus solving the problem forever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2020 00:27
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Also there's no way Poland and Hungary would end up on different sides. Speaking of, what side are they on in the whole Eurobonds issue anyway? They're not in the euro so they probably don't give a poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Just looking at the recent conversation here on why the EU only managed to agree on a measly €500 billion in stimulus, it seems like everyone agrees the inadequacy was due in large part to disagreements between national level governments. In terms of how to fix this problem for future crises, one obvious solution would be to actually empower a supranational EU parliament with real decision making power independent of national governments. This would be especially effective if representatives were selected at-large, so that they would be beholden to European wide voters rather than regional blocs. The problem is the EU is designed to be run by national governments and can't act without them. It's like if all US states had veto powers over the budget and foreign policy while the Senate were actually members of state governments that just met up once in a while and state governments appoint members of the federal cabinet and nominate the president of US. It's designed to keep as much sovereignty as possible on a national level and make the EU accountable to national governments as opposed to voters Any attempt to reform it died with the Constitutional Treaty. The Lisbon Tteaty patched things up but no one has an appetite for more defeats by referenda. It's chaotic, corrosive and frankly embarrassing every time. Crisis is much more likely to dissolve the EU than motivate reform.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:I blame Germany. Every time there's a proposal to reform some part of the EU, Merkel said nein. It's not particular to Germany though. Norway and Iceland never joined, Denmark and Sweden opted out of the Euro and the UK left altogether. Meanwhile the south is all in. The north is generally speaking a lot less willing to integrate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2020 02:37
|
|
|
Celexi posted:the eu and esp the eurozone has 0 future without being federalized, and since that won't happen, brexit is just what is going to happen to all countries eventually Yes. Expensive so may take a while though..
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2020 04:24
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Macron's talk on the EU has been consistently good. But you know, talk is cheap. He hasn't accomplished poo poo and he's never been willing to actually put his foot down. Put his foot down and do what?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2020 10:51
|
|
|
Blut posted:True, Northern politicians will definitely be under far less pressure to open the borders. My post should really have read "Southern Europe" rather than just Europe. They're not going to open the borders and still require 14 days quarantine for travellers. That makes no sense. Guys it's safe to travel so go ahead and also it's not safe so we'll quarantine you.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
Lord Stimperor posted:Is there actually any European country that has rolled something like unconditional basic income as we hear it from Canada? At the beginning of the crisis I heard a lot about governements taking over payroll for businesses that operate at reduced capacity, zero-interest loans, and the like. That gave me hope that European countries would get through this crisis with as little pain as possible. But last I heard was all about loving austerity again. Spain is doing some kind of guaranteed minimum income.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2020 13:32
|
|
|
mortons stork posted:I doubt it. These are political blocs we're talking about, they march in lockstep, and if the senior partner decides on a line and is committed to it then the rest will fall in line. I suppose the Frugal Four counts as a bloc. https://twitter.com/sebastiankurz/status/1262432181571518466 Not sure if they consider Germany a senior member though.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
mortons stork posted:Let's not kid ourselves, if the recovery fund is truly wanted, those countries are about to get a nicely worded letter from Berlin. If not, Germany will just shrug at the next European Council meeting and say 'oh I can't really tell them how to vote now can I?' It depends on the internal politics of those countries. If a government deems it unacceptable they can and will refuse regardless of whatever carrot/stick Paris-Berlin offer in exchange. Poland and Hungary routinely go against EU consensus even on issues extremely important to Berlin. No doubt they have suffered political influence and standing on the continent but that's irrelevant If they think the alternative is worse.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
Bloomberg - EU Powers Suffer Shock Defeat as Irish Take Key Finance Job posted:The euro region’s smallest nations staged an uprising to put one of their own in charge of finance ministers’ meetings and strike a blow against the bloc’s major powers. The major economies can try, and may often, set the agenda but structurally it's only possible by broad consent.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2020 11:10
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I refuse to believe people were discussing cricket even as a joke How else could you? 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2020 05:09
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:it's hard to say that it's a wrong line of thought, given the dog's dinner that's been made of european solidarity in previous years and the constitutional weakness of the Union In my country the EU has never been about solidarity. Obviously internal discourse varies between countries, and perhaps even regions within them, so I wouldn't presume it's general but I have never heard a politician argue we should join or remain in the EU for altruism or solidarity. It has always been a matter of "This will be good for us - internal market, trade and jobs" while the skeptics pushed "This will be bad for us - foreigners, bureaucracy and sovereignty,". The point is, it has always been about what benefits US - never if it benefits someone else.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2020 11:08
|
|
|
Honest Thief posted:why everyone keeps calling them the frugal four, did they just named themselves that and no one blinked? No. Depending on preference you also have miserly and stingy on the menu. Apparently French and German diplomats started the Miserly Four psy-op counter-attack during a late night this weekend and Merkel and Macron is currently in a photoshoot pissing on piles of Legos, meatballs and wooden shoes to further ramp up pressure..
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2020 07:09
|
|
|
atal posted:But the lack of empathy dramatically limits understanding - so there is never any attempt to understand the working class, what they want, how to reach them, etc and it turns out that that section of society is absolutely key in winning elections! Not by the left perhaps but Trump did it quite successfully. Hey coal miners, steel workers, farmers, loggers and factory workers - you are my guys, you are awesome and I will create so many jobs for you! Trump spoke directly to them, recognized their problems, told them he was going to fix it and then they voted for him. The working class didn't turn right out of spite because of gender issues and feminism. To be sure those issues are important to some but for the people in depopulating rural areas and the stagnant rust belt the real issue is putting food on the table. Trump spoke to them and for them. In his own incoherent way he even laid out a plan. Curb immigration, better trade deals to restore manufacturing and deregulation to get resource extraction going in rural areas. We can disparage those ideas but it is a plan and having a plan is important. It's great to speak for LGBTQIA+, women, minorities and students. It's especially great if you offer something concrete like specific legislation or student loan forgiveness. It's a plan. But if all you have to offer for people who don't fall in those categories are empty platitudes and vagueries about job training, they probably won't vote for you nor should they.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jurabilis/status/1286944449839468545?s=19
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2020 17:09
|
|
|
Belarussian KGB arrested 30+ Wagner mercs in country and is accusing Russia of election fuckery. Maybe Montenegro 2.0 down to agents getting ineffectually exposed and arrested or Lukashenko is paranoid and arrested good hard working honest mercs on their way to work in Sudan. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53592854
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Generally, as long as both the army and the police support you, you're good. See also Venezuela, I thought Maduro would have been long gone by now. This. If the police and military does not stand down or in part defect there will be neither regime change nor revolution.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2020 22:28
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:. What metrics are you looking at? If you're talking about Soviet pre-war industrialization that includes repression, political persecution, forced labor canps and massive ethnic cleansing. Industrialization happened fast in part because it was a single-minded totalitarian state that could forcefully remove anyone not on board with the programme instead of working out messy compromises in a democratic system. If you're talking about the war itself then no, central planners did a piss poor job running the war. The same repression that allowed the SU to industrialize fast by removing malcontents is what decapitated military leadership and allowed the collapse during Operation Barbarossa. Everything that happened after that on the Eastern Front was the SU working to recover from that loss. You could say they were not ready for war at that time but that would be a failure of planning on their part. Which is not to say a totalitarian state established to fight climate change would not be effective but you can't achieve it through democratic or peaceful means and there's some human cost to make it run smoothly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2020 07:27
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:All of this is bad. But Capitalism says that Number Must Go Up. So we need a system that will be driven not by Number Must Go Up but by other conditions, such as sustainability. This will likely require Number to Go Down for a while first, because the western standard is not sustainable. Ok but this is where it would be useful to get more specific. If by socialism you mean market socialism with worker owned corporations and profit sharing then the profit motive remains exactly the same and there's no reason to think the environment won't still be a secondary concern. The different branches of socialism have mostly in common socially owned means of production but there's nothing in that concept as such to say that consumption would or should be limited. In fact, if socialism were to create a society with a more equal wealth distribution we should expect consumption to go up. While some forms of socialism may render the profit motive irrelevant there's always an incentive to do things efficiently and the question of how to distribute limited resources. Socialism under a democracy may simply replace profit with ever increasing, and ultimately runaway, demands for a higher standard of living by popular demand. Socialism in a totalitarian state might simply seek to increase consumption to appease the populace.. At any rate, if the goal is to lower standards of living a profoundly unequal feudal society would be a guaranteed success. Which brand of socialism with what characteristics are likely to achieve this with a higher chance of success?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Yes. However I posit that, for example, a worker-owned factory is less likely to decide to outsource to a factory in a country with less stringent environmental regulations. The capacity to concentrate enough wealth to push tailor-made legislation by buying MPs will also be less of a problem. Not really. There would be an incentive to limit membership of cooperatives to the bare essentials so there’s fewer to share the profits with or in other words to outsource as much as possible. Apple would still want to outsource its factories to the cheapest bidder wherever that may be but now it would also want to outsource things like retail, logistics, catering, cleaning etc. Simply buy or lease stores and contract another company to staff them and you have fewer people to share profits with. Companies would either be an elite of very profitable R&D and management companies or exist only to carry out contractual work while barely breaking even. The investor class is simply replaced with privileged workers with the connections to become members of the most profitable cooperatives.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
orange sky posted:While I think that publishing the Prophet's caricature is akin to publishing a black person's caricature as a monkey (in that it is extremely offensive to a race/religion) in Mohammed's case it is actually written in multiple rules and obeyed religiously (no poo poo lol). I find it extremely offensive to imply there's any context where such a reaction is warranted.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2020 16:18
|
|
|
Ham posted:I don't think that implication exists in the post you quoted, unless I'm reading it wrong. "I can understand why viewing it academically should not have such a reaction" implies the reaction is warranted when not viewing it academically. "You should not hit your wife in public spaces" while a true statement, is similarly disconcerting. Ham posted:It is abhorrent no matter what laws, rules or Islamic jurisprudence says that someone would harm someone else over a drawing, an opinion, or shouting "blasphemous" things - no qualifications there. Whether it is appropriate to show and share these depictions in a country with a systemic bigotry problem with their ostracized minority is a different question, and the one driving all the calls to boycott in the Islamic world. I applaud the voluntary and peaceful expression through boycotts. Good for them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
generic metric posted:well if you listened to people from that origin you would find that yes it is definitely intertwined That's unfortunate but there's no practical way to deal with that in legal terms. Unlike race or ethnicity religion can have social, cultural and moral values that can be and is used to, among other things, persecute and ostracize minorities. We need to be able to discuss, and yes mock, not just those values and the people who advocate them but also the religious frameworks they are couched in and are used to justify them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2020 10:32
|
|