|
Dude come the gently caress on. Lenin is not the reason workers don't see themselves as a class. Everyone in society is taught that individualism is cool and good, and our social structures reward being selfish as hell (look at who gets all the money, and thus political power). How many working class people do you think have chosen not to be communists because Lenin cost the left "credibility"? Do you think it is more or fewer than those who are not communists because they have been taught from birth that communism is terrible and basically fascism actually, and everyone can just apply their own bootstraps and become a billionaire anyway? How about the active suppression of leftist organizations as already mentioned upthread? In an imaginary world in which Lenin had been the perfect revolutionary and the Soviet Union had been a worker's paradise, do you imagine that western coverage would have been any kinder? If you think so, consider how western media covers any country outside our circle of friends (Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba come to mind). Social democracy is an attempt to save capitalism from the threat of revolution. It was instituted and remained strong around the time when communist and fascist revolutions were all the rage in Europe. The New Deal was in large part put in place to avert communist revolution. This was a great deal for capitalists at the time: They get to stay largely in control and keep most of the money, and in return commies aren't going to come seize their wealth. Now that the threat of communist revolution has been much reduced, welfare states are being slowly dismantled again, and so are unions. Regarding the social democrats of today, isn't it weird how those parties tend to busy themselves dismantling the welfare states they supposedly defend? Isn't it weird how the Danish Social Democrats have cozied up to the racists in the name of wanting to preserve the welfare state for us whites against the foreign other (the immigrants are using all the welfare, better build some barbed wire fence around the EU)? Also if the social democrats gave half a poo poo about worker democracy, they'd be defending unions rather than making GBS threads on them every time they're in power. See for example the last several rounds of collective bargaining agreements in the public sector in Denmark. Postorder Trollet89 posted:Anyone who would profess themselves a leftist while undermining social democrats [...] is insane. Vote Blue No Matter Who is a terrible strategy in America, and it's terrible here. Keep voting for shitheads because they're wearing your team jersey, and soon enough, you'll be getting racism, but woke (See: Matthias Tesfaye). I don't see how you can invoke climate change as a point in favor of social democrats. SocDems want to keep capitalism going, which means political power stays with capital, and capital doesn't seem terribly interested in policies that will impede growth. Postorder Trollet89 posted:That also goes for arguing over what's basically conjecture on deeply personalized accounts of events that happened 100+ years ago. I guess speculating on Lenin and Kerensky was only cool until you got pushback, now it's "insane"?
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 14:13 |
|
|
The Danish right wing, including S, is just the worst. Roughly 10% of Danish adults can't vote, many due to not being citizens. Citizenship is not automatically conferred if you're born here, so many people born and raised in Denmark aren't citizens. In order to become a citizen, you have to complete a multiple choice test that tests crucial knowledge, like random historical dates, or factoids about the royals. If you fail that test, or have been sentenced to any kind of jailtime or large fine, you get to plead your case to the "Indfødsretsudvalg", which is a small council of politicians who will decide whether you can acquire citizenship. This deliberation is done in secret. Here are quotes from a couple of the members of that council. Marie Krarup posted:Jeg stemmer nej til folk, der kommer fra islamiske lande, fordi jeg formoder, at de bærer den kultur videre. Men jeg vil gerne stemme ja til kristne fra de lande. For der er kristne minoriteter i de lande, og derfor synes jeg, det er for dårligt, at jeg ikke kan få oplysninger om deres religiøse tilhørsforhold. Mette Thiesen posted:(commenting on a guy who was in a fight in the early nineties, and still can't get citizenship because of it) Vi har den holdning, at udlændinge skal udvises konsekvent og efter første dom If you have received a sentence, even if it expires on your criminal record, you will still need to go to this council. Naturally, S doesn't see anything wrong with this. They love that people have to individually go hat in hand to this council, rather than letting criminal records expire at some point. I'm so happy we have a left-wing government.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Yes 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
Løkke's take on this is hilarious. He really wishes they could have run the commission under the previous government, so the case wouldn't have made it to a court, and they could have let Støjberg off with the dreaded "næse", but then when asked if she should lose her eligibility to be in the Folketing, he's like oh definitely, she's a criminal now.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
While it would be hilarious if Claus Hjort got locked up, I'd prefer if the intelligence services lost this one. The NSA being allowed to wiretap any communication running through Denmark is probably illegal, and it definitely doesn't help that it's apparently being used by the Americans to spy on nominal allies (e.g. Merkel). What's going on currently seems to be that some people at FE likely leaked the existence of this program to the press due to internal dissatisfaction with said program, and now PET is spraying and praying to try to clamp down on future leaks. Shortly after the initial leak of the existence of an NSA wiretapping program in DK, Tilsynet med Efterretningstjenesterne said that FE were likely sharing info on Danish citizens with the NSA illegally. This led to a commission. In December, that commission basically concluded with "Nothing to see here, move along" (most of the material is secret, but that's the public summary). Meanwhile PET put the former FE chief in detention and are currently running a super secret court case against him, where no one can be told what he's charged with. His defense lawyer's apparently trying to get the charges made public, which seems like a weird thing to want unless the charges are something people might be sympathetic to, so probably not leaking info to the Russians or nazis. PET also recently asked a bunch of the press to come be interrogated, seemingly as an intimidation tactic, and partly to see if they could get someone to spill their sources (Most of the press ignored the summons). What PET seems to be trying to get Claus Hjort on is that during an interview related to the leak of the NSA wiretapping, he said something to the effect of "If there were a wiretapping agreement, an incoming defense minister would be informed about it early on". So the NSA wiretapping program doesn't exist, and if it does it's definitely not illegal, but also it's very serious that this very legal fictional program might have been leaked, and PET are trying to nail everyone that might have mentioned anything about it to the wall. I'd have a hard time feeling good about PET succeeding here, even if this does seem like a fight between assholes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2022 23:40
|
|
|
BonHair posted:Also, does anyone remember why covid is over in Scandinavia? I think it's something about freedom, definitely not about people being vaccinated. It feels like the DK government arbitrarily decided covid was over sometime in the middle of February while infection numbers were still climbing. I'm guessing this is based on Omicron being less dangerous than Delta. It's definitely not based on number of infections. They stopped offering free rapid tests a few weeks ago, told people to stop wearing masks, and also updated the recommendation for covid isolation to shorten how long you should isolate yourself if you get a positive test. You can now break isolation as soon as you don't have symptoms. While they made these changes, Omicron has been running rampant to the extent that SSI estimates that half the adult population of Zealand caught covid in the last 3 months. https://www.ssi.dk/aktuelt/nyheder/2022/paa-lidt-over-tre-maaneder-har-halvdelen-af-de-voksne-i-oestdanmark-sandsynligvis-vaeret-smittet The positive rate for PCR tests is still high at around 25%. Infection numbers have been dropping, but fewer people are getting tested, and the positive rate doesn't seem to be budging that much. It's not like the hospitals are emptying out either, there are still ~1450 patients receiving treatment, which is about the same as a month ago. Last week they started recommending that you only get a PCR test if you are part of a vulnerable group, where the previous recommendation was to get tested if you think you might have been exposed. The reasoning for the change is that infection numbers (but not the positive rate) are dropping. I guess if we stop testing, the positive test count will drop, which means covid has gone away?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 18:15
|
|
|
It's hard to say. If fewer people are getting tested because tests are less readily available or because fewer people are choosing to get tested, the test count would go down without implying fewer infections. On the other hand, it's possible that fewer people are getting infected overall, and the positive rate is high because people only choose to get tested if they are highly likely to be infected? It just seems weird to decide to scale down testing before the positive rate starts dropping on its own 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
I think you're right, good point. If you follow the new recommendations though, you won't go get tested even if you feel sick, unless you're part of a vulnerable group. I don't see how they expect to be able to measure anything when they give that kind of advice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:As additional anecdata, literally none the nurses I know (I know more than a few for various reasons) think more pay will solve their problems. They all say they need more colleagues, as in more nurses. It’s the workload that’s the problem, not the salary. Okay, but that seems like a false dichotomy. Isn't it reasonable to assume that higher pay might lead to more nurses down the line, especially if you have to work for 8 years before you start getting the big bucks? Nursing (especially in the public sector) seems like a rough time, so I'm not surprised people are choosing other options. 200kr an hour isn't actually that much considering that you have to spend ~3-4 years studying. If you're spending that amount of time getting a diploma, you could just go be a computer toucher and earn 250/hr starting out, not have to wait 8 years for that pay to start scaling, and also know that you're not walking into a shitshow in terms of working hours. I'm not saying there aren't other groups treated worse, but if there's a lack of staff in this profession, raising wages seems like an obvious knob to turn to try to attract more people. I don't imagine it helps that nurses have been protesting several times over the last decade for better wages, and even during the pandemic, the response from the government has been "thanks for all your work, we see and hear you. We'll create a commission to tell us not to pay you more". This has happened at least twice now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2022 11:31
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:You could say ‘why not both’ I.e. more pay AND better working conditions. My point was that one of the ways to improve working conditions is to attract more nurses, so you can improve how stretched thin nurses are. Of the options available to attract more people to the profession, raising pay is one of the easy ones. I'm not saying to raise pay and do nothing else about working conditions. Doing literally anything to improve working conditions would be a good idea, because the public health care system seems to be bleeding out. I think it's pretty weird that you insist that higher pay is the wrong focus, considering that nurses have been protesting for wage increases a number of times now. Are they just misguided and should be protesting for something else? Revelation 2-13 posted:That nurses are somehow behind on salary, is a myth fabricated by DSR politicians and completely removed from objective reality and facts So just to be clear, are you saying that DSR is misleading the nurses, and when nurses protest for better wages, that's just DSR tricking them into thinking they're underpaid? Or is this a silent majority thing where DSR isn't representing the nurses properly? Revelation 2-13 posted:It’s about as factual and objective as number as it is possible to get. [...] Yes, it does include the extra salary people get for overtime pay and additions for nighttime shift, just like it does for everyone else, because it’s based on what people actually earned in those jobs over the last year The number might be objective, but that doesn't mean it is being applied fairly. If nurses make 500k a year, but have to take a lot of weird shifts and overtime to get there, and it is also a high pressure job in other ways, then why is it reasonable to compare that against other jobs that don't have those drawbacks? According to the chart derived from loen20 on https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/penge/tjener-en-sygeplejerske-25000-eller-42000-kroner-her-er-hvad-der-er-op-og-ned-i-den, you can make more than a nurse by going and being a librarian or a teacher. I'm pretty sure the working environment and hours for either is more comfortable (though it has been getting worse for teachers), so why shouldn't the worse working environment come with a premium in wage terms? Edit: Since "the current system" is that S and V take turns chipping away at the public sector, I agree that higher wages in the public sector isn't the way the political winds are blowing. Esran fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Oct 23, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
R jumping ship and going into government with VMK would be hilarious. Not being (as) lovely to immigrants is one of the few issues R pretends to care about, so I'm sure they'll go over well with the neo-nazis in DF, Nye Borgerlige and Danmarksdemokraterne (Inger really isn't hiding her inspiration here).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
BonHair posted:Pia Olsen Dyhr made a good point in an interview I just heard: she straight up said that there was no red majority because Radikale is in fact liberal, and she insinuated that S was kinda blue as well. It's not exactly breaking news, but coming from the party of S-but-cool, it's nice to hear. I wonder what S party member in good standing, former finance minister, editor in chief of Børsen, and corruption golem Bjarne Corydon has to say about the party? https://nyheder.tv2.dk/politik/2022-12-10-bjarne-corydon-socialdemokratiet-har-vaeret-paa-et-tre-aar-langt-frikvarter-nu quote:En regering over midten vil bryde med de seneste mange år med en socialdemokratisk regering med røde støttepartier. Og den udsigt glæder Bjarne Corydon, der sad som socialdemokratisk finansminister fra 2011 til 2015 og i dag er chefredaktør på Børsen. I'd say S is a little more than just kinda blue. S and V are the same party, the only difference is the branding and who they usually go into government with.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2022 21:19
|
|
|
Støjberg ate V's lunch in the racism department. Hard to tell if V's direction has actually changed though, I feel like after Støjberg and Løkke left, V has seemed pretty bland and deflated in general.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2022 00:26
|
|
|
And the money they expect to get from it is earmarked for war. Cool.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2022 20:24
|
|
|
Well, this is one of the most cursed sentences I've seen in a while:quote:Lars Seier revser ny regering og 'top-topskat': 'Helt urimeligt'. Her kan du se B.T. politiske kommentator Joachim B. Olsens vurdering
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
The changes to masters programs are garbage. Universities are one of the dumbest places to try to save money, spending on education is one of the few types of public spending you'd think the New Public Management types would like, since money spent there is very likely to come back with interest through taxes later. The neolibs will keep insisting that universities should just be converted into schools preparing you to work a particular job and nothing else I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2022 00:50
|
|
|
"Guess we're just gonna let it happen." has been the slogan through the entire pandemic. The goal was always only to "flatten the curve", and then just live with having covid hanging around forever once it became endemic. I think this was a great test run for climate change, we're absolutely not going to handle that either.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2023 17:38
|
|
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:allow more immigration, since Denmark is still one of the more attractive nations to immigrate to. But the Muslim menace though Revelation 2-13 posted:increase taxes (individual an corporate both thank you) so the increase in health and childcare expenses is offset by an increase in revenue. but the job creators Revelation 2-13 posted:I’m sure our wonderful politicians will get right on that. It’s not like they all ran on anti-immigration campaigns and neoliberal tax cuts. Oh, I see. Yeah, we’re hosed. The only thing that can “””””save””””” us is apparently slashing higher education, despite that being the one thing we’ve had going for us for quite a while. Actually, probably bringing smoking back will help a lot too. Is that on the table? Former health minister Hækkerup would really prefer if you drank yourself to death instead. Tesfaye, being his usual charming self, just announced that the government is aiming to make getting into STX harder. Love to lock kids out of an education based on performance at 14/15. Børnenes statsminister.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Russia literally did "just turn off the gas valve", they just came up with some other excuses for it (maintenance and technical issues). There was no need for them to blow up their own pipeline to keep it closed. Blowing it up also removed leverage Russia had over Germany, which is not at all in Russia's interest. Recall that when the pipeline blew, Europe was looking into a winter where we weren't certain if there would be gas shortages, and people were beginning to air the idea that the pipeline might need to be reopened. If the US did it, that's at least a coherent story in terms of motivation. The US had a clear motive and the means to do it, and Biden specifically threatened that he would shut off the pipeline if Russia invaded Ukraine. I think the "Russia did it" story is very weakly supported given the limited information that's currently available. That seems to be why people are digging out great arguments like "Hersh is just washed up, so let's just ignore the story" and "How could Russia possibly blame the US so quickly if they didn't know in advance?". It's not like it took more than a few hours for our own press to report that Russia definitely did it to themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Okay, here you go: This article isn't anything. The journalist asked the White House, Norwegian PM's office and Forsvaret for comment, and they said they didn't do it. I guess that's all the investigation we need to do, let's move on to how Bellingcat feels about Hersh (dislike, it turns out). The only part of that article that says anything at all about whether Hersh's story is believable is the note that the P8 plane isn't in service yet. I'm not saying Hersh's story is believable, but this kind of article is just white noise.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:No, you're being taken advantage of by a Russian info operation. You don't need to hand it to insane conspiracy theorists just because you agree with their political views. Not even if they did something good decades ago. It's his job to back up his claims, not ours. "He's a conspiracy theorist, he has no evidence, you just want to believe it due to your political views. He's being fed a story in a Russian disinformation campaign" I say, with no hint of introspection. Potrzebie posted:Unfounded accusations without any credible sources posted by a disgraced boomer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:And? And so maybe don't imply that he's antisemitic by drawing comparisons between his article and the Protocols. Somaen posted:The lowest common denominator that it's aimed at that believes it here It would be nice if you and Nenonen would stop peppering your posts with little barbs implying people who disagree with you are 9/11 truthers, antisemitic, or "the lowest common denominator". It's lovely, and I'm sure you're sufficiently confident in your arguments that you can get by without them. Somaen posted:Definitely that alone is not, the goal of a critical analysis is taking in every possible aspect of the situation and pattern recognition to come to a likeliest conclusion, so including the behavior of the involved parties and their risk assessment (US - high risk to ruin relations with NATO allies, benefit - cutting off gas that wasn't flowing half a year into the war?), correlation with previous behavior (russia loves using proxies to post articles in a similar vein, when Browder was pushing for the Magnitsky act, some new york post or similar rag articles appeared with the Magnitsky Killed Himself Actually narrative that was obviously ordered), the source of the information (anonymous sources shared by a dictator defender) and so on. The thing is that this is a pretty straight forward op, if critical faculties fail at an assessment of something as hamfisted as this, how well do you think people spreading this garbage are capable of recognizing and resisting something done capably? I don't think Hersh's story is all that interesting unless someone can corroborate it, but this doesn't point to Russia blowing up the pipelines, nor does it indicate that the US wasn't involved. There were clear incentives for the US to destroy the pipelines. The pipelines being destroyed removes any temptation for Germany to waffle on the war in case energy shortages start, it helps ensure the EU will be using US gas and not Russian gas in the future, and it cuts off a source of funding for Russia. That's all beneficial to the US. You might say that it would be completely unrealistic for Germany to want to restart the gas flow anyway, but keep in mind that the gas was throttled by Russia, not Germany, and Germany was pretty angry about it. If it is so blindingly obvious that Russia did it for reasons, and if you believe otherwise you're just gullible, you wouldn't expect to have EU officials, who would presumably know more about the investigations than randos on the internet, telling the press that people probably jumped to conclusions and they now doubt Russia did it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/21/russia-nord-stream-explosions/ posted:“No one on the European side of the ocean is thinking this is anything other than Russian sabotage,” a senior European environmental official told The Washington Post in September. Esran fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2023 13:00
|
|
|
Somaen posted:This doesn't pass a simple risk assessment smell test. US risks: global reputational and relationship damage with allies, Russia flips its poo poo and starts threatening nuclear war or retaliating by damaging critical infrastructure. Reward: status quo, Germany potentially doesn't buy gas in case it wants to? Same can be achieved with sanctioning nord stream with less risk and more negotiation room. (Germany can still keep buying russian gas because stupid americans failed to blow up nord stream 2) I don't think your analysis holds water. The benefits to the US of the pipelines being destroyed are not "status quo". How would the US sanction Nord Stream in a way that prevents Germany from buying Russian gas, without also pissing off Germany? Remember, the goal in this hypothetical would be to drive a wedge between Germany and Russia. You claim the risk to Russia is minimal. Do you feel that there is no risk to Russia in attacking infrastructure which could be easily interpreted as belonging to a NATO member? You seem to be saying that in order to force Germany to buy gas from Russia, Russia is blowing up its own pipelines that were not delivering gas, in order to create a gas crisis in Germany that will force Germany to buy gas via Russia's other pipelines. That's nonsense. If the destruction of the NS pipelines creates a gas crisis in Germany, it will be because Germany needed Russian gas via NS. Blowing up the pipelines doesn't force Germany to buy more gas from Russia than they would have otherwise, it just moves the delivery from NS to other pipelines. The officials conducting the investigation do need evidence before making accusations. But when you have no evidence, you say "We're not sure yet". What's the motivation for them to say "We now doubt Russia was responsible, also the rationale that it was Russia never made sense to me"?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:It seems to me that Russia has plenty to gain by simply sowing distrust among allies, when Russia regards all of the allied as enemies. It seems incompetent to do a false flag and not leave any evidence pointing at your enemy (or at least at anyone but you), but yes, this is a possible explanation. Clarifying my position: I'm not saying the US definitely did it, or that Russia definitely didn't do it. I'm saying that it's stupid to assert that people who think the US is involved might as well be 9/11 truthers, because the US clearly benefits from this situation, and there's no real evidence pointing to someone else. The same is true of Russia, though I think it's much less of a clear cut win for them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
True friendship is when people will post for you when you're in cat jail.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
Somaen posted:Making up increasingly unlikely hypotheticals where a conspiracy makes sense ignoring the big picture and actual context (Germany was firmly on board with the us in July) is how you get to explaining how there could be some scenarios where it makes sense that bush did 9/11 and it usually shows by the increasing amount of paragraphs you need to describe those scenarios There is no  large enough. That post was in response to you advocating a conspiracy theory in which Russia was blowing up their already-closed pipelines in order to cause an energy crisis that would force Germany to buy Russian gas from Russia's other pipelines, while pretending that the US has basically nothing to gain from destroying the pipelines. If you think posts longer than a tweet indicate tinfoil hattery, you might be in the wrong forum.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Somaen posted:Russia trying to engineer an energy crisis is a conspiracy theory Literally, yes, but that's not the point. A conspiracy theory can be true. Here's the relevant part of the post you left out. quote:blowing up their already-closed pipelines in order to cause an energy crisis that would force Germany to buy Russian gas from Russia's other pipelines, while pretending that the US has basically nothing to gain from destroying the pipelines This is you making up hypotheticals while ignoring the context (The pipelines were already not delivering gas, blowing them up doesn't increase German gas demand, blowing them up doesn't force Germany to buy more Russian gas than they would have otherwise), and also being unreasonably charitable to the US in order to fit your desired narrative. You're doing exactly what your post says not to do. It's not that Russia couldn't have done it, it's that these hypotheticals don't convincingly point the finger at Russia. If you are trying to make a case for Russia having done it, you'd do better with an argument like the one the defense analyst guy Rust posted earlier made. That one is at least cogent.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2023 23:34
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Number one is of course, cats. Lions, tigers, your average house cat, if anyone says cats aren't the best, they're a cop https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/731179989113765909/1074617132802912256/big_baby.mp4 Yeah, checks out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
It's great that the pedo will just keep coming back, even when people don't vote for him. Also lol at the blurring in that image.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2023 15:28
|
|
|
I love that someone looked at that photo and went "No, that's too obscene. Blur out the vagina".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
Threadkiller Dog posted:Don't danes pay their own payroll taxes and stuff (arbetsgivaravgift) from their gross? It's usually collected by the employer, so while the gross is listed on your pay stub, that money never crosses your bank account. Which is frankly how it should be. I love not having to mess with taxes most of the time, and just having the tax authority send me a "We think you made this much, let us know if you disagree" summary every year. jeebus bob posted:BTW Denmark just lost a holiday for the first time in over 200 years but at least we got some Public opinion seems to be strongly against this and it's being forced through anyway. I've noticed that when people complain about this being undemocratic, party soldiers love popping in with an  about how democracy doesn't mean doing what voters want, it's totally cool for politicians to pull poo poo like this out of a hat post-election, and if people don't like it, they can just vote the bastards out. In 3.5 years.The spirit of VOTE has made it to Denmark. We really are America with a slight time lag. Esran fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Feb 28, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2023 20:24
|
|
|
Work harder proles  https://finans.dk/politik/ECE15228510/statsministeren-knuser-ide-om-kortere-arbejdstid-i-fremtiden-glem-det-venner/ quote:Der er alle mulige mennesker, der mener, vi kan arbejde mindre. Glem det, venner. Glem det Says Mette Frederiksen days after abolishing a public holiday, at a conference arranged by McKinsey, talking to corruption elemental Bjarne Corydon. At least we don't have a right wing government.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2023 18:15
|
|
|
I guess that's just how she gets around these days.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:The funny thing is, if you check the statistics we're doing pretty well Yeah, but how this seems to work is that when there's high unemployment, we need to cut benefits to get the lazy bums off welfare. When there's low unemployment, companies are yelling at the government to increase the labor pool, so we need to get people to work more, and cut benefits to get the lazy bums off welfare. Edit: This explains a lot quote:McKinsey (...) retained a diffident and traditional ethos (...) requiring its consultants to wear fedoras Esran fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Mar 2, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2023 22:33
|
|
|
Yes, but when you've built the last 20-odd years of Danish politics around brown people being scary and that has become the political consensus across the center, switching gears is hard. I don't see any of S, DF, DD, NB and maybe V and K being eager to allow more immigration. I think even parties like Ø would be concerned that more immigration would be used as an opportunity for employers to depress wages. Edit: Even with the current low unemployment, I think I recall someone from S saying that once the war is over, Ukrainians need to leave. So it doesn't seem like they're softening their stance yet. Esran fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Mar 2, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
Potrzebie posted:China did this. I hope it is never tried again anywhere. Agreed, with liberal democracies acting as plague incubators so we don't have to close restaurants, there was no way for zero covid to work in the long run.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
Not what I'm saying. I'm saying that liberal democracies by and large adopted a "flatten the curve" approach, in which the goal wasn't to stop covid from spreading, but just to slow it down enough not to overwhelm hospitals. The result is that covid is now endemic and we're likely never getting rid of it. China showed that a zero covid approach can work, but obviously it only works if other countries aren't letting the disease spread, because you can't stay isolated forever.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 20:01
|
|
|
I think you are overstating the degree to which you would need to "faultlessly implement extreme levels of state control", simple "isolating sick people" would have helped, but whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
Orio posted:How would that help? Are you asking how isolating sick people during a pandemic would help limit infection? Since it was discussed a bunch a few pages ago: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html The people doing the investigation still don't think Russia did it to themselves, they're saying signs point toward some non-state pro-Ukraine group.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 14:13 |
|
|
Orio posted:No, I'm asking how that would help in terms of achieving zero covid, which is very different from just limiting infection. I thought that was pretty self-evident from the rest of my post. What kind of answer are you looking for here? Your assertion is that the only way to pursue an elimination strategy for the disease is to "faultlessly implement extreme levels of state control". I don't think that's true in a world where most countries attempted to eliminate the disease, but obviously I can't provide evidence for counterfactuals. I can point out that zero covid wasn't an exclusively Chinese policy, and I don't believe New Zealand or Vietnam welded anyone into their homes. Every country (except maybe North Korea) has abandoned zero covid at this point, but covid is substantially more infectious now than it was early in the pandemic, so the level of lockdown needed to control it now is not the same as it was then.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2023 00:11
|
|