The elections for the German parliament - the Bundestag - will be held on September 22nd this year. I will use this opportunity to give a brief introduction to German politics. As usual, this won't come without a degree of bias, but I'll try to stick to the facts still.
The Bundestag is the main legislative body in Germany, with the upper house, the Bundesrat, being the second. The Bundestag is elected every four years, and the Bundestag seats are distributed among all parties proportionally to the votes they received (Being Germany, the details are much more complex of course. Have fun reading about it elsewhere). One important factor is that a party needs to receive at least 5% of all national votes to get into the Bundestag in the first place, a threshold that was introduced to avoid the nightmare of dozens of tiny parties and lists blocking German politics which happened in the past.
After election, the Bundestag elect the chancellor, and thus effectively the next administration. Although there is no requirement for it, all major parties will all go into election campaigning with their candidate for the chancellor and most of the chancellor's cabinet and administration already in place.
Because of the 5% requirement, for the longest time German politics has been a three party system, which became four parties in the 80s, and five parties in the late 90s. Because of this today no party can elect the chancellor and back an administration by themselves, and parties form coalitions to get the majority in the Bundestag. Coalitions are a hot topic during campaigning, and often campaigns will be run over potential coalitions.
The party landscape in Germany can be broadly parted into left and right, or into social-democratic and liberal-conservative, however this distinction is becoming more blurry and less meaningful with every election. The main parties contenting for the Bundestag this year are:
The Union is a combined list of the parties Christian Democratic Union (CDU), and Christian Social Union (CSU). Together they make up the main conservative party in Germany. Their chancellor candidate and current chancellor is Angela Merkel. The difference between the two parties that make up the Union are small, but in general the smaller CSU is more conservative on family and social issues, and less liberal and more protectionist on economic issues. Historically the main topics for the conservatives were traditional Christian family values, an "ordo-liberal" free market, integration with the West and specifically the USA politically, militarily, and economically. They have also been the main drivers of European integration. They were doubtful about renewable energy and welfare programs. Despite the name, religion does not play a major role in the Union's program, or in German politics in general. However, after Angela Merkel almost lost the 2005 election on a neo-conservative ticket, she has steered the CDU and the Union decidedly towards the center, and yielded pretty much every classic conservative position. Right now it is difficult to say what makes the Union still a truly conservative party.
The Social Democratic Party (SPD) is Germany's oldest political party, and the main party on the left side of the political spectrum. Their chancellor candidate is Peer Steinbrueck. Similarly to what Angela Merkel is doing to the CDU right now, before 2005 former chancellor Gerhard Schroeder took the SPD on a very centrist course, most famously by introducing highly controversial welfare reforms. This caused a major disruption within the SPD, one that is has not been able to recover from since. The SPD is uncomfortably locked in between an ever more centrist CDU and the far left, and has difficulty differentiating itself from either without alienating either the left or rights branches within the party. Their classic topics are worker's rights, social, and welfare programs, but in any of those their position is only marginally different from the Union's today. They also supported the Merkel administration on all foreign policy and European integration questions.
The Free Democratic Party (FDP) is the second party in the conservative block. Their chancellor candidate is Rainer Brüderle. The FDP is a smaller party, and typically forms a coalition with the Union to achieve a majority in the Bundestag or in state parliaments. They are currently in a coalition with the Union and thus are part of the Merkel administration. The classic liberal topics are free market, little state intervention in economic and social issues, and individualism. They used to have some overlap with the SPD, and indeed were part of a joint SPD -FDP administration in the 70s, but since then their only option for a coalition on the national level has been the Union. For a number of reasons (accusations of corruptions, mismanagement, infighting) they had a spectacularly bad start into the current Merkel administration, and for the longest part it was doubtful they would even make the 5% threshold to get back into the Bundestag this year, dropping to a historically low 2% in national polls two years ago. They recently recovered, but it is still not certain if they will make it into the next Bundestag.
The Green Party started as a movement purely devoted to environmental issues in the 80s, but is now a fully matured party. They have nominated two candidates for chancellor, Katrin Göring-Eckardt and Jürgen Trittin. The Green party is in an unprecedented strong position. From a party dedicated to environmentalism they have become a party somewhat left on welfare questions, but without the socialist tradition of the SPD, very progressive on education, family, and social issues, and is now welcoming free market ideals. The Green party today is neither truly left nor right, and "steals" votes from both camps, although so far they have only ever gone into coalitions with the SPD. They used to be a small party on par with the FDP, but are now about to take over the role as the main party opposing the conservatives from the SPD.
The Left Party is a joint party made of PDS, which superseded the communist party in former East Germany, and the far left branch of the SPD, which had split from the SPD during the Schroeder administration. They have not nominated a chancellor candidate. The Left enjoyed much success towards the end of the Schroeder administration and during the first Merkel years, but has long struggled with internal disagreement over direction and internal power contests. They are hovering just above the 5% threshold. The Left's program is classic socialist with additional pacifist ideals and a modern program regarding family and social issues. While they are not a truly communist party and have many overlaps with the SPD and the Green party, they do reject capitalism and the free market in favor of a democratic socialism.
The Pirate Party is a new party that evolved from the European movement for internet freedom which started with the Pirate Party in Sweden. They have not nominated a chancellor candidate. The Pirate party's main topic is copyright reform and protection of internet freedom. Since the last year they have matured and adopted positions on other topics, which are on many points similar to the Green party. They can be described as somewhat left on social issues, but more liberal on economic ones. The Pirates enjoyed a spectacular rise and a just as spectacular falldown over the past four years. From 2% turnout at the last Bundestag election they rapidly gained popularity which went up to 13% on national polls two years ago. Due to a very public power struggle within the party they collapse over the past year and fell back below the 5% threshold. It is very unlikely they will make the threshold in September.
The Alternative For Germany (AfD) is an upstart party founded just weeks ago. It is difficult to associate them to either Left or Right yet, as they borrow from both. The sole program which they publicly advertise is rejection of the mainstream European policy. While they don't openly call for an end of the Euro or the EU as the only way, they demand that a return to the old currency, the DeutschMark, has to be considered as a viable option. They also call for an end of all transfer payments from Germany to EU institutions, specifically the ESM. They are currently at 3% in national polls.
Alright, so those are the players. Now, how will the elections turn out in September?
SPOILER ALERT: The next German chancellor will be Angela Merkel.
Angela Merkel right now is pretty much untouchable in Germany. No matter how catastrophic her administration was run at times, her approval ratings never dropped. In fact, she remained the most popular politician in Germany up until last year, and was only recently overtaken by Gauck, the current German president. She is far ahead of any of her contenders. Her foreign policy, especially how she handles the European crisis, is very very popular. She understands extremely well to stay away from any definite positions on anything controversial. Her administration went through several scandals, like evidence of special interest groups influence, corruption charges against the former president, who she backed until the end, two ministers who had to resign for being stripped off their PhDs for fraud. Yet none of that did the slightest damage to Merkel.
Peer Steinbrueck, the main contender, would be a good candidate, but in this election he still doesn't stand a chance. He is also a popular politician, known as a sometimes politically incorrect straight shooter. However, he already served under Merkel during the last administration from 2005 to 2009 as minister of finance. Thus he is basically forced to agree with most of her economic decisions since they are largely a continuation of the policy he was part of back then.
In general the main opposition party, the SPD, has a very hard time attacking the administration on anything, mostly because of the already mentioned centrist course Merkel took the CDU on. Examples include abolishing compulsory military service, exiting nuclear power, embracing environmentalism. During the financial crisis the supposedly liberal-conservative administration massively intervened to save companies and jobs with billions of tax payer Euros.
So, apart from the Left and the AfD, none of the other parties disagree fundamentally with the course Merkel is running. Since the major battle, the European crisis, is basically already decided in favor of the current administration, public discourse shifted to arguably less important topics:
Family and gender: Here too, the Merkel administration runs a remarkably progressive policy for a conservative party. However, she ceded one point to the right wing of her own party: A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium". This policy and other events sparked a new discussion about gender equality in Germany recently.
LGTB rights: The German supreme court has basically announced they will rule a number of laws and regulations unconstitutional since they discriminate against homosexuals. The resulting discussion has started yet another fundamental change in the conservative block, since the vast majority of Germans support gay rights and gay marriage (which sadly still doesn't exist in Germany), but especially the CSU traditionally opposed liberalization. After the initiative from the court, Merkel gave an outlook that her position might change in this regard, without being specific though.
Minimum wage: It is kind of funny, but for years this has been one of the hottest topics in Germany. The reason being that heavily unionized, social and welfare happy Germany does not have a minimum wage. Naturally this is the home ground of the SPD, PDS, and to a lesser degree the Greens, who heavily campaign for the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage.
Taxes: In short, the conservatives promise to not raise taxes, the Left and the Greens promise to raise taxes (for the wealthy). It should be said that this isn't nearly as important a topic as it is elsewhere, as Germans are generally quite ok with paying taxes. Prime example is that the voters of the Green party (who call for higher taxes) happen to be the most wealthy compared to the voters of other parties.
I hope this topic wasn't too dry (in case it was, here is a picture of Claudia Schiffer to compensate), but it seemed a better point in time than any to give an introduction to the German political landscape. What I want you to take away:
Under Schroeder, the SPD moved decidedly towards the right
Under Merkel, the Union moved decidedly towards the left
As a result the SPD is crushed between the far left and the center
As a result the Green party gained strength, drawing from both camps
The next German chancellor will be Angela Merkel
The interesting question in September will be who she will form a coalition with
Obviously this article is not exhaustive. If you have further questions I'd be happy to address them in the comments.
As a student in political science and concerned with germany's energy policy.
I will toroughly watch Die Grünen results, I argued at some point that Merkel decided to accelerate the end of the nuclear program because of the important rise of Die Grünen in the parliament and in several crucial Länder like Bade Wurtenberg and the downfall of her coalition with FDP. She needed a bold, nation-wide move, even if inconsistent with the EU or even with the climate change issue.
Nonetheless, i agree with you, she will the next chancellor. She is way too strong both inside and outside of Germany for german to kicks her out. Needless to say that she looks like she saved the country from the bad situation the EU is in right now, even thought she (imho at least) was just there at the right moment, as it is not her policies that helped but previous reforms and german's ethics of work (which can be found in switzerland and austria as well).
Nice writeup, pretty much agree with everything you wrote. I liked Schroeder and his Agenda 2010 approach, although it might have been too harsh in some areas and you still see the effect it had/has on the SPD to this day. And yeah, there is no way Merkel won't be the next chancellor
cheers zatic, interesting and enjoyable read. kitchen premium was pretty surprising. hoping for more german demand of norwegian hydro electric competence, go green party.
can you go a bit further into why they relatively more wealthy? also can you talk about how the pirate party and those who vote for it are perceived by msm, other parties and general public?
Interesting read, especially when you compare and contrast with American politics right now. I'm surprised at how many countries have more than two dominant political parties. Its also strange to see a place where the big parties are moving closer to center, while here in the states everyone is becoming more polarized left and right.
Good analysis. However, zatic, I'd strongly recommend changing The Piracy Party to The Pirate Party. Piracy is a different thing, although I'm sure there will be pirate party members supporting free data for all movements.
Edit: Just to make it more certain. It's The Pirate Party everywhere. :-)
On May 04 2013 00:48 nunez wrote: can you go a bit further into why they relatively more wealthy? also can you talk about how the piracy party and those who vote for it are perceived by msm, other parties and general public?
To me atleast it is pretty logical that part of the current supporters of the Green Party are somewhat more wealthy, because this ecological and sustainable thinking (and especially living - man these prices of Bio-products etc , although our food is cheap as fuck anyways imo) requires some form of financial stability and comes mostly from the more educated (and with this comes wealth more often than not) class. They also want to improve the standard of education by introducing full-time schools and also increase the amount of university students and graduates by supporting students with socially weaker situated backgrounds, which comes with additional financial strains for the system
On May 04 2013 00:48 nunez wrote: also can you talk about how the piracy party and those who vote for it are perceived by msm, other parties and general public?
There were quite some different phases in coverage by MSM on the pirate party. At the start it was this little group of people that had alot more radical opinions about internet freedom than most of the other parties, but they didn't see them as a threat at all. It was more of this curiosity thing going on (hey look at that funny movement kinda reaction). Suddenly they gained alot of support though and some of the members of other parties started to change sides. This really helped the pirate party to establish themselves as a more legitimate political option and they established a real party manifesto. MSM reacted with trying to understand a little more what actually was going on with this party. The hype slowed down though and more often than not, they get sneered on and if they appear as talkshow guests, they mostly get taken lightly. That's atleast my take on it. All personal impressions of course.
This is awesome, as it is rather difficult for foreigners to access good, clean information on a nations politics from the outside looking in. If I may ask, zatic, what is your personal take on Merkel and the Union?
Even though i like your presentation, i think you overlooked one important factor in those elections, and thus your bet on Merkel becoming chancellor is not completely safe. This years elections are not about how many votes the big 3 (CDU/CSU, SPD and Greens) will get. This year it is about the small parties. Current predictions (those are highly accurate in germany, like the prevotepools almost always nail the votes, but ofc there is still some time up to the elections...) Left: 6% FDP: 4-5% AFD: 3% Pirates: 3% Remaining: 2% In theory we can have everything from a 3 to 7 party Bundestag this year. If there are 3 parties,(that means 20% of the votes go down the drain of the 5% barrier) the greens will decide, who becomes chancellor of SPD and CDU/CSU! Whoever they ally with will get the chancellor(more likely to be SPD). If we get 4 parties, it will be a close call, if SPD+Green is enough, if not, it will only leave us with CDU/CSU+Green or CDU/CSU+SPD (more likely imho). With 5+ parties a CDU/CSU+SPD is almost guaranteed, because i don't see any possibility for a CDU/CSU+FDP+Green coalition at Bundeslevel (especially after the last 4 years and the debacles of the FDP)
Democracy in a capitalistic world is an insult to the human intellect, or something like that. I do not know if it was Pispers(German satiric) or George Carlin, but I like that quote.
72.5% went to the last election, 330 from 620 seats form the majority government, so even if it would matter who was elected, the government was formed with a little more than the consent of 1/3 of the population.
The Left Party actually once was elected for my local government, Their budget plan was not approved, and the revision of their budget plan was not approved either, they then sold welfare housing.
What the SPD did when they were elected, because of the social crisis germany was/is in: they made everything worse. A lot of people work for an Euro the hour, we are the china of europe, sarkozi thought this is great, good for economy and tried to copy our system for france. It did fail, because it demands people to deny others the right to live if they do not as they are told, and french people are just better humans than us germans in generall.
Thoughts of someone who does not vote, because it does not matter and he dislikes the idea of giving power to make decisions for him to someone else.
When I first moved to Germany I was very confused by the way "liberal" suddenly meant far right :p
I thought the Green Party got a massive boost from what happened in Fukushima, and I think this is what pushed Merkel more into environmentalism and anti-nuclear power. I still see badges and stickers saying "Atomkraft: Nein Danke" (Nuclear power: No thanks).
I find German politics weird. The scandals of politicians and plagiarism was huge, and seemed to get more attention than Schroeder's (possible) corruption with Gazprom ever did. Merkel herself seems to be popular because she has no real personality of her own and says/does whatever she thinks will be popular at the time. I'm surprised it is so successful for her.
I Study Sinology with political sience as a minor her in germany , so i will try to sum up the electoral procedure a little.
Every citizen over 18 has 2 votes in the election , with the first vote , you elect a candidate that will be send into the parlament by your district. the second vote is used to elect a party.
The important distinction is that the candidate is elected by the majority in each district , the first votes for the other candidates are lost, while the second vote will be allocated via proportional vote allocation , which means each party will get its share out of each district.
Now , here is where it gets complicated: ALL seats in the Parlament are distributed according to the second vote: which means if your party recieved 33% of the second vote nationwide , you gain 207 out of 620 seats. your 207 seats will then first be filled by the candidates of the districts you won with the first vote. as their are 299 districts overall , lets say the party also won 33% of those , meaning a hundret seats of your 207 go to your directly elected candidats. The remaining 107 are filled via party lists. these are published by each party prior to the election , in our example , since the party won 207 seats , 100 of those are filled with direct candidates , the first 107 people from that partys list also move into the parlament. since a party will usually have more seats won with their second vote then direct districts won a high place on the list is basically a guarantee to get a seat.
A special case are the so called "Überhang mandate" if a party wins more districts then the number of seats it has allocated via second vote, the additional direct district candidates that have won will also get a seat , which is added to the total of seats in the parlament. this will cause the parlament to have more than their maximum number of seats. usually after each election there will be like 10-20 candidates moving into the parlament this way , increasing the netto size of the Bundestag from 598 to about 620.
the two biggest parties, that are supposedly socialists and conservatives are actually that close that the individual opinions of the respective candidates often overlap or even criss-cross.
For my decision-making process about whom to vote for, I have found the following to work for me: The biggest German news magazine (Der Spiegel) sends questionnaires to all the candidates, asking them for their stance on something like 50 political topics (gay marriage, nuclear power, abortion, legalization of weed, speed limit on the Autobahn, etc.) and puts the data online so that you can do nice comparisons of all the candidates in your electorate. I use this to see which one is the least retarded in my opinion, he/she gets my vote. The 2nd vote goes to the small party that I feel closest to and that actually has a chance of making it into the parliament. Lately, this have been the Pirates.
On May 04 2013 03:38 Rimstalker wrote: the two biggest parties, that are supposedly socialists and conservatives are actually that close that the individual opinions of the respective candidates often overlap or even criss-cross.
For my decision-making process about whom to vote for, I have found the following to work for me: The biggest German news magazine (Der Spiegel) sends questionnaires to all the candidates, asking them for their stance on something like 50 political topics (gay marriage, nuclear power, abortion, legalization of weed, speed limit on the Autobahn, etc.) and puts the data online so that you can do nice comparisons of all the candidates in your electorate. I use this to see which one is the least retarded in my opinion, he/she gets my vote. The 2nd vote goes to the small party that I feel closest to and that actually has a chance of making it into the parliament. Lately, this have been the Pirates.
On May 04 2013 03:38 Rimstalker wrote: the two biggest parties, that are supposedly socialists and conservatives are actually that close that the individual opinions of the respective candidates often overlap or even criss-cross.
For my decision-making process about whom to vote for, I have found the following to work for me: The biggest German news magazine (Der Spiegel) sends questionnaires to all the candidates, asking them for their stance on something like 50 political topics (gay marriage, nuclear power, abortion, legalization of weed, speed limit on the Autobahn, etc.) and puts the data online so that you can do nice comparisons of all the candidates in your electorate. I use this to see which one is the least retarded in my opinion, he/she gets my vote. The 2nd vote goes to the small party that I feel closest to and that actually has a chance of making it into the parliament. Lately, this have been the Pirates.
On May 04 2013 00:58 IBringUFire wrote: Good analysis. However, zatic, I'd strongly recommend changing The Piracy Party to The Pirate Party. Piracy is a different thing, although I'm sure there will be pirate party members supporting free data for all movements.
Edit: Just to make it more certain. It's The Pirate Party everywhere. :-)
I studied politics in university, though mostly international relations and American politics, so learning about Germany is very interesting. I was a little surprised to hear that the successor party to the East German Communist party is still alive and kicking, but of course that was the main party for a significant period of time for a significant part of the country.
One thing I'd be interested to know is how these parties play across a more regional level. In the US, for example, the Democrats and Republicans have offices and branches in every state and nearly every county, it's only in the most extreme local towns that the minority party doesn't bother contesting an election. I'd imagine that with 5 major parties there might be more regional variance in Germany. Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
On May 04 2013 08:14 jubil wrote: I studied politics in university, though mostly international relations and American politics, so learning about Germany is very interesting. I was a little surprised to hear that the successor party to the East German Communist party is still alive and kicking, but of course that was the main party for a significant period of time for a significant part of the country.
One thing I'd be interested to know is how these parties play across a more regional level. In the US, for example, the Democrats and Republicans have offices and branches in every state and nearly every county, it's only in the most extreme local towns that the minority party doesn't bother contesting an election. I'd imagine that with 5 major parties there might be more regional variance in Germany. Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
Absolutly, yes. Bavaria for example is dominated by the CSU, the party "Die Linke" is way more succssesfull in east germany and the saarland then in the rest of they country. Looking at smaller regions, there are even bigger differences between the single regions.
Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
What's particularly interesting is that at the moment most states are run by SPD/Die Grünen, instead of the CDU. That also results in a majority in the "Bundesrat" for those parties. So although there is little doubt that Angela Merkel will be Chancellor for another period, the conservative parties have a little bit of trouble on a state/regional level.
What I took from this is that it seems like the German population is fairly moderate and center-thinking because every party you mentioned has been forced to sway towards the center. I applaud this. Nice write-up, I enjoyed the picture very much.
On May 04 2013 08:14 jubil wrote: I studied politics in university, though mostly international relations and American politics, so learning about Germany is very interesting. I was a little surprised to hear that the successor party to the East German Communist party is still alive and kicking, but of course that was the main party for a significant period of time for a significant part of the country.
One thing I'd be interested to know is how these parties play across a more regional level. In the US, for example, the Democrats and Republicans have offices and branches in every state and nearly every county, it's only in the most extreme local towns that the minority party doesn't bother contesting an election. I'd imagine that with 5 major parties there might be more regional variance in Germany. Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
Absolutly, yes. Bavaria for example is dominated by the CSU, the party "Die Linke" is way more succssesfull in east germany and the saarland then in the rest of they country. Looking at smaller regions, there are even bigger differences between the single regions.
and iirc: the conservative parties (CDU/CSU and FDP) are less popular in urban areas where you rather vote for SPD or Die Grünen. But I dont have any source to back it up, maybe I'll find something.
Personally, I dont really know what I'm going to do during the elections. I'm rather a left side voter but I feel like the parties are missing identity. CDU and SPD become more similar from day to day, looking for the "middle-class center", FDP is nothing but a market-liberal party (lulz) and B'90/Grüne promise P before the elections and do not-P when part of the governing coalition. The other parties are not really an option for me either, I guess (pirates too vague, AfD too populist). So I guess I'll just enter the polling booth and write "SCHEISSVEREIN" on the paper. But then again, I really don't like Merkel's euro politics and would like to see some change there. But since she is already seeded as chancellor, no change will happen.
By the way, what are your thoughts on the new election system? The Überhangmandate (atm +22 people for CDU/CSU "for free") should be balanced by Ausgleichsmandate (that would be + >50 more people in the Bundestag for the rest of the parties). I cant tell if this will really balance the system or if it'll just unnecessarily extend the size of the Bundestag.
On May 04 2013 08:14 jubil wrote: I studied politics in university, though mostly international relations and American politics, so learning about Germany is very interesting. I was a little surprised to hear that the successor party to the East German Communist party is still alive and kicking, but of course that was the main party for a significant period of time for a significant part of the country.
One thing I'd be interested to know is how these parties play across a more regional level. In the US, for example, the Democrats and Republicans have offices and branches in every state and nearly every county, it's only in the most extreme local towns that the minority party doesn't bother contesting an election. I'd imagine that with 5 major parties there might be more regional variance in Germany. Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
Absolutly, yes. Bavaria for example is dominated by the CSU, the party "Die Linke" is way more succssesfull in east germany and the saarland then in the rest of they country. Looking at smaller regions, there are even bigger differences between the single regions.
To add to this, winning a regional seat is one way minor parties in NZ (and by extension, Germany) can get into parliament without meeting the 5% threshold. Some parties actually rely on the popularity of one of their members to have representation in parliament. If a party gets, say, 4.5% of the vote - which normally means they do not make it into parliament - but one of their members wins an electorate then suddenly that 4.5% matters and a proportional amount of extra people from that party make it into parliament for the next term.
It can get confusing, but it does encourage minorities to attempt to stand and to get minority views reflected in government.
I never knew german politics were so peaceful. I'm used to most American elections, which tend to be dominated by mostly appeals to swing voters and an understanding of who is already voting for what of the two main contender parties. This is a lot different where it seems that this year it is understood who will win.
For those interested in the local strengths & weaknesses, you can look at the local results of the 2009 election in the german wikipedia.. I dont think you need to understand german to understand the graphics. They give the idea about where which party is strong; these areas don't change and the graphics would look the same no matter if a party is having a good or a bad election. Atm I feel too lazy to explain the "why" of those graphics, but if some people are interested, I might do this later; or some germans might give some insight about their local areas.
Also about the FDP being in doubt of getting 5%: I (unfortunately) don't see how the FDP could get less than 5% in the election. Whenever there was any such doubt before, a more than sufficient number of CDU-voters were voting for the FDP as they were essentially still voting for the same "bloc" of parties. See the last election in Lower Saxony. I'm wuite conviced this would happen again.
On May 04 2013 17:02 Mafe wrote: For those interested in the local strengths & weaknesses, you can look at the local results of the 2009 election in the german wikipedia.. I dont think you need to understand german to understand the graphics. They give the idea about where which party is strong; these areas don't change and the graphics would look the same no matter if a party is having a good or a bad election. Atm I feel too lazy to explain the "why" of those graphics, but if some people are interested, I might do this later; or some germans might give some insight about their local areas.
Also about the FDP being in doubt of getting 5%: I (unfortunately) don't see how the FDP could get less than 5% in the election. Whenever there was any such doubt before, a more than sufficient number of CDU-voters were voting for the FDP as they were essentially still voting for the same "bloc" of parties. See the last election in Lower Saxony. I'm wuite conviced this would happen again.
On May 04 2013 17:02 Mafe wrote: For those interested in the local strengths & weaknesses, you can look at the local results of the 2009 election in the german wikipedia.. I dont think you need to understand german to understand the graphics. They give the idea about where which party is strong; these areas don't change and the graphics would look the same no matter if a party is having a good or a bad election. Atm I feel too lazy to explain the "why" of those graphics, but if some people are interested, I might do this later; or some germans might give some insight about their local areas.
I'll take that
As you can see in the picture, the Union (CDU/CSU) is fairly well represented across the country, with little regional weight. The only are where they are weak is at the core of former Eastern Germany. There is not much to say about this other than that conservative ideas seem to have appeal everywhere. The CSU is only represented in Bavaria (the South East), which also happens to be the most conservative state in Germany.
The SPD is strong primarily in the (former) industrial areas. Their home ground is the area of the steel and (now largely defunct) coal industries around the Ruhr river in the West, and other areas with high numbers of blue color jobs, like the Wolfsburg (Volkswagen HQ) area. They are still fairly well represented all over the country, but the blue color job regions are their strength. Also they are historically weak in the South simply because when they were founded some 150 years ago the South was not part of Germany/Prussia.
You can definitely see that the FDP is strong mostly in the South-West. As the party traditionally most appealing to the wealthy that makes sense, since there is a rather steep deferential from poor to affluent between the North-East and the South-West in Germany in general. Also historically German liberalism has its strongest roots in the South West.
The Left party is very easy to explain. As a successor to the communist party of Eastern Germany, the vast majority of their votes come from Eastern Germany.
The Green party is somewhat similar to the FDP in that they are strongest in the wealthy areas. Additionally the South West is known for being environmentally conscious. They are also particularly successful in large urban areas (Munich, Hamburg, Berlin).
For the Pirate Party it is interesting how well spread out their support is. There is only a slight lean towards the East, and they too are very strong in urban areas.
On May 04 2013 13:18 docvoc wrote: I never knew german politics were so peaceful. I'm used to most American elections, which tend to be dominated by mostly appeals to swing voters and an understanding of who is already voting for what of the two main contender parties. This is a lot different where it seems that this year it is understood who will win.
Well you can compare this election with the US 1996 presidential election rather than the 2004 or later ones. Clinton in 1996 was also basically untouchable and at no point did the opposition have any chance.
It is true though that in general campaigning and elections are much less hostile than in the US. And as you can see from the party profiles, most parties try to appeal to a large center base, whereas the right and left wings in the US seem to have much more weight in dictating public discourse.
On May 04 2013 13:18 docvoc wrote: I never knew german politics were so peaceful. I'm used to most American elections, which tend to be dominated by mostly appeals to swing voters and an understanding of who is already voting for what of the two main contender parties. This is a lot different where it seems that this year it is understood who will win.
Well you can compare this election with the US 1996 presidential election rather than the 2004 or later ones. Clinton in 1996 was also basically untouchable and at no point did the opposition have any chance.
It is true though that in general campaigning and elections are much less hostile than in the US. And as you can see from the party profiles, most parties try to appeal to a large center base, whereas the right and left wings in the US seem to have much more weight in dictating public discourse.
I think the "peacefulness" also comes from the fact that comparative advertising is so highly regulated it's practically impossible. (But I'm no expert on this subject)
Also in a multi-party-system, why would party A invest resources to make another party B unpopular? Even if party A suceeds, there former voters from party B might just as well turn towards parties C,D,E,... instead of party A. Only that those other parties did not have to put up much energy for this. This is much different from a 2 party system. In esports terms, parties in germany need to act more as FFA-players, whereas in 2-party-systems like the USA it's more like 1on1.
Both aspects and maybe some more contribute to (in advertising, but not in discussions) parties only present themselves and not beating much on other parties.
But truth be told, for this particular election, I also feel that the outcome won't change much. I'm much more frustrated with our politics than I was some years ago, I feel we have lots of parties to vote for, but in the end all will more or less do the same. Also most of the main parties seem have programs which tend to equally reflect views/positions I approve and such that I oppose. I'm seriously consideríng protest-voting the pirates.
On May 04 2013 10:18 beef42 wrote: I am as usual delighted to read another piece on our neighbors to the south. I wish you a good election when the time comes.
that feel when Denmark will never be part of the Bundesrepublik ;_;
Is there actually a pro "Join ze germanz" sentiment among some danes? This is the first time I see someone express sth. like this. Maybe I misunderstood your spoiler? I always thought you were closer to the (other) scandinavians.
On May 04 2013 10:18 beef42 wrote: I am as usual delighted to read another piece on our neighbors to the south. I wish you a good election when the time comes.
that feel when Denmark will never be part of the Bundesrepublik ;_;
Is there actually a pro "Join ze germanz" sentiment among some danes? This is the first time I see someone express sth. like this. Maybe I misunderstood your spoiler? I always thought you were closer to the (other) scandinavians.
I think it is mostly just me. I am a bit of a federalist - if I can't have a European superstate, (with things as they are... you know) I would settle for joining Germany. I think old style borders and territory are quickly becoming obsolete towards a globalized, multicultural future for everyone.
edit: and yeah, it seems to me that the German government runs a tighter ship than my own
On May 04 2013 10:18 beef42 wrote: I am as usual delighted to read another piece on our neighbors to the south. I wish you a good election when the time comes.
that feel when Denmark will never be part of the Bundesrepublik ;_;
Is there actually a pro "Join ze germanz" sentiment among some danes? This is the first time I see someone express sth. like this. Maybe I misunderstood your spoiler? I always thought you were closer to the (other) scandinavians.
I think it is mostly just me. I am a bit of a federalist - if I can't have a European superstate, (with things as they are... you know) I would settle for joining Germany. I think old style borders and territory are quickly becoming obsolete towards a globalized, multicultural future for everyone.
edit: and yeah, it seems to me that the German government runs a tighter ship than my own
Funny you say that. I live in the german part of the Jutland Peninsular and I wouldn't mind if we somehow became a part of Denmark again either
On May 04 2013 00:48 nunez wrote: cheers zatic, interesting and enjoyable read. kitchen premium was pretty surprising. hoping for more german demand of norwegian hydro electric competence, go green party.
can you go a bit further into why they relatively more wealthy? also can you talk about how the pirate party and those who vote for it are perceived by msm, other parties and general public?
Unfortunately Germany is very limited in terms of hydro energy, so I don't foresee much initiative in that area.
There isn't really a single good explanation why the Green party voters turned out to be among the wealthier in the country. In fact when that statistic was published some 10 years ago it came as a big surprise. I can try a few angles to explain this:
* Something that has been quoted often is that the wealthy are the only ones who can afford a truly environmentally friendly life style. I find this explanation very insufficient since a) people can support change even if they couldn't live by it right now b) today ecology is a rather small part of the Greens program, with education, integration, social issues taking more prominent roles
* The simplest explanation for me is that the generation that supported the Green movement in the 80s are just naturally among the wealthiest today. The party was mostly supported by students in the 80s and a well educated person from then would just be expected to be high earner 30 years later.
* Also the Green party understands very well to appeal to a more conservative audience who are looking for more progressive alternatives left of the CDU, but are put off by the socialist tradition of the SPD. Because of that the Green party curiously has been called the 2nd conservative party in Germany. They have indeed taken over the administration from the CDU in Baden-Wurttemberg, the richest area in Germany and a solid conservative stronghold for the past 60 years.
* Of course, the Green party also profited from the nuclear debate following Fukushima. It should be said however that they very in a strong position before and are still in that strong position two years after, so that is not a deciding factor.
Hey, I'm bumping this for the following reason: The election will be in about a month, so a thread about it in the general forum would be appropriate, as I believe it will attract some global interest. And this blog would serve as a great opening post, so maybe, with zatic's approval of course, why not move this to the general forum, or copy&paste the op for a new thread there? Any opinions?
Just found this great Thread, was thinking about making one myself but my knowledge is not great enough, thanks for making this ;D
Reading about The Left Party in english sounds like they are bad evil people ... makes your post seem Biased wich you said it would be :D
Maybe I watch too much American TV ... socialist = evil...
Damn... xD not sure what to vote
Thinking about the left party since in the speeches of Gregor Gysi (isnt he chancellor candidate for the Left btw? maybe you need to update that in the OP) he got my attention, Minimum Wage (wich about 80% of European Countries have, we dont), also economic decisions (why do the little people pay for the banks? why not the ones that profited from the crisis?).
I also think the Pirate Party has some strong points, we urgently need a copyright reform and I guess thanks to the NSA scandal they will get more votes I hope so, I need to believe that the NSA-Scandal will be punished by the public somehow, especially in Germany since ppl say that we Germans are more protective of our privacy than others.
On May 03 2013 23:58 zatic wrote:
LGTB rights: The German supreme court has basically announced they will rule a number of laws and regulations unconstitutional since they discriminate against homosexuals. The resulting discussion has started yet another fundamental change in the conservative block, since the vast majority of Germans support gay rights and gay marriage (which sadly still doesn't exist in Germany), but especially the CSU traditionally opposed liberalization. After the initiative from the court, Merkel gave an outlook that her position might change in this regard, without being specific though.
Unconstitutional? was that really the reason? Sry but im sometimes a stickler for details but the thing is: Homosexuals are not protected by the Constitution, what I mean by that is Art 3, GG (3). Not going to quote but it lists groups that are not to be discriminated against, Homosexuals are NOT in there... its possible to change that, you need 2/3 of the Votes in the Bundestag to change something in the Constitution, they tried that but the Christian Democratic Union has about 1/3 of the votes... so they can just say no singlehandedly...
I wonder why Merkel is so popular... she didnt actually do something I feel, except turn around a lot ... Nuclear Power ... changed her opinion completely after Fukushima etc etc... but the most embarrassing thing that I remember (sry non-german speakers) didnt even change ppls minds... argh...
I wonder why Merkel is so popular... she didnt actually do something I feel, except turn around a lot ...
thats exactly the key to her success. in a legislative period in which every single party and countless politicians from every party have fucked up tremendously, she has done nothing and thus gave people the impression that she is the only major politician in germany who hasnt done something wrong.
compare that also to barney stinson's pricipal of "doing nothing" that he talks about in the HIMYM episode with the video job application.
her turnarounds have also contributed to her popularity. she has basically picked up the mainstream opinion of the german people on every issue as soon as this opinion changed.
for example, the german opinion on nuclear energy was pretty much an equal divide prior to fukushima. after fukushima, it was apparent that a majority of germans now oppose nuclear energy. once merkel realized this changing trend, she adopted it.
this general campaign strategy of hers is called "asymmetric demobilization" and has already been very successful in her 2009 campaign. she avoids positioning herself on almost any controversial topic and thus robs the political opposition of any chances to attack her and to mobilize their own voters. because she has done nothing fundamentally wrong and does not stand for anything that enfuriates the traditional voters of opposing political parties, the opposition cannot gain momentum for their campaign. to sum it up, she is not governing, she is administrating the status quo. that this strategy is so successful is quite a testimony to how pathetic, stupid and lazy the majority of germans are when it comes to politics.
I personally will vote for either the pirate party or the AfD.
Doing nothing is the best a politician can do nowadays especially in Germany where people aren't THAT brainwashed. Our financial stystem is dying right in front of our eyes, our economy is only artificial kept alive on the cost of others which starts to backfire in a huge way now and it probably will get only worse. Everyone knows that our education system is getting worse and worse. You have to fight for Europe as a german politician if you want to be taken serious but the majority of people think that europe just costs them money so they are against it. Our politicians are trapped in a broke financial and economical system, our foreign policy is captured by our US american friends and politicians like merkel or seehofer openly say that they are not the ones in charge. Business magnates have the power so at least merkel doesn't talk stupid what she will do because she can't do anything anyway.
it doesnt matter how they poll, lots of CDU voters will vote FDP to try prevent CDU-SPD or worse CDU-green coalition.
Also, most voter polls have barely 1000 people in them, which might meet some made up rule about polls, but is still terribly inaccurate. Source:last elections.
As long as the greens do not get any more votes it will all be fine. Sad to say that there is like zero hope of stuff getting better, but considering how indecisive and full of hesitation our political landscape is, it wont change for the worse as well.
Only the greens really drive me crazy, advertising themselves as "independent" and " different" when they really arent any better. They claim to let their foundation (is that the right word for the majority of members? ^^) decide what is there to do and who should carry their flag, yet at the same time they bypass it. This party is just one huge joke, the true rich-people-party is green in our country. Nothin alternative or special about them. "Look at me, I am voting green, I am so pro-nature and all you who dare to vote for anything else, you are some bad bad folks!"
So as a side note you can say our government does get voted by old dumb people.
Aren't those the same old dumb people that when they weren't old (and presumably were less dumb considering their accomplishments) turned your country from literally a ruined bombed-out wasteland to probably the strongest (not biggest, but strongest) economic power in the world? Just saying the casual arrogance of youth about the stupidity of the old is usually wrong.
Also from your link "statistically" it's a coin-flip as to whether the average CDU/CSU voter is male or female (48%-52%). 38% of CDU/SU voters are in between the age of 35 and 59. Only 24% are over 70.
I'm not sure if I'm translating correctly because I'm not really translating I'm just trying to make a semi-educated at best guess but according to the chart 65% of CDU/CSU voters have gone past primary school?
And 45% of CDU/CSU voters are Catholic, that's a large percentage but again it's just a coin-flip.
I mean wow really both you and that link are trying to paint a picture with statistics that doesn't really match reality. The average CDU/CSU voter is not over 70 (76% are under 70), it's a coin-flip as to male/female, etc.
So as a side note you can say our government does get voted by old dumb people.
Sigh. Failing to understand painfully simple statistics, you are not even remotely close to be in a position to call other people dumb. Not "Only 7% in the group of 18-24 are voting for CDU/CSU. 10% in the group of 25-34.", rather 7% of CDU voters are between 18 and 24 and 10% are between 25 and 34.
So as a side note you can say our government does get voted by old dumb people.
Good thing is: the problem will be resolved naturally in 20 years (unless BILD-brainwashing starts working for younger generations until then too). Bad thing is: they (CDU/FDP) potentially mess up a whole lot until then (most likely by doing nothing, Merkel-style).
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
So as a side note you can say our government does get voted by old dumb people.
Aren't those the same old dumb people that when they weren't old (and presumably were less dumb considering their accomplishments) turned your country from literally a ruined bombed-out wasteland to probably the strongest (not biggest, but strongest) economic power in the world? Just saying the casual arrogance of youth about the stupidity of the old is usually wrong.
Also from your link "statistically" it's a coin-flip as to whether the average CDU/CSU voter is male or female (48%-52%). 38% of CDU/SU voters are in between the age of 35 and 59. Only 24% are over 70.
I'm not sure if I'm translating correctly because I'm not really translating I'm just trying to make a semi-educated at best guess but according to the chart 65% of CDU/CSU voters have gone past primary school?
And 45% of CDU/CSU voters are Catholic, that's a large percentage but again it's just a coin-flip.
I mean wow really both you and that link are trying to paint a picture with statistics that doesn't really match reality. The average CDU/CSU voter is not over 70 (76% are under 70), it's a coin-flip as to male/female, etc.
another shocking fact: Old people tend to show up for votes more often. The category of 21-25 year olds had the lowest turnout rates among the age groupes in 2009 (in Germany) with it being 59% (18-24 wasn't included, screw you google!). The group of 60-70 year olds for example had the highest turnout rates with it being 80%. You'll have a hard time finding a party that doesn't have a good amount of 50-60 and 60-70 year olds voting for them just based on that, unless you go for something "weird" like the pirate party. No idea if that's actually the case but I guess it might be.
So not exactly suprising in general. If anything you could use that data and compare it with other parties. THAT would be something interesting but the way it's presented it's completly and utterly useless. So if there's something like that @whoever posted it you should post a link to that rather than this stand-alone whatever it is supposed to be. No idea if the 7% is actually above average or below, though I'd guess it probably is below.
I will probably determine the party I vote for by which party I like most, but by which party I hate less, so I'll probably go with the Pirates, since we haven't anything of them on the national level yet. :/
I don't understand why all parties in Germany must have a position in everything. I mean, even though I am pro-environment, all the position of the green party outside the environmental politics makes them unvotable for me...
On May 04 2013 08:14 jubil wrote: I studied politics in university, though mostly international relations and American politics, so learning about Germany is very interesting. I was a little surprised to hear that the successor party to the East German Communist party is still alive and kicking, but of course that was the main party for a significant period of time for a significant part of the country.
One thing I'd be interested to know is how these parties play across a more regional level. In the US, for example, the Democrats and Republicans have offices and branches in every state and nearly every county, it's only in the most extreme local towns that the minority party doesn't bother contesting an election. I'd imagine that with 5 major parties there might be more regional variance in Germany. Are particular parties associated with dominance in particular regions?
Absolutly, yes. Bavaria for example is dominated by the CSU, the party "Die Linke" is way more succssesfull in east germany and the saarland then in the rest of they country. Looking at smaller regions, there are even bigger differences between the single regions.
To add to this, winning a regional seat is one way minor parties in NZ (and by extension, Germany) can get into parliament without meeting the 5% threshold. Some parties actually rely on the popularity of one of their members to have representation in parliament. If a party gets, say, 4.5% of the vote - which normally means they do not make it into parliament - but one of their members wins an electorate then suddenly that 4.5% matters and a proportional amount of extra people from that party make it into parliament for the next term.
This is false. A party needs to win at least three 'direct seats', to be represented in parliament with a group corresponding to their result in the general election. If only one or two people get a majority in their precinct, only they can enter parliament. Even this clause is controversial - rightfully so imho - as it allows regional splinter groups to possibly be represented while parties with a higher percentage of the general vote might not be.
Auszug aus dem Bundeswahlgesetz (§ 6 Abs. 6 BWahlG)
Bei Verteilung der Sitze auf die Landeslisten werden nur Parteien berücksichtigt, die mindestens 5 vom Hundert der im Wahlgebiet abgegebenen gültigen Zweitstimmen erhalten oder in mindestens drei Wahlkreisen einen Sitz errungen haben.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
the FDP lost a lot of credibility while governing, for example they reduced taxes for Hotels due to heavy lobbying from Hoteliers and other quarrels within the cabinet. Then there was a (mild) sexual scandal about their "chancellor" candidate, because he "sexual assaulted" a (female) reporter with "she would fill out a Dirndl rather well". (this happened late at night while he was drinking wine at a hotel bar during a big party meeting). this resulted in a debate about sexism, maybe you heard about #aufschrei. Brüderle then broke several bones when he slipped and has been absent from campaigning. This oddly lead to an increase in polls and the FDP has since gotten an upswing in polls, hovering quite stable over the important 5% mark. Some political commentators explain this with the tax plans of the SPD / Greens who want to raise taxes. Since raise in taxes would also happen with a "big coalition" of SPD/CDU people also see the necessity to vote for FDP so a CDU/FDP gvmt won't raise taxes.
One problem of the "liberal" party is, imo, that they are split between the "civil rights liberal" and the "economics liberals". The civil rights wing, most notably represented (nowadays) by justice minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger has been very small for a longer period of times. the problem the FDP is facing is the economic side. They have a hard time communicating why a "free market" is a good thing since a lot of people blame the unregulated banking sector for the ongoing economic crisis.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
"a little more crazy" is quite an understatement. their focus on environmental protection makes them blind for any other matter at hand. if it was for them, we should increase the price for energy, so we would be more environmentally aware. Let alone their crazy plans for the education system which got shot down by their own voters (Hamburg)!
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
"a little more crazy" is quite an understatement. their focus on environmental protection makes them blind for any other matter at hand. if it was for them, we should increase the price for energy, so we would be more environmentally aware. Let alone their crazy plans for the education system which got shot down by their own voters (Hamburg)!
I think he meant that the "a little more crazy" was still one of the exceptions that you do not find in the greens but rather in the FDP.
Does anyone know if there is any sources of in-depth information regarding this election in english? Since Germany is once again the boss of Europe it has become very interesting what's going on down there.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
"a little more crazy" is quite an understatement. their focus on environmental protection makes them blind for any other matter at hand. if it was for them, we should increase the price for energy, so we would be more environmentally aware. Let alone their crazy plans for the education system which got shot down by their own voters (Hamburg)!
You can't really blame the federal green party for what one of their regional branches is doing though. While the Greens on the federal level have some quirks as well ( if I recall correctly they almost decided on a €5 billion educational program at their federal convention in 2009 (or 2010, I forgot) with the brilliant idea of financing it by just printing the necessary money). In case they'll actually be part of the next government, which is highly unlikely anyway, their "crazy" ideas be kept in check by their coalition partner anyway.
On August 18 2013 08:15 Prog455 wrote: Does anyone know if there is any sources of in-depth information regarding this election in english? Since Germany is once again the boss of Europe it has become very interesting what's going on down there.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/ is probably going to be your best bet, most big German newspapers should have an English online presence as well. Try googling Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Zeit, Frankfurter Rundschau and Tagesanzeiger.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
"a little more crazy" is quite an understatement. their focus on environmental protection makes them blind for any other matter at hand. if it was for them, we should increase the price for energy, so we would be more environmentally aware. Let alone their crazy plans for the education system which got shot down by their own voters (Hamburg)!
You can't really blame the federal green party for what one of their regional branches is doing though. While the Greens on the federal level have some quirks as well ( if I recall correctly they almost decided on a €5 billion educational program at their federal convention in 2009 (or 2010, I forgot) with the brilliant idea of financing it by just printing the necessary money). In case they'll actually be part of the next government, which is highly unlikely anyway, their "crazy" ideas be kept in check by their coalition partner anyway.
it's not as unlikely as you think. the FDP is basically nonexistant, the SPD is thanks to Steinbrück basically chanceless and noone wants to coaliate with the Die Linken party. CDU/Die Grünen is a possible combination. that or the big coalition CDU/SPD.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
"a little more crazy" is quite an understatement. their focus on environmental protection makes them blind for any other matter at hand. if it was for them, we should increase the price for energy, so we would be more environmentally aware. Let alone their crazy plans for the education system which got shot down by their own voters (Hamburg)!
You can't really blame the federal green party for what one of their regional branches is doing though. While the Greens on the federal level have some quirks as well ( if I recall correctly they almost decided on a €5 billion educational program at their federal convention in 2009 (or 2010, I forgot) with the brilliant idea of financing it by just printing the necessary money). In case they'll actually be part of the next government, which is highly unlikely anyway, their "crazy" ideas be kept in check by their coalition partner anyway.
it's not as unlikely as you think. the FDP is basically nonexistant, the SPD is thanks to Steinbrück basically chanceless and noone wants to coaliate with the Die Linken party. CDU/Die Grünen is a possible combination. that or the big coalition CDU/SPD.
CDU/Grüne sounds nice on paper but there is no way the CSU or the right wing of the CDU would ever go through with it.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
Well the "can't eat meat day" is more than a little exaggeration: it would only affect state owned/public cafeterias.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
I would support The Left, but from what I saw, they seem to be a bunch of closeted Marxist-Leninists who are nostalgic for the DDR. Bleh...I am pretty disappointed in Germany's left-wing parties.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist? I also fail to see what's wrong with cafeterias offering vegetarian meals on a mandatory basis. Forcing them to not serve meat at all is taking it too far, I agree, but in principle I think it's quite a good idea. I'll give you that Claudia Roth is unbearable, though you'll find people as bad as her in every party.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist? I also fail to see what's wrong with cafeterias offering vegetarian meals on a mandatory basis. Forcing them to not serve meat at all is taking it too far, I agree, but in principle I think it's quite a good idea. I'll give you that Claudia Roth is unbearable, though you'll find people as bad as her in every party.
i used it as an example to show how they are. They as a government can only make it illegal to serve meat in publically owned cafeterias, but if they could, they would make it illegal for everyone.
Also btw, traffic produces like what...6% of germanies CO2 output? A speedlimit would reduce that by like 0.1%. Higher safety is not proven. It would make much more sense to finally crack down on the private wood burning fire places, which cause heavy pollution without regulation.
And The Left....they are very amateurish, especially on a not-federal level. Same with the pirate party, who as a new party had a lot of problems of being invaded by people that want to press their own ideology. For example in my city they are mostly made up of jobless people who want a bunch of free stuff, which has nothing to do with what the pirate party really stands for.
I am too lazy to do any research regarding the actual percentages of CO2 emissions from cars right now, but given the misinformation in the rest of your post, your numbers there probably aren't correct either.
On August 18 2013 09:18 dismiss wrote: How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist?
Other countries introducing something isn't a real argument. There are countries that introduced Sharia law, still we won't think about introducing it in 1.000 years.
About security: "With these insane speeds, isn't the Autobahn incredibly dangerous? Oddly enough no; in fact the Autobahn is one the safest highways in the world. In 2011 there were a total of 453 fatal accidents on the Autobahn, which is 0.56 per 100,000 speed addicted residents. Compare that to the US interstate's 1.61 per 100,000 - three times as many." (from zatic's blog about the Autobahn)
Fuel economy: If you want to save fuel, you are free to drive 100-120Km/h only. However, this should be up to every driver himself. We live in a free society, so people shouldn't be forced neglect things that don't harm anyone at all, like driving as fast as they want as long as the conditions are fine, or like eating meat whenever you want.
It would hurt my heart if driving stopped being fun at some point in the future. I don't want to fall asleep when I have to drive long distances. People work hard to buy expensive cars, and when driving long distances they want to feel that the car is worth the price. It's kind of a reward for your hard work over the years. You could drive 130Km/h safely with every second hand Golf for ~2.000€.
On August 18 2013 09:18 dismiss wrote: How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist?
Other countries introducing something isn't a real argument. There are countries that introduced Sharia law, still we won't think about introducing it in 1.000 years.
About security: "With these insane speeds, isn't the Autobahn incredibly dangerous? Oddly enough no; in fact the Autobahn is one the safest highways in the world. In 2011 there were a total of 453 fatal accidents on the Autobahn, which is 0.56 per 100,000 speed addicted residents. Compare that to the US interstate's 1.61 per 100,000 - three times as many." (from zatic's blog about the Autobahn)
You're implying that speed is the only cause for accidents happening on highways. I'm no expert on the field but I'm sure that things like Germany's much harsher regulations regarding car maintenance as well as the condition of the roads and general difference in driving style do play a part as well.
Regarding the maximum speed of cars, driving faster doesn't not harm anyone. The higher output of C02 is actually going to fuel global warming, thus harming all of us. Now I can understand that if you're going to buy an expensive car you'll expect it to be nicer than a cheap one, but there's really more to that than ithe car's top speed, isn't there? Now if you basically want to turn your local highway into a race track, you'll most certainly endanger other people, if you absolutely need to drive insanely fast in your car, you could and should keep that to track days and similar things.
On August 18 2013 09:13 Shiragaku wrote: I would support The Left, but from what I saw, they seem to be a bunch of closeted Marxist-Leninists who are nostalgic for the DDR. Bleh...I am pretty disappointed in Germany's left-wing parties.
It really depends on your viewpoint. The Left has quite a spectrum of voters and members.
If you take the conservative viewpoint (some say propaganda) then sure, the Left is a bunch of old neo-Marxists wishing back the old days. If you ask members of the party itself, then they will tell you that their communist wing makes up at most 15% of their ranks and they are all not in leading positions and that none of them want the old system back but that they seek a new democratic socialism instead.
Since the wall came down I have heard these claims from conservative commentators: "These guys are mostly nostalgic Stalinist who will die out in a few years anyway, do not pay any attention to them." Well it's 25 years later and this group of voters is still here, in fact, the Left is pretty successful in young age segment making it slowly gaining ground actually.
There is one thing people from countries with two party systems have to understand: Your parties actually get to implement the policies they set in their programs once they win the election, our don't! So before an election, what your parties say they would like to do is actually what will be done afterwards!
Here, a 'party program' is pretty much a theoretical exercise. What would you do if you could rule all alone? (In the history of the Federal Republic there has never been a non-collision government.) What happens once the votes are casted is that they negotiate with their coalition partners. Compromises are made and demands are watered down in the name of being part of the government at all. So in reality every party program here is much more outlandish in its demands (because they will most likely never be implemented).
But party programs are the perfect area of attack for the opposition. "Look at these weirdos, if they had their way they would actually do this or that. The horror!"
And it works every time, just look at the infighting German posters in this thread: 'They would force vegetarianism down our throat.', 'They would implement socialism.', 'They would abolish unions.' All outlandish demands, but sadly taken at face value for most voters.
You asked why Merkel has such a high standing in the German population. The answer IMHO comes down to this trait, ridiculing and mobilizing against certain party demands is so much easier, than standing for something. The status quo looks better when contrasted with outlandish visions.
Black Gun explained it earlier:
On August 18 2013 04:31 Black Gun wrote: The general campaign strategy of Merkel is called "asymmetric demobilization" and has already been very successful in her 2009 campaign. She avoids positioning herself on almost any controversial topic and thus robs the political opposition of any chances to attack her and to mobilize their own voters. Because she has done nothing fundamentally wrong and does not stand for anything that infuriates the traditional voters of opposing political parties, the opposition cannot gain momentum for their campaign. To sum it up, she is not governing, she is administrating the status quo.
I agree that the upcoming elections probably won't change much about the political situation in Germany. The CDU is pretty much guaranteed to be the strongest party yet again. Really the only question is who will be able to form a coalition with them. I wouldn't mind having CDU/FDP again, though unlikely. I also wouldn't mind CDU/SPD, which also makes sense considering how similar both parties have become. For that matter, I actually wouldn't mind a SPD led government, which however seems unlikely considering that the pesty left is still existent. Also, I really feel like the op is not biased enough. Neither AfD nor Die Linken are votable. Both parties have beyond ridiculous agendas, filled with populist rethorics and crazy proposals, which they can only make because they won't be able to gain enough votes to actually govern. On a side note, the greens, albeit having imfluenced German politics positively in the past, currently have yet another crazy agenda, which makes me hope that there won't be many people voting for them...
I wonder why Merkel is so popular... she didnt actually do something I feel, except turn around a lot ...
...
I personally will vote for either the pirate party or the AfD.
Please do not vote for the AfD! That's by far the worst possible choice... As far as the pirate party is concerned, they do have some really appealing ideas. However, you should also consider what kind of people you might end up having in the government if voting for them. Just take a look at Berlin, where they ended up with an 18-year old high-school student in the government...
On August 18 2013 05:05 Nachtwind wrote: The typical CDU/CSU voter statistically is
-catholic -female -over 70 -lives in a town less then 10.000 people -has only visited the primary scool -still works (next is pensioner)
Only 7% in the group of 18-24 are voting for CDU/CSU. 10% in the group of 25-34.
So as a side note you can say our government does get voted by old dumb people.
As others have pointed out, your understanding of statistics is just plain non-existent. e.g.: Only 7% in the group of 18-24 are voting for CDU/CSU. Means that 7% of their votes come from people between the age of 18-24 and not that only 7% of the people in this age group vote for them. Furthermore, considering the German urbanization structure it's not surprising that many votes come from small towns. Just take a look at NRW where ~15 mio people live in towns of (far) less than 100k population. The situation in Bavaria or B-W isn't that different. Also, your remarks about "primary school" is simply wrong. What you translate as "primary school" is actually a school which lasts until 8th grade. Not to mention that almost everybody who only visited those schools received a vocational education afterwards.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
To be honest I haven't read their current agenda. However, in my opinion in the last election they had the best agenda out of all parties. Of course, it should be mentioned that they achieved exactly zero from their last agenda...
On August 18 2013 09:13 Shiragaku wrote: I would support The Left, but from what I saw, they seem to be a bunch of closeted Marxist-Leninists who are nostalgic for the DDR. Bleh...I am pretty disappointed in Germany's left-wing parties.
Only half of them fall under this category. The rest can be described as delusional idealists. For any practical purposes this distinction doesn't matter though. I really hope they don't make it into the next government, so the SPD can gain some strenght again.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist? I also fail to see what's wrong with cafeterias offering vegetarian meals on a mandatory basis. Forcing them to not serve meat at all is taking it too far, I agree, but in principle I think it's quite a good idea. I'll give you that Claudia Roth is unbearable, though you'll find people as bad as her in every party.
Have you seen German Autobahns? You're driving on a road which goes pretty much straight forward all the time and is so well maintained that you won't be able to find a single hole, or a bump for that matter, on it. When there is little traffic, it makes no sense whatsoever to enforce a speed limit. Additionally, large parts of the autobahn, which are deemed not extremely safe are already regulated with speed restrictions. Not to mention that there are also large parts which are regulated by electronic speed limit signs, which act according to weather and traffic. Pretty much everywhere that a need for a speed limit on the autobahn exists already has it. Furthermore, statistically autobahns are extremely safe. By far the most traffic occurs on them, while in comparison very few accidents happen. Not to mention that most accidents on the autobahn have little to do with high speed... Basically, an absolute speed-limit on the autobahn is not neccessary at all. And I'm pretty sure that the greens know it, but just need something to be able to claim that they are pro-environment. As far as co2 emissions are concerned, street traffic in Germany causes 19% of the total emissions. However, expecting that an absolute speed-limit would reduce them by any noticable margin is unrealistic.
Good article: Merkel 3.0: Stasis You Can Believe In Germans love Angela Merkel, first and foremost because she asks little of them. It is a strategy she will be likely to continue following should she return to the Chancellery for a third term. But it is also one that has blinded Germany to the dangers facing Europe.
On August 18 2013 09:13 Shiragaku wrote: I would support The Left, but from what I saw, they seem to be a bunch of closeted Marxist-Leninists who are nostalgic for the DDR. Bleh...I am pretty disappointed in Germany's left-wing parties.
It really depends on your viewpoint. The Left has quite a spectrum of voters and members.
If you take the conservative viewpoint (some say propaganda) then sure, the Left is a bunch of old neo-Marxists wishing back the old days. If you ask members of the party itself, then they will tell you that their communist wing makes up at most 15% of their ranks and they are all not in leading positions and that none of them want the old system back but that they seek a new democratic socialism instead.
Since the wall came down I have heard these claims from conservative commentators: "These guys are mostly nostalgic Stalinist who will die out in a few years anyway, do not pay any attention to them." Well it's 25 years later and this group of voters is still here, in fact, the Left is pretty successful in young age segment making it slowly gaining ground actually.
There is one thing people from countries with two party systems have to understand: Your parties actually get to implement the policies they set in their programs once they win the election, our don't! So before an election, what your parties say they would like to do is actually what will be done afterwards!
Here, a 'party program' is pretty much a theoretical exercise. What would you do if you could rule all alone? (In the history of the Federal Republic there has never been a non-collision government.) What happens once the votes are casted is that they negotiate with their coalition partners. Compromises are made and demands are watered down in the name of being part of the government at all. So in reality every party program here is much more outlandish in its demands (because they will most likely never be implemented).
But party programs are the perfect area of attack for the opposition. "Look at these weirdos, if they had their way they would actually do this or that. The horror!"
And it works every time, just look at the infighting German posters in this thread: 'They would force vegetarianism down our throat.', 'They would implement socialism.', 'They would abolish unions.' All outlandish demands, but sadly taken at face value for most voters.
You asked why Merkel has such a high standing in the German population. The answer IMHO comes down to this trait, ridiculing and mobilizing against certain party demands is so much easier, than standing for something. The status quo looks better when contrasted with outlandish visions.
On August 18 2013 04:31 Black Gun wrote: The general campaign strategy of Merkel is called "asymmetric demobilization" and has already been very successful in her 2009 campaign. She avoids positioning herself on almost any controversial topic and thus robs the political opposition of any chances to attack her and to mobilize their own voters. Because she has done nothing fundamentally wrong and does not stand for anything that infuriates the traditional voters of opposing political parties, the opposition cannot gain momentum for their campaign. To sum it up, she is not governing, she is administrating the status quo.
Ah, I guess I just had bad experience with some members. I know that they have a strong libertarian leftist branch, but the two I talked to were Marxist-Leninists, people who I am more than unimpressed with these days. Also, what happened in 2007 really made me upset that there were leftists in the world who still had some sort of sympathy towards the satellite states.
On August 18 2013 10:25 lord_nibbler wrote: You asked why Merkel has such a high standing in the German population. The answer IMHO comes down to this trait, ridiculing and mobilizing against certain party demands is so much easier, than standing for something. The status quo looks better when contrasted with outlandish visions.
The problem with this, and why it is quite unsatisfying are twofold. One is that large singular events might drive her to decisions which may not be necessary in the long run. My prime example would be the shutdown of the nuclear power plants after the events of Fukushima. This is hurting the economy due to higher energy prices yet no one died through this accident. The second and more grave imo is that political party programs should (at least in theory) provide a coherent and conclusive vision of what society should strive for. This would include (ofc) a lot of idealistic ideas which would have to be toned down for coalitions. Now in adapting things that are "the favorite of the month" one just has a patchwerk of ideas instead. This isn't problematic per se, but it becomes a problem if every party does it. This leads to opinion mainstreaming and suppression of debate. If we don't have a choice why should we go voting? Isn't the conflict of ideas why we installed democracy in the first place? This is also originating in the "party politics" where people tend to get promoted who were good "party soldiers" and got to not alienate any of the major faction in the party. It is lastly a depressing campaigning when none of the candidates have the ability to inspire people but instead try to convince that they are the best in managing the country. It looks like the defeat of spirit in favor of dull conformity.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist?
introducing a general speed limit on the autobahn is to us Germans what removing the right to carry guns is to Americans.
i think this analogy explains it in as few words as possible.
On August 18 2013 11:59 Shiragaku wrote: Also, what happened in 2007 really made me upset that there were leftists in the world who still had some sort of sympathy towards the satellite states.
What do you mean? What happened 2007? Who are the 'satellite states'?
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
the green party is actually the worst when it comes to being illiberal. They are against buying any luxury with money. They want to remove first class in transportation, they would tax "high" income much more, they want to introduce days where you cant eat meat...im sure i forgot many things.
Basically, they have a certain ideology and want to force it upon everyone.
True, this is why I will never ever vote for them and talk everyone who wants to do so out of it.
Seriously, they want to introduce a speed-limit of 130Km/h on the whole Autobahn. To me this is the perfect example to show how they are a party of modern Socialists who want to force people to get along with their views. In addition to that, they have blatantly stupid views on sexual equality. They are taking that topic so unscientific and ignore logic while they just appeal to people's feelings and try to make the current situation much worse than it is. I could vomit every time Claudia Roth gets invited to a talkshow that deals with sexual equality.
At the moment I don't really like any party in particular. However, I like FDP the most because they are trying to introduce as few regulations as possible.
How is enforcing a lower speed limit, which by the way most other countries have done a long time ago(drastically improving road security i.e. in the UK; as well as fuel economy) socialist? I also fail to see what's wrong with cafeterias offering vegetarian meals on a mandatory basis. Forcing them to not serve meat at all is taking it too far, I agree, but in principle I think it's quite a good idea. I'll give you that Claudia Roth is unbearable, though you'll find people as bad as her in every party.
Germany is really irrational in that regard. For some demographics, their car and the ability to drive it as unresponsibly as they want is their way to express their status and their "freedom". This goes as far as the FDP campaigning on the slogan of "Freie Fahrt für freie Bürger" (roughly: "unlimited driving for free citizens"). The ADAC, a breakdown service and automotist interest group, along with the very strong automotive industry (with VW, Mercedes, BMW, supportive industry such as Bosch being some of the largest of German companies) are some of the most influential lobby groups in Germany. They regularly publish studies that show that an unlimited speed limit doesn't impact safety at all (don't ask me, I know that that defies basic physics; they usually reach their statistics by comparing not well constructed country roads with limited visibility to the well built Autobahn with very good visibility, safety rails etc for 'proof' of this) and campaign against speed controls as if they were the devil's work on earth. Cars are a touchy and very irrational topic in Germany, haha
Realy nice write up from the op,and great info in the links about germany in general. Just love germany. Dont think the elections will change annything in the political landscape, The afd might make the tresshold of 5% but they will still be a verry small party without to much influence.Am more interested in what happens after the elections. Will merkel stay with her current euro policy or will she give in to the demands of most of the southern countrys to create eurobunds and such. She cant realy do that now because then she would be at risk of throwing the election but once she has another 4 year mandate she might change.
On May 03 2013 23:58 zatic wrote: LGTB rights: The German supreme court has basically announced they will rule a number of laws and regulations unconstitutional since they discriminate against homosexuals. The resulting discussion has started yet another fundamental change in the conservative block, since the vast majority of Germans support gay rights and gay marriage (which sadly still doesn't exist in Germany), but especially the CSU traditionally opposed liberalization. After the initiative from the court, Merkel gave an outlook that her position might change in this regard, without being specific though.
Unconstitutional? was that really the reason? Sry but im sometimes a stickler for details but the thing is: Homosexuals are not protected by the Constitution, what I mean by that is Art 3, GG (3). Not going to quote but it lists groups that are not to be discriminated against, Homosexuals are NOT in there... its possible to change that, you need 2/3 of the Votes in the Bundestag to change something in the Constitution, they tried that but the Christian Democratic Union has about 1/3 of the votes... so they can just say no singlehandedly...
Unconstitutional, yes. The constitutional court can by definition only act on legislation that violates the constitution. In this particular case the inequality in taxation of homosexuals compared to married couples was ruled to violate Article 3, 1 (Equality before the law):
On August 18 2013 11:59 Shiragaku wrote: Also, what happened in 2007 really made me upset that there were leftists in the world who still had some sort of sympathy towards the satellite states.
What do you mean? What happened 2007? Who are the 'satellite states'?
The members walked out during the honoring of German unification but maybe this walkout was towards Gauck who is certainly not my favorite guy in the world.
Also, the satellite states were the nations that were part of the Soviet Union. Not under full control, but mostly under their control.
Why did you only write Katrin Göring-Eckhart as candidate for the greens? Its both her and Jürgen Trittin I think. Or if you want to put it that way, maybe you can say that for the left party, Gregor Gisy is the candidate (not that they will, but if they would choose the chancelor, it would be him).
Also one remark on the greens: In the post its stated that they are not clearly left or right. I think in the current situation that is wrong (at this point I should mention that I am biased towards the liberals), the current agenda is heavy on the left side with enourmus tax raises (it will not only hit "the rich") and some national education plans like veggie day.
To the outcome: Only two realistic scenarios in my opinion: Either we get the same goverment as we have now (depends if the FDP gets enough votes) or we get the same coalition as 2005 (black-red). There is now way red-green gets enough, the SPD will not work with the left since it would go to far for the right wing of the party. Also for this they have the wrong canditate, Steinbrück is far more towards Merkel than towards Gisy.
And by the way for people from the US: what you should consider, what is considered far right in our country is still far on the left side in your country, the CDU has probably more in common with the democrats as with republicans. So you can imagine what far left in Germany can mean... well again I'm of course biased
On August 19 2013 22:36 Brot wrote: Hey just to give my thoughts on it:
Why did you only write Katrin Göring-Eckhart as candidate for the greens? Its both her and Jürgen Trittin I think. Or if you want to put it that way, maybe you can say that for the left party, Gregor Gisy is the candidate (not that they will, but if they would choose the chancelor, it would be him).
Also one remark on the greens: In the post its stated that they are not clearly left or right. I think in the current situation that is wrong (at this point I should mention that I am biased towards the liberals), the current agenda is heavy on the left side with enourmus tax raises (it will not only hit "the rich") and some national education plans like veggie day.
The OP was written before the 2013 program of the Greens was released. I'll add Trittin. I maintain that the Green party is not decidedly left however. Their current program leans towards it, but we all know how little campaign programs are worth. Overall the Green Party is definitely not hard left, and where they are in power (state of BW) they are running a course so conservative and diagonally against their current federal program that it has actually alienated many from their traditional voter base.
As far as I can tell the Left has not nominated a chancellor candidate.
On the topic of the Green Party and their position in the political spectrum, I have something to add. In my view, the Green Party clearly tries to reinforce their image as progressive, libertarian party. They see themselves as some sort of avantgarde of a post-modern lifestyle and society. However, they actually can be very conservative. For instance, their take on new, potentially important scientific breakthroughs can easily overlap with that of the Union's. An example would be their absurd view on genetics in farming, medicine and pharmacy. I can understand the stance of the Union, since they actually base their politics on christian ideology and thus genetics does not really fly with them (although I do not share this view). However, the pseuode-progressive Green Party rejects technologies that could reduce the usage of environmentally malign and noxious pesticides, could cure diseases and in general is an important high tech sector. Then, they also try to impose certain views and values on everyone (forcing a veggie day is just one prime example that comes to mind right now), which is contrary to any libertarian stance. Add to that the discussions I have had with some of their supporters, which sometimes eventually resulted in some really dangerous views (e.g. "since Earth as a whole is more important than humans, it could be necessary to reduce Earth's population..." the hell?!?) I am clearly not rooting for this party... Of course I could be biased.
EDIT: In general I am aware of the problems that might arise from the usage of genetically altered plants, but this antagonism of this technology that you see in Germany and in the Green Party particularly is absurd.
TLDR: The Green Party tries to look like a progressive party, while in its core there are some very conservative stances and even totalitarean tendencies.
Any chance of black/green? That would actually be my preferred coalition, basically what the government has been doing, minus some shenanigans of the FDP (though I am thankful that they abolished the military service which had been one of their goals for a long time), plus a heavier focus on renewable Energies. Would be ideal in my opinion, except that we still have the shenanigans of the CSU in it.
I just read the summary. Basically, every party in Germany is around the center with a light flavor of something (be it conservatism, social policies or environment)? I suppose it's a natural evolution of a system based around consensus (being proportional), since a party need to be able to agree with at least two others if it want to be able to do more than opposition. But that mean
An example would be their absurd view on genetics in farming, medicine and pharmacy. I can understand the stance of the Union, since they actually base their politics on Christian ideology and thus genetics does not really fly with them (although I do not share this view).
- We have no idea about what dangers genetics could bring, and being careful about it is a very legitimate ecologist stance. Things we were thinking harmless (like fossil fuel) and source of progress were discovered to be real danger to Earth (and as such, to us). Sounds to me like an ecologist party should be careful on matters of technology. As for saying that Earth is more important than humans, it's clearly ridiculous. Earth is worth something for us only because we need it to live. Of course, we need it to be healthy, and it's state is important to monitor (and yes, it's a reality, humanity as a whole would do a lot better if we were less numerous. Of course, suggesting that we correct it by killing people is out of question, but natality control isn't. But anyway, it's not needed in countries like Germany, where the population is declining without intervention). - In recent times, genetically modified crops have been used to enable MORE herbicides, not less (because your crops are resistant to it, you can flood your field with it, it will only kill unwanted plants. But the dangerous chemicals will still end in the food). Genetics is more dangerous in the abuses of this type it makes possible than in itself.
I am not saying to fully embrace genetics without caution. But radical environmentalists - encouraged by politicians from the Green Party - invading testing plantations and destroying the plants that are grown their for scientific research is just absurd. Another example is that the Green Party, once part of the government of Lower Saxony stopped a genetics workshop for students, where these students would learn the basic ideas of genetic alteration hands-on in a laboratory, with the poor excuse that it was "brainwashing" them. Seriously, how can you start a genuine discussion about a scientif topic, when you even dogmatically abolish any form of scientific education for your students? This is just censorship. Again, I could be biased, but these things have happened and it is no surprise that there are nearly no important tech companies in that field in Germany any more. And these are examples showing how "ugly" the face of the Green Party can become sometimes.
(...)but without the socialist tradition of the SPD
The SPD has a social-democratic tradition. Not a socialist tradition. With the assistance of the old kaiserliche Armee (royal army) they actually fought the socialists in 1918/19 to gain power in Germany. There is a catchphrase the socialist used at that time:
I hate the FDP, but next to the Pirate Party, they are the only ones who fight for data security. And the FDP actually did good in the past 4 years concerning data security. Also most physicians I meet vow for the liberals and condemn the SPD, because of their stance on how to manage medical social security (SPD being the one trying to privatize the public funds). Never really understand how that came to be...
On August 20 2013 22:07 Restrider wrote: I am not saying to fully embrace genetics without caution. But radical environmentalists - encouraged by politicians from the Green Party - invading testing plantations and destroying the plants that are grown their for scientific research is just absurd. Another example is that the Green Party, once part of the government of Lower Saxony stopped a genetics workshop for students, where these students would learn the basic ideas of genetic alteration hands-on in a laboratory, with the poor excuse that it was "brainwashing" them. Seriously, how can you start a genuine discussion about a scientif topic, when you even dogmatically abolish any form of scientific education for your students? This is just censorship. Again, I could be biased, but these things have happened and it is no surprise that there are nearly no important tech companies in that field in Germany any more. And these are examples showing how "ugly" the face of the Green Party can become sometimes.
This happens because the other side (genetics companies) is completely closed to the idea of researching the security of their products before putting them to use (because that would hurt immediate profit). I agree that it's not the way to do it, rationally, but the other camp isn't rational either (sadly, because I believe that if we were cautious about it, we could use it well, just not in a 5 years timeframe, but eh, that's too long for modern finances).
On August 20 2013 22:12 Jelissei wrote: very nice post!
(...)but without the socialist tradition of the SPD
The SPD has a social-democratic tradition. Not a socialist tradition. With the assistance of the old kaiserliche Armee (royal army) they actually fought the socialists in 1918/19 to gain power in Germany. There is a catchphrase the socialist used at that time:
Not surprising, social-democracy is the antithesis of socialism's plans. If you increase the living condition and freedom of the proletariat class bit by bit, you destroy all revolutionary will, because people imagine/see (depending on your side) that things can be improved without it.
But the distinction is a non factor today, since there is no more proletariat in Europe.
I hate the FDP, but next to the Pirate Party, they are the only ones who fight for data security. And the FDP actually did good in the past 4 years concerning data security. Also most physicians I meet vow for the liberals and condemn the SPD, because of their stance on how to manage medical social security (SPD being the one trying to privatize the public funds). Never really understand how that came to be...
Aha, this country is so wierd. I can't imagine how this happens without alienating half your voting base with the first decision and the other half with the second, since they are radically opposed in the political spectrum :D But eh, since you don't need to have more than 50% of people on your side to matter, I suppose you can have a wider range of stances without following the left-right scale.
On August 20 2013 22:07 Restrider wrote: I am not saying to fully embrace genetics without caution. But radical environmentalists - encouraged by politicians from the Green Party - invading testing plantations and destroying the plants that are grown their for scientific research is just absurd. Another example is that the Green Party, once part of the government of Lower Saxony stopped a genetics workshop for students, where these students would learn the basic ideas of genetic alteration hands-on in a laboratory, with the poor excuse that it was "brainwashing" them. Seriously, how can you start a genuine discussion about a scientif topic, when you even dogmatically abolish any form of scientific education for your students? This is just censorship. Again, I could be biased, but these things have happened and it is no surprise that there are nearly no important tech companies in that field in Germany any more. And these are examples showing how "ugly" the face of the Green Party can become sometimes.
It's not only that. They attacked AfD-politicians in some cities for being right-wing extremists (when I read about that all I could think was "wat") so that they couldn't continue their campaigns.
Additionally Renate Künast, one of the leading Grünen-politicians, called it a "Sternstunde der Demokratie" (magic moment of democracy should be a close translation) when green people destroyed a nuclear waste train's rails so that it was delayed.
I don't like them at all, however when things keep developing as they did during the last years, they will soon be the number 2 party in Germany. Another Fukushima might immediately get them ahead of SPD.
On May 03 2013 23:58 zatic wrote: LGTB rights: The German supreme court has basically announced they will rule a number of laws and regulations unconstitutional since they discriminate against homosexuals. The resulting discussion has started yet another fundamental change in the conservative block, since the vast majority of Germans support gay rights and gay marriage (which sadly still doesn't exist in Germany), but especially the CSU traditionally opposed liberalization. After the initiative from the court, Merkel gave an outlook that her position might change in this regard, without being specific though.
Unconstitutional? was that really the reason? Sry but im sometimes a stickler for details but the thing is: Homosexuals are not protected by the Constitution, what I mean by that is Art 3, GG (3). Not going to quote but it lists groups that are not to be discriminated against, Homosexuals are NOT in there... its possible to change that, you need 2/3 of the Votes in the Bundestag to change something in the Constitution, they tried that but the Christian Democratic Union has about 1/3 of the votes... so they can just say no singlehandedly...
Unconstitutional, yes. The constitutional court can by definition only act on legislation that violates the constitution. In this particular case the inequality in taxation of homosexuals compared to married couples was ruled to violate Article 3, 1 (Equality before the law):
OH! I remember, it was about taxation yeah. That counts I guess, my bad.
Btw, why so much hate towards "The Left" ?
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
On August 20 2013 22:47 Daumen wrote: Btw, why so much hate towards "The Left" ?
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
Die Linke, has much more members than just Gregor Gysi (who might be sympathic, haven't payed much attention to them lately so I refrain from stating any opinion). Anyways, they attract attention with very exaggerated demands (which might or might not make it into their official program).
it doesnt matter if they are exagerated. Making those demands is the whole point. Opening subjects to discussion is the job of a good opposition party. Not like the SPD who just sits on their asses and wait for mummy Merkel to invite them to a coalition again.
Die Linke gets a bad rep because of all those retarded kommunists that came from western germany when WASG and PDS combined.
On August 18 2013 05:09 Dazed_Spy wrote: Are the FDP still polling terribly in Germany?
The FDP pulling bad results is just about the best thing that could happen, they have a terrible agenda regarding pretty much every important subject. If you're interested in recent survey results here's a pretty comprehensive list http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
They're the only party I find even remotely tolerable, though far too interventionist and illiberal for my tastes. Still, its Europe, you cant shoot for the moon.
You might want to look more into the Green party, they're basically the same thing, except with fewer tax breaks for lawyers, dentists, and a little more crazy as well as an emphasis on environmental protection.
You couldn't be further from the truth. But on the otherhand you probably also know absolutely nothing about economics either.
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
BTW: Here you find current surveys ("Sonntagsfrage") by different institutes: Klick
The last added data is from today. Concerning CDU/Greens (Black-Green coalition): I don't think neither party wants that. The conservatives in the CDU will be highly against that since of their positions on family politics and related stuff. The green party might also be afraid that such a coalition will hurt them as much as it did the SPD in 2005.
Of course it sounds a bit strange if you look at the current reality we live in. It is a nice contrast to current politics. Even if they ever got into the government they would never get such extreme positions through, but it would push the discussion into a more reasonable direction - eg. more social welfare, deprivatization of infrastructure, bank regulations, ..
If you read their party platform as a direction in which they want Germany to develop, it makes a lot more sense. You have to take into account that they are an opposition party and do not expect to take part in the government in the near future - even if they offer coalitions, that are more publicity stunts and trolling.
I personally do not agree with a lot of their positions (they go way too far) but in the current situation i see noone else adressing the standard left positions eg. caring for our neighbors and being a society. We privatize our infrastrucure (see Die Bahn in Mainz, BER), take away the civil servant status from teachers etc. but when there are some banks going down suddenly there are billions of Euros to save them? Why are there nearly 50% royalties and taxes on family incomes but only 25% on stock profits? The gap between the rich and the poor is quickly growing. We develop away from a pay-as-you-go pension system (->Riesterrente) while the older people finance their pension on national dept which we young people will later have to pay back.
These are in my opinion serious wrong developments in our society which need to be fixed or at least mitigated.
Also, the Verfassungsschutz is observing them which makes them quite likeable in hindsight of the current surveillance scandals.
Just some points that make me seriously consider voting for Die Linke.
It doesn't really matter who gets elected. It's just a game to keep the plebs thinking it was an actual democracy and to pretend they actually got to decide anything important.
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
sounds like paradise on earth, doesn't it?
Umsatzsteuer, we pay those taxes on almost everything, why not financial transactions? Rich Germans dont pay taxes anyways, they just move to Switzerland, the US or somewhere :o.
State owned Banks, Sweden has them, they were almost untouched by the bank crisis werent they? Banks go rampant, they need some kind of regulation, dont they? I mean why should the underprivileged buy them out?
Ty grollicus, for your input but this, I dont understand:
On August 21 2013 00:47 Grollicus wrote: Also, the Verfassungsschutz is observing them which makes them quite likeable in hindsight of the current surveillance scandals.
Why would that make them Likable? Because they are actually right and the State is afraid of them? Or because it was a thing to dislike the Linke, but now that we know the Surveillance in germany is quite scandalous so that we now know that Die Linke is actually not being Surveillanced for any good reasons?
I meant to say that if Die Linke had more influence over our intelligence services something like the arresting of Andrej Holm would propably not have happened. They have some experience with being under surveillance and would be opposed to that.
I don't really have an opinion weather or not there are good reasons to list Die Linke in the Verfassungsschutzbericht. But they seem to be a good candidate to retain (regain?) control over the various intelligence agencies.
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
sounds like paradise on earth, doesn't it?
Umsatzsteuer, we pay those taxes on almost everything, why not financial transactions? Rich Germans dont pay taxes anyways, they just move to Switzerland, the US or somewhere :o.
State owned Banks, Sweden has them, they were almost untouched by the bank crisis werent they? Banks go rampant, they need some kind of regulation, dont they? I mean why should the underprivileged buy them out?
For you, that stuff doesn't sound like a glorified DDR that can never work out and will end up in a huge, corrupt mess?
I'm currently suffering through my gf's home country (Argentina) becoming more and more socialistic, trying to end private banks, while buying votes from the lower social strata by giving them more unemployment money. It's a huge mess, and trying to get anything done is an unbelievable pain in the arse.
Here is a current article from the Spiegel about one of the socialist states in South America:
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
sounds like paradise on earth, doesn't it?
Umsatzsteuer, we pay those taxes on almost everything, why not financial transactions? Rich Germans dont pay taxes anyways, they just move to Switzerland, the US or somewhere :o.
State owned Banks, Sweden has them, they were almost untouched by the bank crisis werent they? Banks go rampant, they need some kind of regulation, dont they? I mean why should the underprivileged buy them out?
For you, that stuff doesn't sound like a glorified DDR that can never work out and will end up in a huge, corrupt mess?
I'm currently suffering through my gf's home country (Argentina) becoming more and more socialistic, trying to end private banks, while buying votes from the lower social strata by giving them more unemployment money. It's a huge mess, and trying to get anything done is an unbelievable pain in the arse.
Here is a current article from the Spiegel about one of the socialist states in South America:
There is a difference between going hardcore socialism on the one hand and de-privatizing core infrastructure and keeping the banking sector in check on the other hand, imo. Unregulated, private banks haven't been doing too hot in the last few years. Considering they have been the loudest in singing the neo-liberal song of unchecked capitalism, they were quite quick in yelling for the state's help when they failed. If it wouldn't cost us all so much money, it'd be quite hillarious actually.
It has to be possible that a bank, that was mismanaged and has accumulated unbelievable amounts of debt, can go bankrupt. If we need more state banks and/or regulation to cover for their actual responsibility (providing the economy enough liquidity for an investment friendly environment) then so be it - the banking sector obviously fails at that role as it is.
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
sounds like paradise on earth, doesn't it?
Umsatzsteuer, we pay those taxes on almost everything, why not financial transactions? Rich Germans dont pay taxes anyways, they just move to Switzerland, the US or somewhere :o.
State owned Banks, Sweden has them, they were almost untouched by the bank crisis werent they? Banks go rampant, they need some kind of regulation, dont they? I mean why should the underprivileged buy them out?
For you, that stuff doesn't sound like a glorified DDR that can never work out and will end up in a huge, corrupt mess?
I'm currently suffering through my gf's home country (Argentina) becoming more and more socialistic, trying to end private banks, while buying votes from the lower social strata by giving them more unemployment money. It's a huge mess, and trying to get anything done is an unbelievable pain in the arse.
Here is a current article from the Spiegel about one of the socialist states in South America:
There is a difference between going hardcore socialism on the one hand and de-privatizing core infrastructure and keeping the banking sector in check on the other hand, imo. Unregulated, private banks haven't been doing too hot in the last few years. Considering they have been the loudest in singing the neo-liberal song of unchecked capitalism, they were quite quick in yelling for the state's help when they failed. If it wouldn't cost us all so much money, it'd be quite hillarious actually.
It has to be possible that a bank, that was mismanaged and has accumulated unbelievable amounts of debt, can go bankrupt. If we need more state banks and/or regulation to cover for their actual responsibility (providing the economy enough liquidity for an investment friendly environment) then so be it - the banking sector obviously fails at that role as it is.
What can I say? 'My' bank doesn't offer or do fancy investing, it also doesn't run any ads with celebrities I am aware of and I think they weathered the financial crisis without any problems. Voting with your wallet usually works quite well.
And you really, really, really do not want to have to jump through the hoops of a quasi state-owned banking system or the state meddling too much in the banking system. My gf pays a 20% 'government fee' if she pays with her card anywhere outside Argentina. If her bank account ever holds more than a certain amount (like 2k euro or so), she will get audited by some government agency. If you want to exchange money, you need government approval (which is not granted in most cases). Are you ready to have all your financial transactions scrutinized by some apparatchik?
I'd like to point out that we have plenty of state owned banks in Germany too, and among them happened to be the ones that were hit worst by the crisis, HSH Nordbank and BayernLB. That doesn't mean that there wasn't a lot wrong with how the financial crisis developed, but it's not as easy as simply crying for state owned banks.
They gained some popularity with me thanks to Gregor Gysi's speeches.
He seems to understand how our failing Eco system works, doesnt he? Minimum Wage, stop selling weapons to war waging countries, Stop Versailling Greece.
I know most people would say "its easy to shout from an oppositions point of view" but unless they have a chance to prove themselves they will never be able to prove themselves (wow, weird sentence). Also Gysi calls people on their bullshit in the Bundestag way more than others. :O
Prove me wrong plx, it will influence my Vote.
(this is not supposed to be a "Die Linke, fuck yeah" post, I just want to be more educated about them, ty)
take the time to actually read their 'Parteiprogramm'. Last time elections were around, I started on it and fairly soon I wasn't sure if they are delusional, if it's some kind of in-joke, or if just none of their voters actually bothered to read it.
some highlights from browsing through it right now: Pretty much all big companies will be - following a democratic process - shifted into ownership of their employees. Core infrastructure companies will not have to be operated to break even, but have to be available cheaply for the underprivileged. All private banks have to be transferred into state ownership. Any kind of financial transaction is to be discouraged through taxation. Exchange rates of currencies have to be fixed.
sounds like paradise on earth, doesn't it?
Umsatzsteuer, we pay those taxes on almost everything, why not financial transactions? Rich Germans dont pay taxes anyways, they just move to Switzerland, the US or somewhere :o.
State owned Banks, Sweden has them, they were almost untouched by the bank crisis werent they? Banks go rampant, they need some kind of regulation, dont they? I mean why should the underprivileged buy them out?
For you, that stuff doesn't sound like a glorified DDR that can never work out and will end up in a huge, corrupt mess?
I'm currently suffering through my gf's home country (Argentina) becoming more and more socialistic, trying to end private banks, while buying votes from the lower social strata by giving them more unemployment money. It's a huge mess, and trying to get anything done is an unbelievable pain in the arse.
Here is a current article from the Spiegel about one of the socialist states in South America:
There is a difference between going hardcore socialism on the one hand and de-privatizing core infrastructure and keeping the banking sector in check on the other hand, imo. Unregulated, private banks haven't been doing too hot in the last few years. Considering they have been the loudest in singing the neo-liberal song of unchecked capitalism, they were quite quick in yelling for the state's help when they failed. If it wouldn't cost us all so much money, it'd be quite hillarious actually.
It has to be possible that a bank, that was mismanaged and has accumulated unbelievable amounts of debt, can go bankrupt. If we need more state banks and/or regulation to cover for their actual responsibility (providing the economy enough liquidity for an investment friendly environment) then so be it - the banking sector obviously fails at that role as it is.
Well, please keep in mind that it was the state-owned banks (West LB, Bayern Bank etc.) which had the biggest problems while Deutsche Bank, the largest private bank, had little problems at all during the financial crisis, so I think de-privatizion alone might not be the solution.
My main problem with Die Linke, at least in the last election, was not that their program and their campaign was leftist, IMO it was pure populism - same thing as the FDP only from the other side. I will never get why these two parties got so many votes with their populist slogans, while CDU and SPD lost so many seats besides their good and, compared to other nations, very successful management of the hole economic situation back then.
Germany now has a real bank owned and safed by the people (not sure they shoud be happy with it) Coba (commerz bank) emitted tons of shares recently wich where mostly bought by german small private investors. Instead of the german state having to pay for the nationalisation the public paid for it (wich is the same) though the public at least got ownership and control in return.In the end the difference with the state buying out the bank isnt that big i think.
Letting a bank go bankrupt wont safe the government alot of monney btw, they will have to pay out all guaranteed deposits (wich is 100k per captiva in germany i believe) and wich will probably cost more then bailing out the bank and waiting for better times.
(...)but without the socialist tradition of the SPD
The SPD has a social-democratic tradition. Not a socialist tradition. With the assistance of the old kaiserliche Armee (royal army) they actually fought the socialists in 1918/19 to gain power in Germany.
To someone from the political Right that is mostly semantics. And still there is nothing wrong with what I wrote there; the SPD is older than 1918, and historically was a socialist party in every sense of the word. It was even called Socialist Workers Party of Germany before renaming to SPD:
I realise that this is mostly blog stuff, but here it is anyways:
Maybe thats just me, my history and personality, but I am very confused and in a state of sadness and anger that at this moment the decision where to put my two votes feels like seeing myself playing in a Monthy Python scene, while realising that this is actually real life. At least Monthy Python was sensical nonsense!
Most of the posts already observed that the three big parties are nearly identical, with flavors in the corners and of the weeks. In various online surveys, which party suits my point of views the most, I often found myself with Die Grünen. But I hate their lack of vision and reverie. That may sound counterintuitiv, but look closely at their profile and you will most of the time stare into a dark reallity which is only made visible by their own light and it all reminds me of the stick and the carrot. The Linke is the most interesting, they have an alternative model of society, at the same time their pitfall because of the ideology that leads them into that model, which is and will always be their blinding spot, making them never real open minded. The Piraten and the AfD are not yet out of a polemic state of affair and thats why nearly void in substance.
How is to decide? What to do? How to make that decision meaningfull? You really can not go with the programs, because high profile politicians even said that those are not that helpfull. But than what to do? Granted, it is only one of many elections in my life. Or, it is just a god damn election! But there is this nagging feeling of: let me participate, let me be a good citizen, let me rule with all the others. Give sense to my political life. Give sense to my life. Let me feel important. Let me feel self-efficacy. Why do I feel so powerless? You won't get this with an election!
God, it is just a damn election!
To counter theese feelings, that came in various levels throughout my political life during Wahlzeit, I developed strange strategies, I flunked elections, I crossed my Wahlzettel, to make it not count - and in that process got myself called an irresponsible former GDR citizen -, I made my choices based on the attractiveness of the candidates - Cornelia Pieper (FDP) seemed to me as always an impeded MILF - or, and that was by far my best try, to make a vote because I knew the candidate very well and she - Claudia Dalbert (Die Grünen) - impressed me because of her human personality and vitality.
This time I don't know and the bad feelings are more present then ever.
On August 21 2013 21:52 Schmobutzen wrote: I realise that this is mostly blog stuff, but here it is anyways:
Maybe thats just me, my history and personality, but I am very confused and in a state of sadness and anger that at this moment the decision where to put my two votes feels like seeing myself playing in a Monthy Python scene, while realising that this is actually real life. At least Monthy Python was sensical nonsense!
Most of the posts already observed that the three big parties are nearly identical, with flavors in the corners and of the weeks. In various online surveys, which party suits my point of views the most, I often found myself with Die Grünen. But I hate their lack of vision and reverie. That may sound counterintuitiv, but look closely at their profile and you will most of the time stare into a dark reallity which is only made visible by their own light and it all reminds me of the stick and the carrot. The Linke is the most interesting, they have an alternative model of society, at the same time their pitfall because of the ideology that leads them into that model, which is and will always be their blinding spot, making them never real open minded. The Piraten and the AfD are not yet out of a polemic state of affair and thats why nearly void in substance.
How is to decide? What to do? How to make that decision meaningfull? You really can not go with the programs, because high profile politicians even said that those are not that helpfull. But than what to do? Granted, it is only one of many elections in my life. Or, it is just a god damn election! But there is this nagging feeling of: let me participate, let me be a good citizen, let me rule with all the others. Give sense to my political life. Give sense to my life. Let me feel important. Let me feel self-efficacy. Why do I feel so powerless? You won't get this with an election!
God, it is just a damn election!
To counter theese feelings, that came in various levels throughout my political life during Wahlzeit, I developed strange strategies, I flunked elections, I crossed my Wahlzettel, to make it not count - and in that process got myself called an irresponsible former GDR citizen -, I made my choices based on the attractiveness of the candidates - Cornelia Pieper (FDP) seemed to me as always an impeded MILF - or, and that was by far my best try, to make a vote because I knew the candidate very well and she - Claudia Dalbert (Die Grünen) - impressed me because of her human personality and vitality.
This time I don't know and the bad feelings are more present then ever.
So, my quetsion to all: How do you decide?
Find solace in the thought that no matter how you vote, your one single vote will not decide anything.
do the Day-9 trick! Flip a coin, screw what the coin tells you to vote and vote whoever you ended up thinking "oh gosh I hope this thing lands on heads so I can vote for XXX" while in the air. Vote XXX and be happy.
If you have more than 2 options to vote for you probably need to make it some kind of tournament, best option would be with double elimination to make sure everyone get's a second chance and didn't just get an unlucky bo1 performace.
And advice from my point of view: Do that while still at home. Don't get in the voting booth with pen, paper & a coin. Instead have it done at home so you only go there and make your cross in the booth, already knowing what you're going to vote for!
I use the wal-o-mat from Spiegel online to compare the stances of 'my' direct candidates. Whoever has the least bullshit opinions gets my vote. I think last time it was actually the candidate from SPD, CSU candidate disqualified himself with very strong opinions on same-sex marriage, legalization of weed and some other things related to the internet. Some candidates however also disqualify themselves through party affiliation. I have no love for the left, the right, or the bible thumpers.
For my 2nd vote, I check the party agenda of the pirates and if it doesn't have too much outrageous stuff, they get it.
I am going to do my usaual stuff. I am gonna make my vote invalid myself. Still voted. If that would do everybody who doenst vote, that would be at least a statement.
On August 23 2013 02:57 spaZps wrote: I am going to do my usaual stuff. I am gonna make my vote invalid myself. Still voted. If that would do everybody who doenst vote, that would be at least a statement.
well yeah but you can't really expect people who don't care to show up for votes to do that and vote as "invalid". So in reality people who vote like that are people who would have voted to begin with (imo).
So it's not exactly a good thing to tell people to do that...
I will vote for the AfD. The ongoing support (called "credit", although it is a known fact, that we won't get the money back) for Greece and other countries is the wrong thing to do in my opinion. They should take some responsibility for their over the top government spending. The German citizens are paying huge amounts of taxes, thanks to well working tax administration, while this kind of administration is not working in Greece, they are evading their tax payments. There was a statistic a few months ago, showing that the median acquired private property in Germany is lower than in most other European countries (also partly due to high tax payments), and this fact has been down played by media and politicians alike. The private wealth in the southern European countries is there, they just are unable or unwilling to take it from their own citizens and Germany and other "rich" northern European countries are partly financing their government spendings. In my opinion, we are paying for their public spendings, without having a right to vote - No taxation without representation. Another American idea I like is the concept of self-responsibility, instead of "solidarity", which has been corrupted to the point of extortion here in Europe.
Will propably vote Union or Green, haven't decided yet. I have some problems with both their programs but they strike me as the least bad options. Kudos for the OP, it's excellent
Do us all a favor and vote for AFD so we can topple the euro that is hurting the whole of Europe. This currency is too weak for Germany and too strong for everyone else, it's killing us.
On August 23 2013 03:50 polarwolf wrote: I will vote for the AfD. The ongoing support (called "credit", although it is a known fact, that we won't get the money back) for Greece and other countries is the wrong thing to do in my opinion. They should take some responsibility for their over the top government spending. The German citizens are paying huge amounts of taxes, thanks to well working tax administration, while this kind of administration is not working in Greece, they are evading their tax payments. There was a statistic a few months ago, showing that the median acquired private property in Germany is lower than in most other European countries (also partly due to high tax payments), and this fact has been down played by media and politicians alike. The private wealth in the southern European countries is there, they just are unable or unwilling to take it from their own citizens and Germany and other "rich" northern European countries are partly financing their government spendings. In my opinion, we are paying for their public spendings, without having a right to vote - No taxation without representation. Another American idea I like is the concept of self-responsibility, instead of "solidarity", which has been corrupted to the point of extortion here in Europe.
You can have whatever opinion you desire on the German support for Greece. However, your arguments are severely flawed and thus your conclusion blatantly wrong. Just consider for a moment what factors other than "having more money" can contribute to the fact that "the median acquired private property" of one country's citizens is higher than that of another. You have for example: property price. Property in Germany is extremely expensive in comparison to some other countries. From personal experience I can only give examples of Bulgaria, but it should explain what I have in mind. In Bulgaria you can get an old, small house outside of the cities for as little as €5k, In many cities you can find apartments as cheap as €5k-10k. Even in the capital where property prices are absurdly high for Bulgaria, you can find many ~90m² apartments for €30k-35k. Now compare this to Germany, where you would struggle to find anything this size for less than €50k even in the most remote places. If you try to find something similar in a larger city you might easily have to pay 2 or 3 times more. Another factor is mentality. From my experience, Germans don't have "owning private property" as a very high priority. Just looking at my previous school mates and their parents living situation, I cannot recall a single German family that tried to buy an own place. There was a family of 1st generation immigrants from Turkey, whose main priority was buying a house. They own a shitty 15 year old car and generally own nothing too fancy, but have invested in their own house. The same happened to a 1st generation Iranian immigrants. (Both families relied solely on one person working full-time as a regular employee without any kind of high education) On the other hand, the father of a friend of mine, who earned really well at least for 20 years, including several years with earnings well into 6 digits, never bought a home, but instead leased a new BMW/Mercedes every 2 years and bought a new Golf as a second car at some point.
The fact that tax evasion has been rampant in Greece for quite a while is another issue...
Anyway, I'd advise you to really reconsider who you want to vote for. I personally cannot see any reason to vote for the AfD, a party relying heavily on populist statements, and having a considerable member fraction of far right views. If you really do not want to vote for a mainstream party, consider at least the pirates...
On August 23 2013 04:04 Skilledblob wrote: Die Linke here, no point in voting for something else.
SPD = CDU
FDP is old farts that want to support their CEO friends. The Greens are full with the children of said old farts and CEO's
Are you serious? Die Linke aren't fit to be real players in german politics, even they know that, that is why they make so many ridiculous claims, since they know they won't have to keep them because they will never be in power. If you just want to protest atleast vote the pirates, voting Die Linke is of no consequence since no other party will ever be willing to coalate with them (SPD talks about it every time, but only to pressure the other parties, they know that they would never do it) and even IF they would suddenly get into power it would be nothing positive for germany. I really hope that you were just joking.
On August 23 2013 05:34 ggrrg wrote:
Anyway, I'd advise you to really reconsider who you want to vote for. I personally cannot see any reason to vote for the AfD, a party relying heavily on populist statements, and having a considerable member fraction of far right views. If you really do not want to vote for a mainstream party, consider at least the pirates...
I wouldn't vote for them, but wasn't the party founded by economists? That they have far right supporters makes sense since they are basically being against the same thing that far right parties would be against to use the fear of the people, but I don't think the leaders or many close under them should be put in the same group as far right politicians. Then again I fervently ignored every newspaper article I saw about the AfD because I knew that they won't be too important (except maybe giving politicians an excuse to flirt with the idea of stopping the support of poorer countries, but they'd never go through with it anyway since they would have done it long ago if they could and I wouldn't have to read about them in particular to find out about that).
On August 23 2013 04:04 Skilledblob wrote: Die Linke here, no point in voting for something else.
SPD = CDU
FDP is old farts that want to support their CEO friends. The Greens are full with the children of said old farts and CEO's
Are you serious? Die Linke aren't fit to be real players in german politics, even they know that, that is why they make so many ridiculous claims, since they know they won't have to keep them because they will never be in power. If you just want to protest atleast vote the pirates, voting Die Linke is of no consequence since no other party will ever be willing to coalate with them (SPD talks about it every time, but only to pressure the other parties, they know that they would never do it) and even IF they would suddenly get into power it would be nothing positive for germany. I really hope that you were just joking.
Anyway, I'd advise you to really reconsider who you want to vote for. I personally cannot see any reason to vote for the AfD, a party relying heavily on populist statements, and having a considerable member fraction of far right views. If you really do not want to vote for a mainstream party, consider at least the pirates...
I wouldn't vote for them, but wasn't the party founded by economists? That they have far right supporters makes sense since they are basically being against the same thing that far right parties would be against to use the fear of the people, but I don't think the leaders or many close under them should be put in the same group as far right politicians. Then again I fervently ignored every newspaper article I saw about the AfD because I knew that they won't be too important (except maybe giving politicians an excuse to flirt with the idea of stopping the support of poorer countries, but they'd never go through with it anyway since they would have done it long ago if they could and I wouldn't have to read about them in particular to find out about that).
your arrogance towards "Die Linke" is astounding. and yes, AfD was founded by economists. however, there party naturally attracts nationalists etc.
Either explain yourself, or don't post at all, the Linke is just not seen as a possible coalition partner above statelevel by any other party, they know it, the parties know it and you should know it too. "Wealth for everybody" isn't exactly realistic.
and yes, AfD was founded by economists. however, there party naturally attracts nationalists etc.
Which is exactly what I said.
Next time try to bring atleast ONE piece of new information or explanation for what you state or just don't post at all, because you're not helping anybody here and do it with an attitude. (I realise that my post isn't the nicest one I've ever written too, but I hate it when people just brush into the thread, make a statement or two or a one-liner, which doesn't help the thread or other people at all and is often insulting and just leave again afterwards.)
calling every vote for Die Linke a joke is not only disrespectful but also, as i said, very arrogant.
first of all, you are missing the point. you can vote for a party not only because they will do a coaltion, but also because you want a good opposition. and in my opinion, Die Linke was quite a good one during the last years. (check out the amount of small requests by tDie Linke ( http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/kleine-anfragen-spd-liegt-hinter-der-opposition-zurueck-a-894333.html ). couple that with charismatic and smart politicans (gysi is probably one of the smartest in germany) and you have your answer.
I don't know how you get the idea that the pure quantity of that makes a good opposition, and no, I wouldn't call them "good" during the last few years, Die Linke may have disagreed with pretty much everyone on every topic ever and they asked the most written questions to the CDU over official channels, but even though you didn't even mention the first thing the second one alone surely doesn't make them a good opposition (the first one seemed kinda implied to me, forgive me if I'm wrong).
couple that with charismatic and smart politicans (gysi is probably one of the smartest in germany)
That is just so wrong that I'm not even going to get into that...
and yes, i just agreed with you on the AfD.
I'm happy about that, but I don't need +1-posts, especially when most of the rest of the post pretty much only consisted out of an insult to me.
I'd actually like to hear your reasons why you think Die Linke needs to become stronger, wouldn't be the first time that I was wrong on the internet or that I learned something here, but that party has never given me the slightest reason to call them competent politicians and even you have to admit that they talk about and promise a lot of completely ridiculous things.
On August 23 2013 03:50 polarwolf wrote: I will vote for the AfD. The ongoing support (called "credit", although it is a known fact, that we won't get the money back) for Greece and other countries is the wrong thing to do in my opinion. They should take some responsibility for their over the top government spending. The German citizens are paying huge amounts of taxes, thanks to well working tax administration, while this kind of administration is not working in Greece, they are evading their tax payments. There was a statistic a few months ago, showing that the median acquired private property in Germany is lower than in most other European countries (also partly due to high tax payments), and this fact has been down played by media and politicians alike. The private wealth in the southern European countries is there, they just are unable or unwilling to take it from their own citizens and Germany and other "rich" northern European countries are partly financing their government spendings. In my opinion, we are paying for their public spendings, without having a right to vote - No taxation without representation. Another American idea I like is the concept of self-responsibility, instead of "solidarity", which has been corrupted to the point of extortion here in Europe.
Anyway, I'd advise you to really reconsider who you want to vote for. I personally cannot see any reason to vote for the AfD, a party relying heavily on populist statements, and having a considerable member fraction of far right views.
Intruiging, ggrrg, intruiging. "having a considerable member fraction of far right views" in the party, it should be oh so easy to name just a single AfD official and post his corresponding far right statements or views. Enlighten me please.
On August 23 2013 07:33 SilentchiLL wrote: I'd actually like to hear your reasons why you think Die Linke needs to become stronger, wouldn't be the first time that I was wrong on the internet or that I learned something here, but that party has never given me the slightest reason to call them competent politicians and even you have to admit that they talk about and promise a lot of completely ridiculous things.
I also don't think 'Die Linke' is so bad, so i'll just take the freedom to give you my opinion. Importantly , they were the only party that did vote against the bailout packages, and thus, they were the only party trying to not socialize financial losses of the big players.
'Die Linke' also wants the wages to go up substantially, which is not only reasonable because many employees would profit from it, but because it will reduce our trade surplus (exporting more than importing a lot of stuff sounds pretty nice, but in fact from an economical standpoint is pretty stupid) which would also give the other European countries actually a chance to be able to compete with us.
Furthermore the party is progressive when it comes to social politics and does not propagate an image of society that could stem from the 50's.
They also despise selling guns and tanks to crazy despotic countries, which at least in my opinion, is kind of a reasonable position to take.
Intruiging, ggrrg, intruiging. "having a considerable member fraction of far right views" in the party, it should be oh so easy to name just a single AfD official and post his corresponding far right statements or views. Enlighten me please.
Bernd Lucke: "Ich glaube nicht, dass Jörg Haider ein Rechtsradikaler ist." (I don't believe Jörg Haider was a right-wing extremist)
Die Linke is getting slammed by most of our media because they actually want huge changes, which is against the media's owner's agenda.
I don't agree with many of their views, but to me they definitely have a point. Some things in our society are just terribly wrong and people should at least start thinking about that.
imo they get bashed because they just throw around ridiculous ideas without any plan whatsoever how to realize them. Also, a lot of their ideas sound nice for people with average (or lower than average) saleries at first glance, but if realized, could be hugely detrimental to them (higher taxes for people with a lot of income for example).
On August 23 2013 23:29 imperator-xy wrote: Die Linke is getting slammed by most of our media because they actually want huge changes, which is against the media's owner's agenda.
Indeed, it's a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"(tm). Sorry to temper your enthusiasm with facts, but according to University of Hamburg research, the party preference among journalists/content creators ("der in Deutschland tätigen Medienschaffenden") in Germany is as follow:
Grüne: 35,5 Prozent SPD: 26 Prozent CDU: 8,7 Prozent FDP: 6,8 Prozent
I can compare German media with US, English and Irish from first hand experience and it is easily more left leaning than any of these three. Intruigingly the 11th biggest media owner in Germany with 2% market share is Deutsche Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, fully owned by the SPD.
Historically speaking, do the results of the German elections tend to serve as an indicator of what will happen in the European elections in Germany (since obviously that affects me and the German general election doesn't directly)? In the UK it's not usually a good indicator, but we have a wildly different system for general elections so people vote completely differently, whereas the german system is much closer to the european system.
Since Merkel and the CDU/CSU seem so popular, are we likely to see a strong vote for the CSU/CDU (and therefore Europäische Volkspartei) in the European elections?
On August 23 2013 23:29 imperator-xy wrote: the party preference among journalists/content creators ("der in Deutschland tätigen Medienschaffenden") in Germany is as follow:
Grüne: 35,5 Prozent SPD: 26 Prozent CDU: 8,7 Prozent FDP: 6,8 Prozent
On August 23 2013 23:57 Mandalor wrote: imo they get bashed because they just throw around ridiculous ideas without any plan whatsoever how to realize them. Also, a lot of their ideas sound nice for people with average (or lower than average) saleries at first glance, but if realized, could be hugely detrimental to them (higher taxes for people with a lot of income for example).
I am not a vivid supporter of the Linke, but posts like these drive me nuts. (Healthy discussion is overshadowed by bullshit.)
Even you, dear Mandalor, must recognize that a statement like "this party X has no plan whatsoever" is pure propaganda, period. What party in this world, that is older than 2 years and has more than a hundred members, does not have a plan?
You may not like their plan, but accusing them without any grounds it childish.
On August 23 2013 23:57 Mandalor wrote: imo they get bashed because they just throw around ridiculous ideas without any plan whatsoever how to realize them. Also, a lot of their ideas sound nice for people with average (or lower than average) saleries at first glance, but if realized, could be hugely detrimental to them (higher taxes for people with a lot of income for example).
I am not a vivid supporter of the Linke, but posts like these drive me nuts. (Healthy discussion is overshadowed by bullshit.)
Even you, dear Mandalor, must recognize that a statement like "this party X has no plan whatsoever" is pure propaganda, period. What party in this world, that is older than 2 years and has more than a hundred members, does not have a plan?
You may not like their plan, but accusing them without any grounds it childish.
Also your second sentence makes no sense at all.
it is entirely true though. They base everything on shouting nice phrases that sound nice on the first hand that some times even contradict something else they're shouting at the same time. Take that and some ridiculous standpoints they got like + Show Spoiler [german, short] +
[Die Linke steht] für eine andere, demokratische Wirtschaftsordnung, die die Marktsteuerung von Produktion und Verteilung der demokratischen, sozialen und ökologischen Rahmensetzung und Kontrolle unterordnet. Sie muss auf öffentlichem und demokratisch kontrolliertem Eigentum in der Daseinsvorsorge, an der gesellschaftlichen Infrastruktur, in der Energiewirtschaft und im Finanzsektor beruhen.
Wir wollen eine demokratische Vergesellschaftung weiterer strukturbestimmender Bereiche auf der Grundlage von staatlichem, kommunalem, genossenschaftlichem oder Belegschaftseigentum. Die Wirtschaft ist einer strikten Wettbewerbskontrolle zu unterwerfen. In allen Unternehmen sind wirksame Arbeitnehmerund Mitbestimmungsrechte zu sichern
I even wanted to make the hilarious part up there bold, turned out I made everything bold, in 5 steps, so I just copy&pasted without anything.
They know they're a laughing matter and apparently don't even take it serious themselves to catch attention and votes from people who think that phrases like "Arbeit für alle! Vollbeschäftigung für Deutschland!" (yeha for all those "Platzanweiser" again!) sound like something, because it might sound appealing at first.
Edit: The point that they apparently thought they have to include the phrase that they won't disown small companies like local farmers as well is pretty hilarious as well. How nuts does your program have to be for you to have to include THAT phrase in there to make sure people don't get the wrong opinion?
On August 23 2013 23:57 Mandalor wrote: imo they get bashed because they just throw around ridiculous ideas without any plan whatsoever how to realize them. Also, a lot of their ideas sound nice for people with average (or lower than average) saleries at first glance, but if realized, could be hugely detrimental to them (higher taxes for people with a lot of income for example).
I am not a vivid supporter of the Linke, but posts like these drive me nuts. (Healthy discussion is overshadowed by bullshit.)
Even you, dear Mandalor, must recognize that a statement like "this party X has no plan whatsoever" is pure propaganda, period. What party in this world, that is older than 2 years and has more than a hundred members, does not have a plan?
You may not like their plan, but accusing them without any grounds it childish.
Also your second sentence makes no sense at all.
I applaud the spirit of your post and wish I could agree with you, it's good that you try to defend a noncomformist party from general statements, but the problem is: They are true. Die Linke DOESN'T have a plan how to realize their silly promises, because they don't NEED one, they won't ever actually get into the situation which would force them to try to realize them because they are a relatively small party and none (NONE) of the other meaningful parties would coalate with them above statelevel ever and even if they would they still couldn't realize their agenda because they are too small and both coalitionpartners (since it would be SPD and Grüne if any at all) wouldn't want their changes. So yeah, I dislike general statements like "this party X has no plan whatsoever" too, but in this case it's true, they have no plan and need no plan, their plan is basically to promise whatever gets them votes while knowing that they never have to fullfill their promises.
On August 24 2013 00:22 SgtCoDFish wrote: Historically speaking, do the results of the German elections tend to serve as an indicator of what will happen in the European elections in Germany (since obviously that affects me and the German general election doesn't directly)? In the UK it's not usually a good indicator, but we have a wildly different system for general elections so people vote completely differently, whereas the german system is much closer to the european system.
That is really hard to answer, because of the different election periods (every 4 year vs. every 5). Generally speaking, like in most democracies there is this approval cycle going on. Two years after an election approval ratings are at the lowest for the government (regardless of party).
And from what I remember, European elections have been quite aligned to the ongoing general tune. So this 'phenomenon' used to be quite obvious (meaning the governing parties got quite the slap in the face oftentimes). Last time was special though. As the European election was just two month before the German one. So it was more of a 'pre-vote' for the upcoming 'real' election.
This time it might become interesting. Say Greece gets it's third bailout (expected in early 2014) and the mood turns worse again, then there is a chance of a landslide. But I can also see a vision, where we have a grand coalition with no real opposing views, where nothing at all happens (like an gentlemen agreement to tone down campaigning).
On August 23 2013 23:29 imperator-xy wrote: Die Linke is getting slammed by most of our media because they actually want huge changes, which is against the media's owner's agenda.
Indeed, it's a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"(tm). Sorry to temper your enthusiasm with facts, but according to University of Hamburg research, the party preference among journalists/content creators ("der in Deutschland tätigen Medienschaffenden") in Germany is as follow:
Grüne: 35,5 Prozent SPD: 26 Prozent CDU: 8,7 Prozent FDP: 6,8 Prozent
I can compare German media with US, English and Irish from first hand experience and it is easily more left leaning than any of these three. Intruigingly the 11th biggest media owner in Germany with 2% market share is Deutsche Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, fully owned by the SPD.
I feel like you totally missunderstood me.
Basically every party and every newspaper bashes Die Linke. Die Linke wants to heavily limit our free market, so people with power and money try everything to make them look poorly. Has nothing to do with a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" (never heard of that).
People should at least think about some of Die Linke's views. Free market is good, but sometimes it really fucks up things. For example when basic things get privatized, there are often problems because private companies just want to make money instead of delivering the best quality possible.
On August 23 2013 23:57 Mandalor wrote: imo they get bashed because they just throw around ridiculous ideas without any plan whatsoever how to realize them. Also, a lot of their ideas sound nice for people with average (or lower than average) saleries at first glance, but if realized, could be hugely detrimental to them (higher taxes for people with a lot of income for example).
I am not a vivid supporter of the Linke, but posts like these drive me nuts. (Healthy discussion is overshadowed by bullshit.)
Even you, dear Mandalor, must recognize that a statement like "this party X has no plan whatsoever" is pure propaganda, period. What party in this world, that is older than 2 years and has more than a hundred members, does not have a plan?
You may not like their plan, but accusing them without any grounds it childish.
Also your second sentence makes no sense at all.
If you cared to read the party programmes, you'd notice how many of our parties have nice ideas, but no detailed plans on how to realize them (or they withhold them for whatever reason, which I doubt). This isn't even only true for Die Linke. It's just that Die Linke is a very extreme example for this. The amount of demands this party has and the promises they give that are based on solid grounds and numbers, most importantly, are close to non-existant. The second sentence was hinting on the development our tax income might have if we taxed high income households even more. Switzerland and Monaco really aren't that far away You might disagree with my view on the party, but I don't see how my post evoked a reaction like that (bullshit, propaganda, childish) - just to quote a few gems of a non-vivid supporter of the party I was criticizing, dear lord_nibbler.
On August 23 2013 23:29 imperator-xy wrote: Die Linke is getting slammed by most of our media because they actually want huge changes, which is against the media's owner's agenda.
Indeed, it's a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"(tm). Sorry to temper your enthusiasm with facts, but according to University of Hamburg research, the party preference among journalists/content creators ("der in Deutschland tätigen Medienschaffenden") in Germany is as follow:
Grüne: 35,5 Prozent SPD: 26 Prozent CDU: 8,7 Prozent FDP: 6,8 Prozent
I can compare German media with US, English and Irish from first hand experience and it is easily more left leaning than any of these three. Intruigingly the 11th biggest media owner in Germany with 2% market share is Deutsche Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, fully owned by the SPD.
People should at least think about some of Die Linke's views. Free market is good, but sometimes it really fucks up things. For example when basic things get privatized, there are often problems because private companies just want to make money instead of delivering the best quality possible.
Fully agree on privatizing e.g. water supplies is madness.
My point was that the media landscape in Germany is reasonably far leftist and criticizing the post-communists has nothing to do with a hidden agenda, but everything with Linke's complete inability to offer realistic alternatives. They are good at criticizing, but completey worthless when it comes to presenting viable solutions.
What silent chill (hi there btw) points out is correct. Like the huge parts of the Pirateparty are most big parts of "Die Linke" not able to gover on the federal level, but this is not very important if you understand their whole point of their existence.
Their existence alone acts (like with the early days of the green party) as a warning for the more established partys, so they consider a slightly social course to get the votes, who else would go to "Die Linke".
Over all the people in germany are happy with the work the Bundestag does (over 50%), the CDU/CSU would get 41% of the votes if the election would be today - in basically a five party system. Nothing is perfect, but most people look around and see, that other countries got hit by the economy crisis way harder and our debt is stable at ~80% of our BIP. Nothing to spit at if you compare that to other major powers.
On August 23 2013 03:50 polarwolf wrote: I will vote for the AfD. The ongoing support (called "credit", although it is a known fact, that we won't get the money back) for Greece and other countries is the wrong thing to do in my opinion. They should take some responsibility for their over the top government spending. The German citizens are paying huge amounts of taxes, thanks to well working tax administration, while this kind of administration is not working in Greece, they are evading their tax payments. There was a statistic a few months ago, showing that the median acquired private property in Germany is lower than in most other European countries (also partly due to high tax payments), and this fact has been down played by media and politicians alike. The private wealth in the southern European countries is there, they just are unable or unwilling to take it from their own citizens and Germany and other "rich" northern European countries are partly financing their government spendings. In my opinion, we are paying for their public spendings, without having a right to vote - No taxation without representation. Another American idea I like is the concept of self-responsibility, instead of "solidarity", which has been corrupted to the point of extortion here in Europe.
Just a little observation, since I remember that survey from a while ago. Median is the midpoint of the observation, whereas mean is the average of the observation. Every single EU country had homeownership rates above 50%, therefore their median was a homeowner. Germany had a homeownership rate a bit below the 50% mark, so their median was not a homeowner. Homeownership accounted for the vast majority of 'wealth' of any EU citizen. Draw your own conclusions about the presentation of the facts from the reporters. The actual study was ok, might be misleading if you couldn't read into nuances like that but at least it pointed out the nuances.
On August 24 2013 01:16 Crytash wrote: Over all the people in germany are happy with the work the Bundestag does (over 50%), the CDU/CSU would get 41% of the votes if the election would be today - in basically a five party system. Nothing is perfect, but most people look around and see, that other countries got hit by the economy crisis way harder and our debt is stable at ~80% of our BIP. Nothing to spit at if you compare that to other major powers.
Germany and especially it's export industry is the big winner of the euro, for now.
Even your own ministry of finance knows this can not last (Google translated for the german impaired) and the rest of europe is suffering or is about to suffer from crushing austerity and inner devalvation leading to non-existant buying power, which will hurt German exports too in the long run. Things could be helped a great deal by taking back our freely floating national currencies and national central banks. As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
Please do us all a favor. Vote for whomever will do this.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
On August 24 2013 00:22 SgtCoDFish wrote: Historically speaking, do the results of the German elections tend to serve as an indicator of what will happen in the European elections in Germany (since obviously that affects me and the German general election doesn't directly)? In the UK it's not usually a good indicator, but we have a wildly different system for general elections so people vote completely differently, whereas the german system is much closer to the european system.
Since Merkel and the CDU/CSU seem so popular, are we likely to see a strong vote for the CSU/CDU (and therefore Europäische Volkspartei) in the European elections?
I would doubt it, as Europe is only a minor topic during the national elections.
On August 24 2013 01:16 Crytash wrote: Over all the people in germany are happy with the work the Bundestag does (over 50%), the CDU/CSU would get 41% of the votes if the election would be today - in basically a five party system. Nothing is perfect, but most people look around and see, that other countries got hit by the economy crisis way harder and our debt is stable at ~80% of our BIP. Nothing to spit at if you compare that to other major powers.
Germany and especially it's export industry is the big winner of the euro, for now.
Even your own ministry of finance knows this can not last (Google translated for the german impaired) and the rest of europe is suffering or is about to suffer from crushing austerity and inner devalvation leading to non-existant buying power, which will hurt German exports too in the long run. Things could be helped a great deal by taking back our freely floating national currencies and national central banks. As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
Please do us all a favor. Vote for whomever will do this.
Thats a bit of a problem. The two main parties (SPD and CDU/CSU) are pretty much the same when it comes to Europe. And in all likelyhood we will end up with a coalition gouverment of those two, which means nothing much will happen the next four years at all.
Regarding the dicussion about "die Linke" further up, the problem is that they are basicly blocking the place of a real modern left party with their communist notalgia version of being left, forcing the SPD to the center where they are not really distingushiable from the CDU at all. And since people seem to like Angie better then Peer we'll get her again. *sigh*
On August 24 2013 01:16 Crytash wrote: What silent chill (hi there btw) points out is correct. Like the huge parts of the Pirateparty are most big parts of "Die Linke" not able to gover on the federal level, but this is not very important if you understand their whole point of their existence.
Their existence alone acts (like with the early days of the green party) as a warning for the more established partys, so they consider a slightly social course to get the votes, who else would go to "Die Linke".
Over all the people in germany are happy with the work the Bundestag does (over 50%), the CDU/CSU would get 41% of the votes if the election would be today - in basically a five party system. Nothing is perfect, but most people look around and see, that other countries got hit by the economy crisis way harder and our debt is stable at ~80% of our BIP. Nothing to spit at if you compare that to other major powers.
Overall the people in Germany are happy that they get shows of Bohlen, Raab and all the other morons, too. It's not an indicator of quality. Also, nobody ever admits to be 'not happy'. That's a positivity bias. You get that if you ask in opinion polls, everywhere. Germans usually don't complain, they just go along and Merkel is a mastermind of making the masses believe her. It's horrible, I could puke whenever I hear 'alternativlos' or 'ergebnisoffen'. Phrases meaning she only waits for the masses to decide, while not acting whatsoever. Big surprise, she'll win again. Only, small hope, would be that the FDP would finally drop out, these damn morons and their jerks...
Don't get me wrong, I agree with what people said about Die Linke, it's not a solution (nor do they offer one), but at least a little sign, that there are few wanting to have changes. I'd hope more silly parties like the Pirates and Die Linke would get higher percentages, simply to strengthen the message they send. It's really hard to be not pissed off at the course our big parties made in the past eight years, especially Merkel's party. Guess I'll never forget Roland Koch for his infamous "I can completely ignore the teens and their thoughts, they're just a vocal minority and not my voters anyways". ASFdasd.ff
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs. The biggest winner of this failed experiment can walk away from it and help the scared politicians in smaller countries save face. No one wants to be the first to break ranks. The elite might like the euro but for the average Joe european it is a disaster. I can only hope that if Germany continues on the path of doing nothing but putting out fires we'll elect enough politicians with bigger balls in 2015 when its time for the Finnish elections. By then though our AAA will be gone and we'll be in a much bigger hole.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs. The biggest winner of this failed experiment can walk away from it and help the scared politicians in smaller countries save face. No one wants to be the first to break ranks. The elite might like the euro but for the average Joe european it is a disaster. I can only hope that if Germany continues on the path of doing nothing but putting out fires we'll elect enough politicians with bigger balls in 2015 when its time for the Finnish elections. By then though our AAA will be gone and we'll be in a much bigger hole.
who is that "biggest winner of this failed experiment" you talk about? you just linked an article describing how the EU has hurt Germany tremendously as it might still be quite decent, but got a lot poorer in comparision to other european countries in the meantime, despite the fairly good time we had throughout the crisis.
Regarding the dicussion about "die Linke" further up, the problem is that they are basicly blocking the place of a real modern left party with their communist notalgia version of being left, forcing the SPD to the center where they are not really distingushiable from the CDU at all. And since people seem to like Angie better then Peer we'll get her again. *sigh*
nah dude nobody forced the SPD anywhere. With Schröder started the downfall of the SPD and they still can not get out of it because they are too scared to embrace the S in SPD. What they do is just agree with Merkel on everything so they can get back into a coalition and rule again where they will lose even more support because they will not be able to distinguish themselves from the CDU. Because of this behaviour the SPD lost it's left leaning votes to Die Linke ( who I will vote for because I want strong opposition), and is losing it's center votes to the CDU. The SPD made it's own grave and is now slowly dying in it.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
who is that "biggest winner of this failed experiment" you talk about? you just linked an article describing how the EU has hurt Germany tremendously as it might still be quite decent, but got a lot poorer in comparision to other european countries in the meantime, despite the fairly good time we had throughout the crisis.
Winning is relative in this case. The euro is hurting Germany but it is hurting everyone else much, much more. Everyone else lost tremendously because the euro is too strong. Germany's export industry which has benefited from a relatively weak euro (compared to what D-mark would currently be valued as) keeps Germany in the winning column for now, but even for Germany the euro is bad (too weak) in the long run. Germany needs a stronger D-mark and other countries need devaluation to get their local markets going.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
this might be a bit off topic but then again i've read this argument a couple of times in this thread now, that's why i'm asking.
it seems to be a general consensus that the Euro is hurting Europe. Why is that so? I really enjoy to travel to France, the Netherlands, Poland, .. without having to get different money. What is the problem that Poles can work in Germany and get paid in their own currency?
If the Euro is hurting the european countries, will the "Deutsche Mark" then hurt the different federal states after we (hypothetically) reintroduced it?
Also, I don't get how it makes any difference at all what name I write onto the stuff I pay my bread with. Be it Reichsmark, cigarettes, Deutsche Mark or Euro, whats the difference?
On August 24 2013 03:45 Grollicus wrote: Hi there,
this might be a bit off topic but then again i've read this argument a couple of times in this thread now, that's why i'm asking.
it seems to be a general consensus that the Euro is hurting Europe. Why is that so? I really enjoy to travel to France, the Netherlands, Poland, .. without having to get different money. What is the problem that Poles can work in Germany and get paid in their own currency?
If the Euro is hurting the european countries, will the "Deutsche Mark" then hurt the different federal states after we (hypothetically) reintroduced it?
Also, I don't get how it makes any difference at all what name I write onto the stuff I pay my bread with. Be it Reichsmark, cigarettes, Deutsche Mark or Euro, whats the difference?
Different currencies allow for flexible exchange rates, which allow countries to devaluate their currency, thus making export easier and import harder which stimulates economic growth and creates jobs.
One currency takes the possibility of monetary policies away from the states to tze EZB, which lead to the current situation in which the Euro is undervalued/artifically low for Germany and too strong for the southern European countries.
So the Euro made it easier for countries like Greece to import a lot of stuff, which resulted in high debt and cash flow away from Germany into the Southern states, creating hugh economic liabilities leading to the situation we have now, where we frequently have to bail out the people we sell our products too, because we're basically giving them away for free just to keep our too large export-industry alive.
On August 24 2013 03:45 Grollicus wrote: Hi there,
this might be a bit off topic but then again i've read this argument a couple of times in this thread now, that's why i'm asking.
it seems to be a general consensus that the Euro is hurting Europe. Why is that so? I really enjoy to travel to France, the Netherlands, Poland, .. without having to get different money. What is the problem that Poles can work in Germany and get paid in their own currency?
If the Euro is hurting the european countries, will the "Deutsche Mark" then hurt the different federal states after we (hypothetically) reintroduced it?
Also, I don't get how it makes any difference at all what name I write onto the stuff I pay my bread with. Be it Reichsmark, cigarettes, Deutsche Mark or Euro, whats the difference?
Currencies of different countries are used to balance trade between those countries.
With the Euro this ability to balance trade was lost... imbalances grew bigger and the problems formed.
Very short answer... much more to it of course. If you want to get it you have to study some national economy especially foreing trade (which just by reading your question, i don't think you have)
Euro being too strong for most of Europe also means these countries are struggling to keep their own industry alive. The workers' wages are comparatively too high so industry that can escapes to countries with cheaper labor and industries that cant escape (like construction for example) imports cheap labor from cheaper labor countries. This leads to unemployment, which leads to lower tax incomes for governments and reduction of buying power, which leads to yet more unemployment because no one is buying anything and the government needs to either cut expenses or borrow money from foreign sources since we don't have our national central banks to borrow from anymore. It's a self feeding cycle.
Also since it is no longer beneficial to produce anything in the country we have to rely heavily on imports for even the most basic products. This leads to trade deficits, which basically means more money is flowing out of the country than coming in. If we had devalued currencies these imports would become more expensive, so it would again be more beneficial to locally produce things. For a great example of this, Greece used to be a very agriculture dependent country that produced almost all the food it ate by itself. Their agriculture was not the most efficient, but a weak drakhma meant that it was still cheaper to produce locally than import food. After joining the eurozone this ratio has flipped completely and now Greece imports most of the food it eats.
The countries in the eurozone are simply too diverse in social and economic situations to have a single currency. They need currencies that can be valued with these variables accounted for.
On August 24 2013 04:36 Dulak wrote: Euro being too strong for most of Europe also means these countries are struggling to keep their own industry alive. The workers' wages are comparatively too high so industry that can escapes to countries with cheaper labor and industries that cant escape (like construction for example) imports cheap labor from cheaper labor countries. This leads to unemployment, which leads to lower tax incomes for governments and reduction of buying power, which leads to yet more unemployment because no one is buying anything and the government needs to either cut expenses or borrow money from foreign sources since we don't have our national central banks to borrow from anymore. It's a self feeding cycle.
Also since it is no longer beneficial to produce anything in the country we have to rely heavily on imports for even the most basic products. This leads to trade deficits, which basically means more money is flowing out of the country than coming in. If we had devalued currencies these imports would become more expensive, so it would again be more beneficial to locally produce things. For a great example of this, Greece used to be a very agriculture dependent country that produced almost all the food it ate by itself. Their agriculture was not the most efficient, but a weak drakhma meant that it was still cheaper to produce locally than import food. After joining the eurozone this ratio has flipped completely and now Greece imports most of the food it eats.
The countries in the eurozone are simply too diverse in social and economic situations to have a single currency. They need currencies that can be valued with these variables accounted for.
Or a single gouverment for Europe. But unfortunately I don't see that happening.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
To sum it up in short: Germany will most likely not lead the deconstruction of the Eurozone. Only if there is the absolute necessity to do so, this will ever happen. All imprtant parties (CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP, Grüne) and big parts of the media support more or less the existence of the Euro and no leading politician would like to become known in history for the destruction of the pinnacle of european integration the Euro is believed to be.
There are three possible ways how this can further develop:
1) The pressure on the southern states is high enough to impose serious structural reforms on their labor market, their social and health systems and clever investment strategies, public stimuli and lower wages lead to a recovery and in the end stabilization of the Euro on its currently reasonably high level (meaning some sort of Euro-Mark). This is basically what Merkel would love to see.
2) The typical coalition of Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece and also France make sure that the ECB makes sure that the interest rates for said countries is not too high by amassing bonds of these countries. This will inevitably lead to a devaluation of the Euro, which means that solving the debt problem is easier. However, those who have been saving money, essentially lose part of their fortune. Indicators for this development are a discrepancy between inflation and basic interest rates (i.e. say the inflation is at 2 %, but you get only 1 % interest on your savings; this means you effectively lose 1 % of your fortune each year) overall increasing inflation (i.e. power, gasoline, food, rent, real estate, rising stock markets,...) and wages that are not being raised in the same rate of the current inflation. This scenario benefits a lot those, who have debts, namely the southern states, also dubbed Club Med.
3) Due to extreme pressure, one or more states of the Eurozone decide to leave the common currency and, after a time of shocks on the finance markets, try to get their economy going again through devaluation of their own currency. Candidates for this would be some of the bigger economies, such as Italy, Spain or France, where it is clear that Germany and the other net payers are not able to reasonably solve the problems of the states in peril with a simple bail out. After this precedence and depending on the outcome, others might follow, and the Eurozone could remain as a core of economical powerhouses, offering the other EU states to enter this common currency only under certain, strict conditions (basically how the Euro should have been in the first place).
Scenario 1) is wishful thinking in my view. Scenario 2) is the most likely one, because we are already in it, and Merkel and Co. would lead the german people into inflation rather than doing something that might be uncomfortable for her image in the history books. Scenario 3) cannot be discounted, because at some point the current system will just not work anymore (personally I think that France might be a likely candidate, since the french people are known to be nasty, when it comes to harsh reforms that might be considered unsocial).
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
The Euro under these circumstances at this time was a bad idea but I believe getting rid of the € wouldn't change anything or maybe even make it worse. It's not 2002 anymore. Globalization has developed in the last 10 years and every country in europe has to compete with china, india, brazil, germany etc. no matter the currency. On top of that, it doesn't actually matter what we think about the €. The banks want the €, The US want the € for geopolitical reasons so it will stay. There is absolutly zero chance to change the currency in europe no matter how retarded the party is we vote. If we don't change our financial system so the people who are in charge don't benfit from the debt of countries and the bankruptcy of us as the tax paying people why should it get any better?
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
That view seems completly reasonable, considering examples of countries standing up against spying are: Ecuador, Bolivia, Iceland and other "strong" players.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
Naive or not, this is the sole reason that i support a combined EU. At the moment the only EU country that is among the biggest 20 countries is Germany. In a few years (relatively speaking) when many of the emerging economies of Asia will have economies comparable Germany, France and UK and much larger populations, a split Europe will have zero political influence.
That being said i don't know if it is a good idea that Northern Europe share a currency with anything south of Germany.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
That view seems completly reasonable, considering examples of countries standing up against spying are: Ecuador, Bolivia, Iceland and other "strong" players.
well those countries don't have treaties to do as the US wants them to do with their (not the US-ones) intelligence services. They also don't happen to have none of their goldreservers in their own country due to WW2.
It's understandable from a German point of view if you want to get past these treaties of the past.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
Naive or not, this is the sole reason that i support a combined EU. At the moment the only EU country that is among the biggest 20 countries is Germany. In a few years (relatively speaking) when many of the emerging economies of Asia will have economies comparable Germany, France and UK and much larger populations, a split Europe will have zero political influence.
That being said i don't know if it is a good idea that Northern Europe share a currency with anything south of Germany.
If you want international recognition it is easier and cheaper to get nukes and a launch platform. I don't favour that approach but it is a much simpler solution to the problem you present.
I favour EU because it is another step towards no countries on Earth. The rest I don't really care for but can accept for the very long term goal. The same would apply to the Euro if my country was a part of it. I see a lot of downsides but could live with them for the potential long term.
Germany doesn't have a treaty that tells them to do as the US wishes. It is totally not understandable from a German point of view if you consider their history in intelligence agencys like the gestapo or stasi.
Small countries in Europe should have no interests in expanding the powers of EU, in fact they should mostly be getting the hell out of there. The whole EU structure is so undemocratic that smaller countries just sign their legislative power away and don't see any benefits coming their way. MEPs are the only democratically elected part of the EU machine, but they only have power to make amendments to law proposals and even the amendments go back to be reviewed by the undemocratically appointed council of ministers and european council and can be discarded at their leisure. In other words our only elected representatives have no power. Laws are proposed by the 3000+ workgroups whose members we are not even allowed to know.
Largest net contributors (financial losers) to the EU per capita are Finland and Denmark. What we get back is a jungle of useless directives. US and China don't give a rats ass about us, so Germany, France and Italy can have their union if they want, just let me out!
As far as common currency goes, even having only Northern Europe in the eurozone would still hurt everyone involved. Germany would still be too strong of an export machine, at least for now.
EDIT: And to comment on Restrider's post which was great:
It seems to be the same in all eurozone countries, no one wants to be the first to break ranks. Propositions of leaving the eurozone here in Finland regularly get criticized with many of the same reasons; possible political and financial isolation. Even so I don't think it will be a question of if some country will leave, but when. Many respected economists, retired government officials and even some CEOs are calling for Finland to be the first to leave the eurozone while we still have our AAA rating intact and less than 60% GDP debt. This is well past a crisis of only the southern countries, unemployment and government debt is rapidly rising here as well.
Dulak, i see you seem to love ideology, but your talk about germany realy leaving the € zone as the first country is absurd a best. Reality is, that all important parties in germany view the € as something valuable.
Now you can "dream" about what you want to happen or acknowlede what WILL happen and that is, if Finnland doesn't leave the € zone, germany won't do it in a million years.
On August 24 2013 08:10 Crytash wrote: Dulak, i see you seem to love ideology, but your talk about germany realy leaving the € zone as the first country is absurd a best. Reality is, that all important parties in germany view the € as something valuable.
Now you can "dream" about what you want to happen or acknowlede what WILL happen and that is, if Finnland doesn't leave the € zone, germany won't do it in a million years.
It is not that easy to get a picture of German politics if you can't read German, that's why I'm here. And yes, the political realities of Germany have become abundantly clear, in that they only promise more of the same. Still it's fun to talk about this stuff and one can always dream, right?
and there are plenty of others of basically every major german magazine/newspaper In the end people are not realy hyped about this election, becouse the outcome is (to a certain point) predictable. Even with a mediocre voter turn out of 70%+ people don't want a big change either.
The political partys just promise the same, becouse the majority of the people actually like that,
It is not that easy to get a picture of German politics if you can't read German, that's why I'm here. And yes, the political realities of Germany have become abundantly clear, in that they only promise more of the same. Still it's fun to talk about this stuff and one can always dream, right?
Indeed, and that last sentence was rather German of you. I rather adore Nietzsche's definition of the German soul:
The German soul has passages and galleries in it, there are caves, hiding-places, and dungeons therein, its disorder has much of the charm of the mysterious, the German is well acquainted with the bypaths to chaos. And as everything loves its symbol, so the German loves the clouds and all that is obscure, evolving, crepuscular, damp, and shrouded, it seems to him that everything uncertain, undeveloped, self-displacing, and growing is "deep". The German himself does not EXIST, he is BECOMING, he is "developing himself". "Development" is therefore the essentially German discovery and hit in the great domain of philosophical formulas,—a ruling idea, which, together with German beer and German music, is labouring to Germanise all Europe. Foreigners are astonished and attracted by the riddles which the conflicting nature at the basis of the German soul propounds to them (riddles which Hegel systematised and Richard Wagner has in the end set to music).
It is equally clear that whatever remained of that introspective German, more preoccupied with the paradoxes of his personal existence than with the infantising world of high politics after 1945, and which still survived the imbroglios of the sixties, will be destroyed by Europe and everything it represents. Germans are still that depth and richness when one can persuade them to speak of life beneath the upper world. Engaging a German student in conversation about literature or poetry or the religious mysteries is a vast, sublime delight. When speaking to Germans, one ought to avoid any missteps which might lead his tongue unto the high road of politics. Should he escape there, your dream will soon be shattered with the realisation that the deep and powerful thinker sitting before you is after all, a real idiot.
The political partys just promise the same, becouse the majority of the people actually like that,
That awkwardness of the electorate fits hand in glove with the neutered aspects of their political personality. Germans may be opinionated as they will, but are in the ordinary mortified at saying something stupid in public. In short, Germans are cautious speakers. So too in politics, the most respectable individuals defer their judgements to the opinions of specialists and experts. The German press is risk-averse and substitutes opinions with information. Germans feel most secure opening their mouths in fora where the majority of people are known as a fact to be less informed than they are (i.e. tl.net,) usually in the capacity of a benevolent pedagogue, "setting the facts straight," and so forth.
Beyond that, you will occasionally have 18 year-olds and college students mimicking some fairly ordinary ideals, the type of thing to be found at Miss America pageants: "I wish for world peace," and so forth. In all, the peaceful co-habitation between the vigorous inner ideal, and the bland outer conformity is a trait about Germany which is something of a national eccentricity. Frederick the Great's adage that "My people and I have come to an accord which satisfies us both. They are to say as they please, and I am to do as I please." can be applied to the modern generation of governance as well.
On August 24 2013 01:55 Dulak wrote: As the de facto leader of current europe, Germany has the duty to end this madness and lead the way.
It is a bit funny when people call Germany the 'leader of the Eurozone'. Germany has only 24% of the population and 27% of the GDP. Without serious support they can not lead anything. The 'Southerners' combined have more influence for example.
As the largest country with the deepest pockets it has all the influence it needs.
Why?
No votes are needed to give up the Euro. Germany can simply decide to leave and take the D-mark back. It is also in the best place financially to set a precedent. All you need is enough political will inside the country to make it happen. If you can't see how closely most of europe follows Germany's lead (maybe save for France and Italy as the two other economic "giants" in the eurozone) i don't know what to tell you. Don't sell yourselves short, Germany is in the driver's seat with France riding shotgun and the rest of us piping feebly in the back.
Your assertions are (mostly) correct. However, the german public has been fed with the ideal of a united Europe and the phrase Merkel said that "if the Euro fails, Europe fails", has led them to believe that we have to give up everything we have to save the Euro. Seriously, with the exception of a few, most people somehow believe that one or more of the following things will happen, if Germany takes the initiative to leave the Eurozone or implement a mechanism of devaluation:
1) the DM would increase exponentially and kill the german economy that relies on export (although they always ignore the fact that imported goods like oil, gas, resources and pre-assembled parts would equally become cheaper). 2) this act of leaving the other european nations behind would lead to political isolation and could result in taxation of german goods as one extreme (again the same line of reasoning that our export industry would suffer). 3) and, I kid you not, war (ridiculous to believe that).
And this atmosphere is supported by what I would call the political-media complex. Due to Germany's past, most germans tend to avoid trying to stand their ground, when it comes to hardship in EU politics and give in (most time with the cheques). And there is also the ideal of creating a european super-state, centralized, rendering the individual nations superfluous. And as far as I know, this is only fact in Germany. People from other EU countries I've met usually laugh at the idea to give up nationality and think of the EU as a partnership of convenience to regain some influence in the world. More in the line of a confederation and not of a sovereign state.
Of course the idea that the EU will disappear without the Euro is supreme idiocy. After all, the Euro may be the biggest threat to the EU of all time.
a lot of people who support the EU are doing so because they see it as the best option to get something that is allowed to rule itself again and does so in a way it's possible to stand up against the US and maybe China in the future.
Remember all the NSA stuff for example? People I talked to have the hope that with a stronger Europe, Europe at least would stop helping the US spy on their own (EU that is) people. That's at least what I'm getting at when I asked my friends about this stuff and their opinion. They're afraid that the single european countries, also including the "strong" players like Germany and France are meaningless and a mere playball in the hands of the likes of the US / China.
And I can understand that point of view, although I'd probably say it's naive, as I just don't see a "one big Europe" happening anytime soon.
Naive or not, this is the sole reason that i support a combined EU. At the moment the only EU country that is among the biggest 20 countries is Germany. In a few years (relatively speaking) when many of the emerging economies of Asia will have economies comparable Germany, France and UK and much larger populations, a split Europe will have zero political influence.
That being said i don't know if it is a good idea that Northern Europe share a currency with anything south of Germany.
Austria begs to differ!
Upon thinking I refuse to believe that all politician were so blinded by the European project that they thought a common currency without a somewhat streamlined economical policy would work. I think a lot of them were blinded by the huge leaps the european "unification" was making back then. (Remember Schengen? came about the same time[1995]). They simply expected it to be a continious process which would end in something like a "United states of Europe". But then those pesky French and Dutch wanted their democracy and they shot the Treaty about constitution for Europe down which hindered the whole unification process. I bet this crisis could have been handled a lot better if this treaty would have gone through. I guess the problem was that the political leaders were somewhat confused as what to do next when they didn't got their constitution through so the EU was like a half build ship where the next step was missing but necessary. Furthermore the problem of the GIIPS states was somewhere lingering but not urgent because the banks failed to properly account for the risks of them since they were € countries with an all in all stable economy. They failed to analyse that the south wasn't as stable as it seemed because it was covered by the north.
And so we are here now where most people see that it can't continue this way but are unsure where to make the next step. And don't expect any leadership from Merkel. She will decide exactly what the polls tell her.
When speaking to Germans, one ought to avoid any missteps which might lead his tongue unto the high road of politics. Should he escape there, your dream will soon be shattered with the realisation that the deep and powerful thinker sitting before you is after all, a real idiot.
Ha! Try talking about the "energiewende". you will enrage/become desperate faster than you can say "weather dependent".
The political partys just promise the same, becouse the majority of the people actually like that,
That awkwardness of the electorate fits hand in glove with the neutered aspects of their political personality. Germans may be opinionated as they will, but are in the ordinary mortified at saying something stupid in public. In short, Germans are cautious speakers. So too in politics, the most respectable individuals defer their judgements to the opinions of specialists and experts. The German press is risk-averse and substitutes opinions with information.
I am not sure, why you quoted me tbh. Would you enjoy a german Sarah Palin, or what? :D Yes, german politicians will try hard not to say something stupid or even things that are just opinions - and that is not a bad thing at all and should be like that in most countrys. What i am referring to , should be quite clear, why do experts exist in the first place? In the end noone is a omniscient, all knowing creature, but every decission in politcs should be made with the maximum amount of information, including opinions. Only a expert can bring that to the table.
On August 24 2013 10:14 MoltkeWarding wrote: Germans feel most secure opening their mouths in fora where the majority of people are known as a fact to be less informed than they are (i.e. tl.net,) usually in the capacity of a benevolent pedagogue, "setting the facts straight," and so forth.
I disagree, that i germans feel/act the way you describe them or better i think that is a sterotype. Actually i write in some other discussion about the elections with a much better informed audience - actually i feel the other way around, i like to discuss these things in fora (btw correct use of that plural, many forget the origin of the word). Please let us not discuss german stereotypes, it is utterly boring to hear these kinds of things over and over. I don't eat Kraut every day and i don't drink beer everyday either. I also find this stereotyp of the "benevolent pedagogue"/"exemplary student" quite annoying. Yes, i - and many fellow germans - try to correct things that are wrong, but that is the same with every other country as well. I'd also appreciate it if you would restrain yourself from using these kind of stereotypes, especially if they are not helping in a discussion.
On August 24 2013 10:14 MoltkeWarding wrote: Beyond that, you will occasionally have 18 year-olds and college students mimicking some fairly ordinary ideals, the type of thing to be found at Miss America pageants: "I wish for world peace," and so forth. In all, the peaceful co-habitation between the vigorous inner ideal, and the bland outer conformity is a trait about Germany which is something of a national eccentricity. Frederick the Great's adage that "My people and I have come to an accord which satisfies us both. They are to say as they please, and I am to do as I please." can be applied to the modern generation of governance as well.
I am not sure if this "trait" even exists, tbh. Yes the german youth is center left, but that is/was most of the youth in europe (esp. the south) and yes, the youth would like to have world peace - isn't that a good thing
The quote you used is btw. only attributed to Frederick II of Prussia, it is not recognized by germans and the meaning of it is explained here:
No monarch was less particular in maintaining his royal dignity. He commanded his attendants to take down from a high wall a scurrilous placard upon himself, which a crowd was trying to read, and put it where they could see it better. “My subjects and I,” Frederick said, “have come to an agreement which satisfies us both. They are to say what they please, and I am to do what I please.” He seems to have been more scrupulous in regard to his personal dignity.
On August 24 2013 18:43 Skilledblob wrote: pogo party :D
or was it APPD?
is was APPD - Anarchistic pogo party deutschland :D
not to forget the violets - seem harmless on the outside, have an intern cult structure very close to scientology ^^
grey panthers don`t exist anymore I think, but that was a smart name pun (It's old people fighting for old people's right, people's old enough to remember the black panthers ^^)
Also, NPD totally missing in OP, basicly nazi party of germany, never make it to bundestag, but got the most insane election posters. They always hang up the highest on street laterns and stuff, because otherwise people would just rip them down. My this year's personal favourite :"Money for Grandmummies, instead of sinti and romanies".
On August 24 2013 19:22 HaRuHi wrote: Also, NPD totally missing in OP, basicly nazi party of germany, never make it to bundestag, but got the most insane election posters. They always hang up the highest on street laterns and stuff, because otherwise people would just rip them down. My this year's personal favourite :"Money for Grandmummies, instead of sinti and romanies".
I always thought of that as a suggestion for what to do with their candidates.
On August 24 2013 18:32 legor wrote: Crytash, I always value your sophisticated opinion. If I may ask, how are you going to vote? MLPD again?
Ist it you Legorq? One of the best/worst Trolls there is in the german community:D ? Just read on DS.de and you can guess what i vote - and it is not left, nor did i ever voted that way.
On August 24 2013 10:14 MoltkeWarding wrote: In short, Germans are cautious speakers. So too in politics, the most respectable individuals defer their judgements to the opinions of specialists and experts. The German press is risk-averse and substitutes opinions with information.
But we agree that this is actually a good thing , right?
On August 24 2013 10:14 MoltkeWarding wrote: In short, Germans are cautious speakers. So too in politics, the most respectable individuals defer their judgements to the opinions of specialists and experts. The German press is risk-averse and substitutes opinions with information.
But we agree that this is actually a good thing , right?
I also find this stereotyp of the "benevolent pedagogue"/"exemplary student" quite annoying. Yes, i - and many fellow germans - try to correct things that are wrong, but that is the same with every other country as well. I'd also appreciate it if you would restrain yourself from using these kind of stereotypes, especially if they are not helping in a discussion.
It's quite silly to think of beer and kraut when attributing stereotypes to Germans. Beer and kraut are caricatures, whereas all stereotypes are true. For instance:
I also find this stereotyp of the "benevolent pedagogue" quite annoying.
i like to discuss these things in fora (btw correct use of that plural, many forget the origin of the word).
It takes a virgin eye to see it though.
But we agree that this is actually a good thing , right?
Eh, that kind of frivolous statement is something of an inkblot test. The frustrated will continue to be frustrated with the way things work, and the appeased will continue to congratulate themselves on the virtues of their society.
I'm still kinda undecided who to vote for. The "wahl-o-mat" (an online-tool to compare the positions of different parties) always gives me agreement-ratings that are usually between 55% and 65% for all major parties (though most of the time SPD/Left party/greens are higher and FDP lowest), and that's about how I feel. I don't feel good about voting for any big party; even though in case of the left-leaning parties I mentioned it's normally their style of politics/behavior/party-leaders that annoy me much more than their actual politics.
So I'm probably going to vote for the pirate party, because I feel that their topics and their principle to get "normal people"/party members more involved would be something good for germany in general to talk more about.
On the bright side, as I don't care too much about the results and there isn't too much tension about what could happen anyway, this is probably a good time to register a "Wahlhelfer", somebody who helps in organizing the election/counting votes etc. Last time I checked, my city still needed some of them.
I'm still kinda undecided who to vote for. The "wahl-o-mat" (an online-tool to compare the positions of different parties) always gives me agreement-ratings that are usually between 55% and 65% for all major parties (though most of the time SPD/Left party/greens are higher and FDP lowest), and that's about how I feel. I don't feel good about voting for any big party; even though in case of the left-leaning parties I mentioned it's normally their style of politics/behavior/party-leaders that annoy me much more than their actual politics.
So I'm probably going to vote for the pirate party, because I feel that their topics and their principle to get "normal people"/party members more involved would be something good for germany in general to talk more about.
On the bright side, as I don't care too much about the results and there isn't too much tension about what could happen anyway, this is probably a good time to register a "Wahlhelfer", somebody who helps in organizing the election/counting votes etc. Last time I checked, my city still needed some of them.
I do know these are two different parties, I simply wasn't sure what "party" meant in the context and thought he referred to Sonneborn (which obviously is a way funnier project than APPD). On a sidenote, if you're not in Bavaria (Landtagswahlen & Volksentscheide), the wahl-o-mat still won't work and doesn't test for every party (dunno what you meant there). There is an alternative called Bundewahlkompass, which doesn't help out either.
I'm still kinda undecided who to vote for. The "wahl-o-mat" (an online-tool to compare the positions of different parties) always gives me agreement-ratings that are usually between 55% and 65% for all major parties (though most of the time SPD/Left party/greens are higher and FDP lowest), and that's about how I feel. I don't feel good about voting for any big party; even though in case of the left-leaning parties I mentioned it's normally their style of politics/behavior/party-leaders that annoy me much more than their actual politics.
So I'm probably going to vote for the pirate party, because I feel that their topics and their principle to get "normal people"/party members more involved would be something good for germany in general to talk more about.
On the bright side, as I don't care too much about the results and there isn't too much tension about what could happen anyway, this is probably a good time to register a "Wahlhelfer", somebody who helps in organizing the election/counting votes etc. Last time I checked, my city still needed some of them.
I do know these are two different parties, I simply wasn't sure what "party" meant in the context and thought he referred to Sonneborn (which obviously is a way funnier project than APPD). On a sidenote, if you're not in Bavaria (Landtagswahlen & Volksentscheide), the wahl-o-mat still won't work and doesn't test for every party (dunno what you meant there). There is an alternative called Bundewahlkompass, which doesn't help out either.
There's a Wahl-o-mat for every region man, lol. Also, just to give those who are still confused an explanation about the goals of Die Partei:
The PARTEI refers to itself as a harbor for voters disappointed by other parties. It plans to engage in a (self-declared) "populist campaign" centering on
rebuilding the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain between east and west Germany, changing east Germany into an "SBZ", a "Sonderbewirtschaftungszone" (Special Economic Zone). East Germany had the same abbreviation between 1945 and 1949 when it was called "Sowjetische Besatzungszone" (Soviet Occupation Zone). a reform of the health insurance system a reduction in working hours along with the abolishment of the Hartz IV laws and others introduced by "the neoliberal Schröder regime" (as an alternative to the Agenda 2010) a new constitution discussed and ratified by the people (according to Artikel 146 German constitution).
Within the party an "Anti-constitutional-platform" was formed, in an attempt to force the German intelligence agency to surveil the party. The latter, however, refused to do so, considering the PARTEI a frivolous political party. The goals of the Anti-constitutional-platform:[2]
abolition of federalism a war of aggression against Liechtenstein in order to force democratization and abolish serfdom.[3] that the first article of the German constitution ("Human dignity is inviolable") be changed such that CEOs of certain TV channels would not possess human dignity.
And just for funsies:
The only program point that cannot even remotely be found in other parties' programm is the resurrection of the wall that once divided East and West Germany, something that, according to certain polls, some 20% of all Germans wish for.
Yes, I'm not stupid. However, the wahl-o-mat for next September will only 'start' on 29th. There are no other Landtagswahlen I'm aware of. Hence, if you only do it for the Bavaria edition, you'll get skewed results, because you'll a) not have the option to pick other parties or b) use outdated data.
I also find this stereotyp of the "benevolent pedagogue"/"exemplary student" quite annoying. Yes, i - and many fellow germans - try to correct things that are wrong, but that is the same with every other country as well. I'd also appreciate it if you would restrain yourself from using these kind of stereotypes, especially if they are not helping in a discussion.
It's quite silly to think of beer and kraut when attributing stereotypes to Germans. Beer and kraut are caricatures, whereas all stereotypes are true. For instance:
But we agree that this is actually a good thing , right?
Eh, that kind of frivolous statement is something of an inkblot test. The frustrated will continue to be frustrated with the way things work, and the appeased will continue to congratulate themselves on the virtues of their society.
Actually i drink beer and eat a lot of Kraut - omg they must be true! (false logic can always end up beeing right, but that is just random)
So what is your actual point anyway? Is there a real one? Else, just stay away from constructive discussion. Good day, Sir.
I also find this stereotyp of the "benevolent pedagogue"/"exemplary student" quite annoying. Yes, i - and many fellow germans - try to correct things that are wrong, but that is the same with every other country as well. I'd also appreciate it if you would restrain yourself from using these kind of stereotypes, especially if they are not helping in a discussion.
It's quite silly to think of beer and kraut when attributing stereotypes to Germans. Beer and kraut are caricatures, whereas all stereotypes are true. For instance:
But we agree that this is actually a good thing , right?
Eh, that kind of frivolous statement is something of an inkblot test. The frustrated will continue to be frustrated with the way things work, and the appeased will continue to congratulate themselves on the virtues of their society.
I'm just wondering, but what is your source of knowledge when it comes the German people?
There is a huge discrepancy between the numbers and the method to generate these results.
Last week AfD got 15% votes in a poll on bild.de with 760.000 participants!
Yesterday their leader "Bernd Lucke" even got attacked by several masked men while he was speaking in front of a crowd.
Some radical thinking people destroy their election poster, and attack and pressurize supporter / members of AfD and their family. These groups are often members of opposing parties and their leaders have not yet dissociated from them.
Yesterday their leader "Bernd Lucke" even got attacked by several masked men while he was speaking in front of a crowd.
Some radical thinking people destroy their election poster, and attack and pressurize supporter / members of AfD and their family. These groups are often members of opposing parties and their leaders have not yet dissociated from them.
its funny cause those attackers come from the left corner, people who call themselves fighers against facism etc etc
they are actively disturbing their right of free speech and are being totally ignorant. i dont have any sympathies for the AfD and of course never for the friggin nazi party npd. but those actions are unacceptable a wise man once said "when facism returns it wont say "i am the facism", it will say " i am the anti facism" "
On August 24 2013 19:22 HaRuHi wrote: Also, NPD totally missing in OP, basicly nazi party of germany, never make it to bundestag, but got the most insane election posters. They always hang up the highest on street laterns and stuff, because otherwise people would just rip them down. My this year's personal favourite :"Money for Grandmummies, instead of sinti and romanies".
I wanted to keep the introduction relevant to the federal elections. And the NPD really is a fringe party federally, with 1.6% being their highest outcome ever since the 1960s.
The National-Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) is the truest successor to the Third Reich Nazi Party that a democratic Germany would just allow to exist. Their program is primarily nationalistic, calling for Germany's exit from NATO and EU. They also don't recognize Germany's current borderline and call for a revision of particularly the Eastern border to extend Germany back to her pre-war area. They also have referred to Austria as German territory. The party runs a paperthinly veiled racist and antisemitic platform. Examples would be openly opposing the German national football team because of non-white players ("'White' - not just the color of the jersey") and aggressive propaganda against immigrants, particularly those from Turkey. They have a contradictory stance towards Islam, on the one hand feeding off anti-Islamic feelings within Germany on the other hand supporting Iran or the Palestinians in their struggle against Israel. There are numerous links between the NPD and various criminal, violent neo-nazi movements.
In 2001 the Schroeder administration sought to ban the NPD on grounds of their "open opposition to the constitution". The trial failed spectacularly when it was revealed that the party was widely undermined by informants and undercover agents of the German secret services, going as far as the heads of some of the party's state organizations. The Federal Constitutional Court stopped the trial because state informants in the NPD's inner circle made it impossible to tell how far the party's anti-constitutional direction was influenced by the state's undercover agents.
I'm still kinda undecided who to vote for. The "wahl-o-mat" (an online-tool to compare the positions of different parties) always gives me agreement-ratings that are usually between 55% and 65% for all major parties (though most of the time SPD/Left party/greens are higher and FDP lowest), and that's about how I feel. I don't feel good about voting for any big party; even though in case of the left-leaning parties I mentioned it's normally their style of politics/behavior/party-leaders that annoy me much more than their actual politics.
So I'm probably going to vote for the pirate party, because I feel that their topics and their principle to get "normal people"/party members more involved would be something good for germany in general to talk more about.
On the bright side, as I don't care too much about the results and there isn't too much tension about what could happen anyway, this is probably a good time to register a "Wahlhelfer", somebody who helps in organizing the election/counting votes etc. Last time I checked, my city still needed some of them.
I do know these are two different parties, I simply wasn't sure what "party" meant in the context and thought he referred to Sonneborn (which obviously is a way funnier project than APPD). On a sidenote, if you're not in Bavaria (Landtagswahlen & Volksentscheide), the wahl-o-mat still won't work and doesn't test for every party (dunno what you meant there). There is an alternative called Bundewahlkompass, which doesn't help out either.
I regularly check the wahlomat even for elections not in my state. Many questions there are not really state-specific at all, but even then I sometimes have an opinion, or I just skip them/vote "neutral". Also in the first post he only referred to one party (Pogo praty and APPD are the same), so then you answer started with "It's..." it doesnt look anywhere near obvious to me that you knew they were different.
I got to hand it to the NPD though. Their election posters are by far the most creative. "Maria instead of Scharia" Always good for a laugh. Like the party itself.
The Wahl-o-Mat is now available for the whole country Klick Have fun. Also there will be the main dabate between the two main candidates on September first. Will someone watch that?
On August 29 2013 19:17 Brot wrote: The Wahl-o-Mat is now available for the whole country Klick Have fun. Also there will be the main dabate between the two main candidates on September first. Will someone watch that?
you might want to wait with the wal-o-mat right now, I tried twice (yesterday at night, today in the morning) and got disconnected in both cases.
cdu/merkel win will . thats a thing we CANT change, the biggest other party spd has a candidat so faceless and bad that it really hurts and not a single mistake cdu does will be bad for merkel so even if we vote merkel will stay just to clarify that for the rest of the world but our stupid foreign minister will change perhaps ^^
On August 29 2013 19:17 Brot wrote: The Wahl-o-Mat is now available for the whole country Klick Have fun. Also there will be the main dabate between the two main candidates on September first. Will someone watch that?
well whal-o-mat is some funny with always giving me i should vote npd linke partei or something else extrem ... wtf xD
I just found I probably used the wahlomat "wrong": I used to click "neutral" whenever I didn't really have an opinion. Now i just "skip statement" instead, and suddenly the parties are much more separated, and ordered in the way I would have ordered them anyway. with noticeable differences between them.
11/38 NATO-Austritt Deutschland soll aus der NATO austreten.
Begründung der Partei [FDP]: „Die Frage ist nicht ernst gemeint, oder?”
Quite surprised I got Afd on second place with 72% but everything else as expected. I'm suprised it ended up that accurate to be honest.
Haha yeah I found that too. (For non-german speakers: The question is, should Germany leave the NATO? The answer of the liberal party is no with the reasoning "That wasn't a serious question, was it?").
I also have to say that my results were quite the way I expected them to be with also the AFD being second. It makes sence that their positions are a mix of liberal and conservative positions so they end up between FDP and CDU.
I also recommend to read the statements of "Die PARTEI" some of them are very funny.
i think pirates would get a lot of votes if everybody would just do it and vote for them :D i have a lot of friends with the same "i agree most with pirate... but who should i vote for? still not sure" :D
funny
but problem is the wight you give. that is what makes the difference
On August 30 2013 01:59 Garalor wrote: i think pirates would get a lot of votes if everybody would just do it and vote for them :D i have a lot of friends with the same "i agree most with pirate... but who should i vote for? still not sure" :D
funny
but problem is the wight you give. that is what makes the difference
it really is funny. They ended up being my third palce on 68% (FDP being first on 79% and Afd on a second place with 72%) and at the same time they're placing decently with all the other people as well, even if they've got completly different opinions, as you can see (comparing those with me):
On August 30 2013 00:50 Doppelganger wrote: Greens 86% Pirates Left SPD 74% [...]
On August 30 2013 01:32 Skilledblob wrote: 80% Left 76% Green 75% Pirates [...]
,which is varying a lot. Pirates simply end up on top spots for everyone
I would love to vote for The Left or the Pirates. Every other vote is for Merkel anyway.
If only they weren't such enormous monkeys. When I read their demands on the posters everywhere, I just don't feel like they have any connection to reality at all. For whom can I vote if I want actual social democracy?
On August 30 2013 03:13 Dyme wrote: I would love to vote for The Left or the Pirates. Every other vote is for Merkel anyway.
If only they weren't such enormous monkeys. When I read their demands on the posters everywhere, I just don't feel like they have any connection to reality at all. For whom can I vote if I want actual social democracy?
well, the thing is most CDU and SPD posters dont even have any demands on them. I have seen a lot of posters that just a have a name and nothing else. Or stupid shit like "modern, brave, bla bla".
On August 30 2013 03:13 Dyme wrote: I would love to vote for The Left or the Pirates. Every other vote is for Merkel anyway.
If only they weren't such enormous monkeys. When I read their demands on the posters everywhere, I just don't feel like they have any connection to reality at all. For whom can I vote if I want actual social democracy?
depends on what actual social democracy means for you. Every party in Germany wants that on paper (just some a little more and some a little less) except for the extremist ones I guess. If that's not enough of it for you and it's about making a sign you don't have to care about wether they make sense when put in a position to rule to begin with because that won't happen anyways. So in that case you're perfectly fine to vote Left or Pirates and ignore that part because it's only about the statement for you anyways.
First and only "tv-duel" of merkel and steinbrück starting in a few minutes. I don't expect too much, as imho you can't win on your own, you need your opponent to slip. And both should be too professional for that to happen.
Kinda shows the silliniss/dilemma of many media, they try as it is in their interest to make people watch it, but on the other hand everyone knows merkel will get reelected anyway. So if they claim stuff like "this is a decisive factor" or "the race is finally starting", they in some some way skew reality towards steinbrück (and I say this as someone who would rather see him, or well, his party reign than merkel),
Stefan Raab (Comedian) was moderator on the "Tv-Duell" and won it for me.
He asked Steinbrück (SPD candidate) what the people have to vote if they want to keep Merkel as chancelor and him as vc or minister in a big coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU, because actually this would be a very good outcome for most germans (me included). Steinbrück declined a "big coalition" Raab asked him if he wants to "rule himself as the King of Kotlett or do nothing, even if in all positions both parties mostly agree" Steinbrück said yes.
Both big parties (SPD, CDU/CSU) want -Stable energy costs -more Wind/Solar -Less coal/gas -No Atomicenergy past 2020 or sth. -Wealth for everyon who earns it -=More Work, more money -better Education, and equal education -More Peace -Stable Euro -No more debts -No more foreign wars -No more economy crysis caused by Banks -better healtcare for everyone -Fair payment for work in needed social fields because of demographic change (more old people need care etc.) -No espionage on every citizen (CDU Gov lets NSA unpunished, SPD desperately wants "vorratsdatenspeicherung", so both lie in that point)
And they are not even far away from each other in the means to achieve theses goals. So what really grinds my gears is, that Steinbrück refuses a big coalition.
Problem : CDU/CSU can´t rule alone and FDP is too weak SPD/Grüne would go together but might fail.
Also the Grüne is obsolete because the big parties have made Energy and Enviroment plans of their own.
That might just be Steinbrück saying he doesn't want to do Commander Riker's job. I think that's fair and should be his choice to make. This doesn't mean SPD won't go into a coalition. It's really not important what Steinbrück does if it's CDU+SPD coalition.
I do vote for the Left(DieLINKE) no doubt. Gregor Gysi such a charismatic Person with much Emotion. But thats not the Main reason. The Left want to remove Hartz4(which does violate basic law) and replace it with Sanction free basic income.All who say this promotes all lazy people...Yes but this is a minority. What about the 55 Year old Person who drops out of his Work after 35 Years of Work? is he Lazy? just a heads up...And the 2nd Part i liek the Left is they want to FORBID subcontracted labor which is nothing else then Modern slavery....Germany needs to be strong again, and promote good Payment for Hard work! Also why we are in Afghanistan? in Kosovo? in Turkey? we should retreat The Bundeswehr out of all conflict areas...
What the left want does always sound kinda nice, problem is, they can't pay for what they promise (for the most part) and just tell what people want to hear, sadly it works for some people. This election period is kinda sad for me, I really don't feel like there is gonna be a change either way. With CDU (Merkel) u will just get the same as always and SPD is just a shadow of its former self. Even the people i vote for (Green) are doing some stuff i cant agree to. This election period just doesn't look promising for any real "change".
*edit* I edited this post just for fun so zatic is happy. i feel that this was one of the worst reasons for a warning ever given on tl.
On September 03 2013 23:57 {ToT}ColmA wrote: what the left wants always sounds kinda nice, problem is they cant pay for shit and just promise what people want to hear, sadly it works for some people. this election period is kinda sad for me, u really dont feel like there is gonna be a change either way, with cdu (merkel) u ll just get the same shit and spd is just a shadow of its former self. even the people i vote for (green) are doing some retarded shit, its just all seems so pointless for me.
I stopped Reading when u said u vote Green...Sorry but how can u vote for such idiots?...
Basic income would probably work, but I don't think that's actually what the left wants. The left probably wants everyone to have a job and work, right? The basic income idea is about reorganizing everything about taxes. It's using zero income tax. The funds are coming from somewhere else. It's so that paying for everyone's basic income isn't tied at all to who has a job and who doesn't. That just doesn't sound like the left, more like the FDP and Grüne.
On September 03 2013 23:57 {ToT}ColmA wrote: what the left wants always sounds kinda nice, problem is they cant pay for shit and just promise what people want to hear, sadly it works for some people. this election period is kinda sad for me, u really dont feel like there is gonna be a change either way, with cdu (merkel) u ll just get the same shit and spd is just a shadow of its former self. even the people i vote for (green) are doing some retarded shit, its just all seems so pointless for me.
The German left party includes several wings. Most of the realistic politicians come from the former GDR. They try to follow a pragmatic course. But from the beginning, the party also have a vocal communist platform which promotes far-left ideas. The left party was created by a union of the former PDS and a new west german leftist party, which brought new left weirdos in.
Pro tip: Any mention of the word "shit" cuts 10% of your postings strength.
On September 03 2013 23:49 quaZa wrote: I do vote for the Left(DieLINKE) no doubt. Gregor Gysi such a charismatic Person with much Emotion. But thats not the Main reason. The Left want to remove Hartz4(which does violate basic law) and replace it with Sanction free basic income.All who say this promotes all lazy people...Yes but this is a minority. What about the 55 Year old Person who drops out of his Work after 35 Years of Work? is he Lazy? just a heads up...And the 2nd Part i liek the Left is they want to FORBID subcontracted labor which is nothing else then Modern slavery....Germany needs to be strong again, and promote good Payment for Hard work! Also why we are in Afghanistan? in Kosovo? in Turkey? we should retreat The Bundeswehr out of all conflict areas...
Just my 2 cents.
to be honest... I respect your decision to vote the Linke... this is democracy after all.. but the problem is still that the party never, in no way removed their old SED party members... My wifes grandpa was improsened by this regime for speaking his mind and because he was a former member of the Zentrums party before the war... he endured 20 years of torture and pain and got out broken and without a mind left. and the people that accused him falsely of being an enemy of the state go unpunished unitl this day and are members of the linken party... so to be honest: I don't exept this party no matter how good their actual program is.
We got all the writings while he was interogated by the stasi, and the people that accused him are blacked out, so we can't have any jurisdiction against them, so they are sitll free, and they are still active in politics...
And this agenda by the linken: hey we are the good guys.. brabra Alll I want to say to them is: Before you judge others.. go ahead and bring the guys to justice that did horrible, horrible crimes against humanity in the DDR...
On September 03 2013 22:40 plgElwood wrote: Stefan Raab (Comedian) was moderator on the "Tv-Duell" and won it for me.
He asked Steinbrück (SPD candidate) what the people have to vote if they want to keep Merkel as chancelor and him as vc or minister in a big coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU, because actually this would be a very good outcome for most germans (me included). Steinbrück declined a "big coalition" Raab asked him if he wants to "rule himself as the King of Kotlett or do nothing, even if in all positions both parties mostly agree" Steinbrück said yes.
Both big parties (SPD, CDU/CSU) want -Stable energy costs -more Wind/Solar -Less coal/gas -No Atomicenergy past 2020 or sth. -Wealth for everyon who earns it -=More Work, more money -better Education, and equal education -More Peace -Stable Euro -No more debts -No more foreign wars -No more economy crysis caused by Banks -better healtcare for everyone -Fair payment for work in needed social fields because of demographic change (more old people need care etc.) -No espionage on every citizen (CDU Gov lets NSA unpunished, SPD desperately wants "vorratsdatenspeicherung", so both lie in that point)
And they are not even far away from each other in the means to achieve theses goals. So what really grinds my gears is, that Steinbrück refuses a big coalition.
Problem : CDU/CSU can´t rule alone and FDP is too weak SPD/Grüne would go together but might fail.
Also the Grüne is obsolete because the big parties have made Energy and Enviroment plans of their own.
The last grand coalition between Union and SPD went catastrophically for the SPD, and she still hasn't recovered from it. It would be next to suicide for the party to agree to another grand coalition under a Merkel administration. If I were in Steinbruecks team I would actually worry about getting results just a bit too good on the 22nd, and be forced into another coalition with the Union by public pressure.
On September 03 2013 22:40 plgElwood wrote: Stefan Raab (Comedian) was moderator on the "Tv-Duell" and won it for me.
He asked Steinbrück (SPD candidate) what the people have to vote if they want to keep Merkel as chancelor and him as vc or minister in a big coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU, because actually this would be a very good outcome for most germans (me included). Steinbrück declined a "big coalition" Raab asked him if he wants to "rule himself as the King of Kotlett or do nothing, even if in all positions both parties mostly agree" Steinbrück said yes.
Both big parties (SPD, CDU/CSU) want -Stable energy costs -more Wind/Solar -Less coal/gas -No Atomicenergy past 2020 or sth. -Wealth for everyon who earns it -=More Work, more money -better Education, and equal education -More Peace -Stable Euro -No more debts -No more foreign wars -No more economy crysis caused by Banks -better healtcare for everyone -Fair payment for work in needed social fields because of demographic change (more old people need care etc.) -No espionage on every citizen (CDU Gov lets NSA unpunished, SPD desperately wants "vorratsdatenspeicherung", so both lie in that point)
And they are not even far away from each other in the means to achieve theses goals. So what really grinds my gears is, that Steinbrück refuses a big coalition.
Problem : CDU/CSU can´t rule alone and FDP is too weak SPD/Grüne would go together but might fail.
Also the Grüne is obsolete because the big parties have made Energy and Enviroment plans of their own.
The last grand coalition between Union and SPD went catastrophically for the SPD, and she still hasn't recovered from it. It would be next to suicide for the party to agree to another grand coalition under a Merkel administration. If I were in Steinbruecks team I would actually worry about getting results just a bit too good on the 22nd, and be forced into another coalition with the Union by public pressure.
Maybe we as the voters should worry less about the fate of parties and more about the issues. If the SPD would shrink again, but delivers good results, they served the people. I still think this is what parties should do.
jsut a few days left and i still dont know who to vote for. i did the wahlomat and others stuff. i still dont know. propably because most partys are "unvoteable" in my eyes.
On September 04 2013 00:08 MuMeise wrote: but the problem is still that the Linke never, in no way removed their old SED party members...
While I sympathize with your personal story, you have to realize that this is a disproportionate demand.
There were thousands of Stasi members, even more informants and millions of SED members in the GDR. It might be hard to accept but these people did not just disappear over night. It is a fact of life that these people are now members in every party (except the Greens). Hell, CDU is actually the worst in this, they just took over the east CDU in '89 without any real checkup of these block party members till this day. (Ever red on Gauck's activity when he was a pastor reporting to his Stasi contact?)
I am just saying, there are hundreds of ex-SED still in politics (not just in the Linke), just like there were thousands of ex-NSDAP in leading positions in the sixties.
You´ll just have to wait till they all died. Assuming that would be arround 2050.
Can´t root them out of every party. Also there is no general agenda "you worked for Stasi or had SED membership" so you are still bad and anti-democratic. Some were forced, some did it for family and career, some for power and money, and some because they actually believed in socialism. Politicians are mostly opportunistic. They say the right things at the right place and time, and they switch around what they think is "right", dependent of who they talk to. If they ever get into a position to change something they have to check what can be done and what they want to do according to their prior mindset.
Take Obama...he wanted to change the World, and changed himself because he could not do the things he wanted, even if i really believe he wanted to.
You got to ask yourself who is in power. And it´s non voted bureaucrats and lobbyists. They don´t change. They work in every ministry, for every poltician, for every parlament.
Take the "Dronen-Desaster" in wich the german ministry of defense sticked to a 500Million-Project for decades, even if it was not viable from the first day. The "Euro Hawk Drone" was never supposed to have an automated colition prevention system WICH IS 100% necessary to get allowence for flying over Europe. There was a closing of mid european air space to transfer it from the US. Still under changing secretaries of defense and changing governments the project was worked on and continued never reviewed or asked, because the secretary of defense and therefore the government only has a weekly meeting with his staff....and "Eurohawk" was put on the agenda under "Other" and so the current secretary did not even knew about it for a long time.
Same goes for education, traffic, safety....there are people, in high positions who have their "weisungsgebundene" minions. And those people ARE NOT VOTED FOR they are grey, nobody knows their names. And nobody cares. And stil they have more influence under lazy secretarys who rather kiss some kids in front of cameras, visit some conflict zone instead of managing all the projects in their department ( what they are for ).
On September 03 2013 22:40 plgElwood wrote: Stefan Raab (Comedian) was moderator on the "Tv-Duell" and won it for me.
He asked Steinbrück (SPD candidate) what the people have to vote if they want to keep Merkel as chancelor and him as vc or minister in a big coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU, because actually this would be a very good outcome for most germans (me included). Steinbrück declined a "big coalition" Raab asked him if he wants to "rule himself as the King of Kotlett or do nothing, even if in all positions both parties mostly agree" Steinbrück said yes.
Both big parties (SPD, CDU/CSU) want -Stable energy costs -more Wind/Solar -Less coal/gas -No Atomicenergy past 2020 or sth. -Wealth for everyon who earns it -=More Work, more money -better Education, and equal education -More Peace -Stable Euro -No more debts -No more foreign wars -No more economy crysis caused by Banks -better healtcare for everyone -Fair payment for work in needed social fields because of demographic change (more old people need care etc.) -No espionage on every citizen (CDU Gov lets NSA unpunished, SPD desperately wants "vorratsdatenspeicherung", so both lie in that point)
And they are not even far away from each other in the means to achieve theses goals. So what really grinds my gears is, that Steinbrück refuses a big coalition.
Problem : CDU/CSU can´t rule alone and FDP is too weak SPD/Grüne would go together but might fail.
Also the Grüne is obsolete because the big parties have made Energy and Enviroment plans of their own.
The last grand coalition between Union and SPD went catastrophically for the SPD, and she still hasn't recovered from it. It would be next to suicide for the party to agree to another grand coalition under a Merkel administration. If I were in Steinbruecks team I would actually worry about getting results just a bit too good on the 22nd, and be forced into another coalition with the Union by public pressure.
Maybe we as the voters should worry less about the fate of parties and more about the issues. If the SPD would shrink again, but delivers good results, they served the people. I still think this is what parties should do.
Even looking from that perspective, what could the SPD possibly hope to accomplish in a Merkel-led coalition? Merkel would probably yield a compromise on minimum wage to the SPD, but that's about it. She certainly won't take back anything from the previous years (tax breaks, kitchen premium, much less even Hartz4), and on Euro-crisis issues she won't give the SPD anything substantial either. Would that coalition really be the SPD representing their voter's will?
Just filled out my voting papers (I always go for voting by mail) and broke out in laughter again about the FDP, with their local candidate being an Apothecary. Perfectly summarizes this party's hubris...
On September 04 2013 18:46 baummonster wrote: Just filled out my voting papers (I always go for voting by mail) and broke out in laughter again about the FDP, with their local candidate being an Apothecary. Perfectly summarizes this party's hubris...
Because every Apothecary is a secret criminal who only wants to sell his poisened medicine for high prices and does not care for people at all. Thats perfectly seems to summarize the view of left parties in germany about them, at least thats my impression when I hear them talk,... well I hope you didnt mean it like that
And also regarding the "kitchen premium": Its ridicolous that you (not the person i quoted, someone in general) think a woman will not go working any more and be binded to the kitchen just because she gets this little piece of cache (in comparison what she can get by working). People who argue like that are the real sexists in my opinion because they think that the woman will make such a decision for that amount of money. I also am against the Betreuungsgeld for different reasons, but the argument that it will somehow destroy the emanzipation is just stupid in my view.
On September 04 2013 00:33 Tppz! wrote: jsut a few days left and i still dont know who to vote for. i did the wahlomat and others stuff. i still dont know. propably because most partys are "unvoteable" in my eyes.
vote for the left, like me
despite of their history, despite of utopic ideas. just to put yourself behind the words "Nie wieder Krieg" (war - never again)
To be honest most local politicians are an embarassment. My local SPD candidate has the slogan "more weight in berlin" because he is fat.
on die Linke topic I respect them for not changing their opinion every 2 seconds but if they ever get voted into power I will consider armed rebellion.
On September 04 2013 20:55 Yuljan wrote: To be honest most local politicians are an embarassment. My local SPD candidate has the slogan "more weight in berlin" because he is fat.
on die Linke topic I respect them for not changing their opinion every 2 seconds but if they ever get voted into power I will consider armed rebellion.
On September 04 2013 20:55 Yuljan wrote: To be honest most local politicians are an embarassment. My local SPD candidate has the slogan "more weight in berlin" because he is fat.
on die Linke topic I respect them for not changing their opinion every 2 seconds but if they ever get voted into power I will consider armed rebellion.
On September 04 2013 20:55 Yuljan wrote: To be honest most local politicians are an embarassment. My local SPD candidate has the slogan "more weight in berlin" because he is fat.
on die Linke topic I respect them for not changing their opinion every 2 seconds but if they ever get voted into power I will consider armed rebellion.
On September 04 2013 21:16 mathemagician1986 wrote: according to wahlomat I should be voting for FDP in the bavarian election, and for Grüne in the big election. This doesn't seem very logical to me...
If you take a step back from looking at some of the details, both are liberal.
On September 04 2013 18:46 baummonster wrote: Just filled out my voting papers (I always go for voting by mail) and broke out in laughter again about the FDP, with their local candidate being an Apothecary. Perfectly summarizes this party's hubris...
Because every Apothecary is a secret criminal who only wants to sell his poisened medicine for high prices and does not care for people at all. Thats perfectly seems to summarize the view of left parties in germany about them, at least thats my impression when I hear them talk,... well I hope you didnt mean it like that
No, I laughed at the combination of someone from the liberal party, which by definition wants to reduce federal regulations to a minimum, who is actually working in one of (if not the) most regulated markets in all of Germany. Which raises the question on what exactly he would like to accomplish. Either he follows his party's political agenda and tries to push regulations back, which lead to a moral contradiction because such changes would eventually diminish his own work and therefor his social/financial safety. Or he doesn't, but then he wouldn't be liberal at all. So no matter the outcome, he just doesn't seem like the right guy for the job
On September 03 2013 22:40 plgElwood wrote: Stefan Raab (Comedian) was moderator on the "Tv-Duell" and won it for me.
He asked Steinbrück (SPD candidate) what the people have to vote if they want to keep Merkel as chancelor and him as vc or minister in a big coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU, because actually this would be a very good outcome for most germans (me included). Steinbrück declined a "big coalition" Raab asked him if he wants to "rule himself as the King of Kotlett or do nothing, even if in all positions both parties mostly agree" Steinbrück said yes.
Both big parties (SPD, CDU/CSU) want -Stable energy costs -more Wind/Solar -Less coal/gas -No Atomicenergy past 2020 or sth. -Wealth for everyon who earns it -=More Work, more money -better Education, and equal education -More Peace -Stable Euro -No more debts -No more foreign wars -No more economy crysis caused by Banks -better healtcare for everyone -Fair payment for work in needed social fields because of demographic change (more old people need care etc.) -No espionage on every citizen (CDU Gov lets NSA unpunished, SPD desperately wants "vorratsdatenspeicherung", so both lie in that point)
And they are not even far away from each other in the means to achieve theses goals. So what really grinds my gears is, that Steinbrück refuses a big coalition.
Problem : CDU/CSU can´t rule alone and FDP is too weak SPD/Grüne would go together but might fail.
Also the Grüne is obsolete because the big parties have made Energy and Enviroment plans of their own.
The last grand coalition between Union and SPD went catastrophically for the SPD, and she still hasn't recovered from it. It would be next to suicide for the party to agree to another grand coalition under a Merkel administration. If I were in Steinbruecks team I would actually worry about getting results just a bit too good on the 22nd, and be forced into another coalition with the Union by public pressure.
Maybe we as the voters should worry less about the fate of parties and more about the issues. If the SPD would shrink again, but delivers good results, they served the people. I still think this is what parties should do.
Even looking from that perspective, what could the SPD possibly hope to accomplish in a Merkel-led coalition? Merkel would probably yield a compromise on minimum wage to the SPD, but that's about it. She certainly won't take back anything from the previous years (tax breaks, kitchen premium, much less even Hartz4), and on Euro-crisis issues she won't give the SPD anything substantial either. Would that coalition really be the SPD representing their voter's will?
They have to do that or accept red-red-green. Everyone knows that SPD and Grüne will not get enough votes to elect Peer Steinbrück als Kanzler.
This week will be the last during which nation wide polls on the election will be published. There is no law for this, but (I believe) all polling institutes decided to not publish anything 2 weeks or closer to the election after the 2005 disaster. + Show Spoiler [2005] +
On the eve of the 2005 election every institute predicted a comfortable lead of 7-9% for the Union. A prediction that turned out way off: On election night Union and SPD were as equal as it gets, both exiting polls at 34%.
What happened over the past 6 months of campaigning in terms of polls and predictions:
Union and SPD more or less unchanged at around 40% and 25%, respectively.
As many had expected, the FDP recovered and is just above the 5% threshold again at 5-6%
Greens are the big losers of this campaign, dropping to as low as 9%, down from a safe 15% when campaigning started
The Left gained ground, and is in fact in the best shape they have been since their drop after the 2009 election: 7-9%
Pirates remain unchanged at around 2-3%
Similarly, the AfD remained at around 3% since their founding 5 months ago.
However, as the 2005 incident showed, polling as been more and more unreliable in national elections. At this point, the result is as open as it was 6 months ago: Angel Merkel will be chancellor, but what coalition will support her administration is still entirely open. Possible options:
Union + FDP: The current majority coalition. However it is unlikely that they will get this majority again in two weeks. Union + SPD: The "grand coalition": Definitely would be enough, but the SPD has still not even recovered from their last grand coalition. Doubtful they would agree to it again. SPD + Greens: Not going to happen. SPD + Left + Greens: Unlikely, as the SPD has ruled out any cooperation with the Left nationally SPD + FDP + Greens: The "traffic light" coalition. Unlikely as especially the Greens and the FDP maintain a healthy hate towards each other, despite their programs overlapping in parts. Union + FDP + Greens: The "Jamaica" coalition: Even more unlikely than the "traffic light", for the same reason. Union + Greens: Yet even more unlikely as there is still little common ground between conservatives and greens, and much ideologically grounded aversion.
In the end, it might come down to the grand coalition as the only viable option. This would put the SPD in a terrible situation, as they have very little to gain from being part of an administration under Merkel's heel. They might be forced into it regardless though if it really turns out to be the only way to form a majority.
Of course, another possibility would be a Merkel minority administration, however that is something entirely new to federal elections and very unusual in German politics in general. Since Germany's parliament doesn't have a whip concept comparable to other countries it is often hard enough for the administration to get their majority in line.
On September 12 2013 20:15 zatic wrote: Where we are two weeks to election
This week will be the last during which nation wide polls on the election will be published. There is no law for this, but (I believe) all polling institutes decided to not publish anything 2 weeks or closer to the election after the 2005 disaster. + Show Spoiler [2005] +
On the eve of the 2005 election every institute predicted a comfortable lead of 7-9% for the Union. A prediction that turned out way off: On election night Union and SPD were as equal as it gets, both exiting polls at 34%.
What happened over the past 6 months of campaigning in terms of polls and predictions:
Union and SPD more or less unchanged at around 40% and 25%, respectively.
As many had expected, the FDP recovered and is just above the 5% threshold again at 5-6%
Greens are the big losers of this campaign, dropping to as low as 9%, down from a safe 15% when campaigning started
The Left gained ground, and is in fact in the best shape they have been since their drop after the 2009 election: 7-9%
Pirates remain unchanged at around 2-3%
Similarly, the AfD remained at around 3% since their founding 5 months ago.
However, as the 2005 incident showed, polling as been more and more unreliable in national elections. At this point, the result is as open as it was 6 months ago: Angel Merkel will be chancellor, but what coalition will support her administration is still entirely open. Possible options:
Union + FDP: The current majority coalition. However it is unlikely that they will get this majority again in two weeks. Union + SPD: The "grand coalition": Definitely would be enough, but the SPD has still not even recovered from their last grand coalition. Doubtful they would agree to it again. SPD + Greens: Not going to happen. SPD + Left + Greens: Unlikely, as the SPD has ruled out any cooperation with the Left nationally SPD + FDP + Greens: The "traffic light" coalition. Unlikely as especially the Greens and the FDP maintain a healthy hate towards each other, despite their programs overlapping in parts. Union + FDP + Greens: The "Jamaica" coalition: Even more unlikely than the "traffic light", for the same reason. Union + Greens: Yet even more unlikely as there is still little common ground between conservatives and greens, and much ideologically grounded aversion.
In the end, it might come down to the grand coalition as the only viable option. This would put the SPD in a terrible situation, as they have very little to gain from being part of an administration under Merkel's heel. They might be forced into it regardless though if it really turns out to be the only way to form a majority.
Of course, another possibility would be a Merkel minority administration, however that is something entirely new to federal elections and very unusual in German politics in general. Since Germany's parliament doesn't have a whip concept comparable to other countries it is often hard enough for the administration to get their majority in line.
Nice summary but you are missing the 2nd or 3rd most likely outcome: new elections.
You are right that in a great coalition the SPD will be the looser for almost sure. It would lower their chances 2017 massively and maybe in the next election Merkel will not candidate which would increase the chances a lot for the SPD. But within a great coalition they would always get the bad end.
Which led new elections to a relative high chances in the following scenario: It´s not enough for Union + FDP but not enough for SPD + Gruene either. Naturally and historically a great coalition comes out of these situations but if the SPD refuses to do that from the reasons mentioned there are 2 realistic options left:
A minority goverment or new elections
The minority goverment would only work for the SPD+Gruene with the help of "Die Linke (lefts)". It would work in a way that SPD+Gruen dont have enough votes in the parlament to make it by them selfs but Die Linke gives them their votes without coalating with them. But all of them had refused to do that. Union don´t have that option because there is just no one that could help.
New elections are a possibility, but a remote one. The way to new elections goes through several rounds of electing the chancellor, and ultimately is the decision of the president.
Essentially the president has to decide if a minority government or new elections will happen after parliament fails to elect a chancellor with absolute majority. I find it a very unlikely outcome, especially since it is not definite at all if the new elections will solve the coalition mess or make it even worse.
As Bleakill said, a SPD-greens minority government is highly unlikely, but not completely impossible. At least to me it seems to be more probable than a CDU(+FDP) minority government; all other parties would basically loose their face if they were doing anything supportive of the CDU or the FDP especially. It think that if the current coalition doesn't get the majority again, a lot of things can happen. A grand coalition is imho still the most probable outcome, but I don't feel -contrary than before previous elections- that it would be inavoidable or "without altenatives". Probably it still is, however.
I love how all the big contradictions - which makes a coaliton seemingly impossible - between the union and the greens are all outside of environmental topics. Does that mean that a non-left-wring pro-environmental German government is impossible?
Anyways, looking forward to how the pirates will fare. If by some chance they do manage to get into the parlament, it will make things even messier.
On September 03 2013 23:57 {ToT}ColmA wrote: What the left want does always sound kinda nice, problem is, they can't pay for what they promise (for the most part) [...]
The other parties obviously don't know how to either - and how their concepts work out we already have proof of (looking at the ever increasing national debt).
On September 04 2013 20:55 Yuljan wrote: on die Linke topic I respect them for not changing their opinion every 2 seconds but if they ever get voted into power I will consider armed rebellion.
On August 30 2013 05:59 Mandalor wrote: There's only so much you can put on a poster. They're all dumb
Yeah, well, last time die Linke overdid it slightly.
"Reichtum für alle" vs. "Die Reichtum besteuern" (wealth for all vs. taxes on the wealth(y))
Well, not all posters are directed at everyone. A politically informed subject will consider them dumb, but a vast part of the population does not actively search for information, and they are the persons who carry the slogans to the regular's tables (Stammtischen) where the debates are led a little different than in other parts of the population. At least that's my explanation for some aggravatingly stupid slogans.^^
Regarding "taxes on the wealthy": Who else to tax? The poor don't have it (we can't take it there) and the middle class is getting smaller and smaller and already paying dearly. "Some" (anecdotal basis here) rich people would rather pay more taxes than renting apartments in working class districts "to lay low when the shit hits the fan" - that's something an acquaintance told me at least, I can't speak for the rich.
On August 30 2013 03:13 Dyme wrote: I would love to vote for The Left or the Pirates. Every other vote is for Merkel anyway.
If only they weren't such enormous monkeys. When I read their demands on the posters everywhere, I just don't feel like they have any connection to reality at all. For whom can I vote if I want actual social democracy?
The posters might not be directed at you (see my theory above), I think they are a struggle in a different arena. Regarding social democracy: I see it this way: Getting die Linke into a coalition would just result in an influence, as they are only a minor part in a coalition. If their influence pulled the system enough towards what "social" stands for you, you could still vote something different next election. Four years is not a very long time where a minor influence can possibly go overboard and result in a planned economy or whatever someone might fear. I would love to vote individual resorts! The Pirates as a very specialised party could have their place, our system is not very much tailored towards specialism :\
I read some interesting article (German), written by the Financial Times Deutschland's founder Wolfgang Münchau, where he states die Linke and (to a lesser extent but still valid) die Grünen have the most intelligent analysis of the economical crisis. I studied social economics and was mostly flabbergasted by what the Merkel administration was doing, so getting confirmation from someone who I'd consider being biased towards "the other side" was good for my own sanity....
Bavaria just went full Bavaria... so an absolute majority for CSU in Bavaria, could mean that now some will give their votes to the FDP instead in one week. Lets see.
Die Partei has got some nice humour, on the question to implement a general Autobahn speedlimit or not they answered: "The Führer would turn in his grave."
On September 17 2013 09:34 Daumen wrote: Just did the Wahl-o-Mat test, my 3 closest friends and me had most similarities to Die Partei,funny enough:O
I believe they said somewhere that they try to "solve" the Wahl-o-Mat. I don't know if that is even possible, but from what I hear they score high with both many lefties and righties, so maybe they figured it out^^
Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
If he'd only be in another party though :/.
EDIT: I obviously don't fully agree with him, I actually disagree often with him, but I think some of the bigger parties could benefit from some of his viewpoints. Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
Will be funny to see what happens. The 3 most likely options are probably 1. CDU+FDP 2. CDU+SPD 3. SPD+Grüne+Linke
hoping for the 3rd option, thinking it will be a the 2nd.
This boggles my mind. I didn't come to Germany from an "ex"-communist country, just to have the questionable "pleasure" to be governed by other "communists"...
Also, I can promise you that if SPD+Grüne+Linke form the governement, Die Linke will fulfill its current agenda exactly as well as FDP fulfilled their agenda in this term... The only thing that might happen is that they could enact a minimum wage. Even then, the consensus those parties would meet will probably be similar to the consensus SPD and CDU had about the VAT (Mehrwertsteuer) during the grand coalition (SPD - no raise in VAT (16%) + CDU - raise to 18% = consensus: raise to 19% -.-). Meaning: I'd be surprises if they actually raised the minimal wage above €8/h.
Will be funny to see what happens. The 3 most likely options are probably 1. CDU+FDP 2. CDU+SPD 3. SPD+Grüne+Linke
hoping for the 3rd option, thinking it will be a the 2nd.
This boggles my mind. I didn't come to Germany from an "ex"-communist country, just to have the questionable "pleasure" to be governed by other "communists"...
Also, I can promise you that if SPD+Grüne+Linke form the governement, Die Linke will fulfill its current agenda exactly as well as FDP fulfilled their agenda in this term... The only thing that might happen is that they could enact a minimum wage. Even then, the consensus those parties would meet will probably be similar to the consensus SPD and CDU had about the VAT (Mehrwertsteuer) during the grand coalition (SPD - no raise in VAT (16%) + CDU - raise to 18% = consensus: raise to 19% -.-). Meaning: I'd be surprises if they actually raised the minimal wage above €8/h.
Most people wouldn't even want them to hold their promises and the mighty people in the SPD either always dodge the question or straight out say that they will never coalate with the lefts in the bundestag, so don't worry, that will never happen.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Will be funny to see what happens. The 3 most likely options are probably 1. CDU+FDP 2. CDU+SPD 3. SPD+Grüne+Linke
hoping for the 3rd option, thinking it will be a the 2nd.
This boggles my mind. I didn't come to Germany from an "ex"-communist country, just to have the questionable "pleasure" to be governed by other "communists"...
Also, I can promise you that if SPD+Grüne+Linke form the governement, Die Linke will fulfill its current agenda exactly as well as FDP fulfilled their agenda in this term... The only thing that might happen is that they could enact a minimum wage. Even then, the consensus those parties would meet will probably be similar to the consensus SPD and CDU had about the VAT (Mehrwertsteuer) during the grand coalition (SPD - no raise in VAT (16%) + CDU - raise to 18% = consensus: raise to 19% -.-). Meaning: I'd be surprises if they actually raised the minimal wage above €8/h.
Your first sentence is very curious - be free to vote against them (assuming you have the right to do so), but if they should ever get voted into government, you should accept that, that's democracy. Btw, they are not full blown communists, they don't claim to be nor does their program indicate such intention. Far left, socialist, sure, but not communist.
However, you are of course right that they would not be able to realize their program (which is the expected modus operandi for coalition government - they have to find consensus). But they'd be able to give a SPD/Grüne government a more leftist touch, which I'd presonally quite like. It's unrealistic, however, as Union and FDP were able to succesfully demonize them in the public opinion. So don't worry
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Everybody, who actually bothered to listen to Westerwelle before the last election without denouncing him based on idealogy or the yellow press, will know that his speeches were easily the most compelling and the FDP's agenda was one of the most social (if not the most social), and most desirable agendas presented by any party last time. Of course, they completed exactly zero from it. Big talks are in no way connected to what actually gets enacted. Especially small parties tend to make big populist promises, which are completely impossible to implement, since they know that they won't be in the position of power and thus won't have to try to fulfill anything they promise.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
:/ Dude, just go outside for once and look at their election posters "Reichtum für alle" is usually the classical example, together with "Das Reichtum besteuern" and those 2 aren't 2 lonely examples, they write and say the most outrageous things, why? Because they know that they will never reign and therefore don't actually have to keep their promises. I feel like I have to explain this every few pages >.<. It's great to be in the opposition and it's great not to actually have any real power, because you can do and say what you want and what sounds good, it's not like you'll ever have to prove that you're being serious about it (and thank god for that, because some of their demands would be ruinous for the country).
EDIT: The bulgarian ninja'd me and as long as you say that the greek state was at fault for the path they've chosen to take, the greek people who voted them and did nothing about it are partially at fault too, so therefore them paying for it isn't THAT unfair anymore. (I realise that that is a gigantic generalisation and that the rest of the EU was at fault too, but I don't wanna go too deep into this and awnsering a generalisation with a generalisation is easier.) EDIT2: And this isn't the euro-crisis thread.
Will be funny to see what happens. The 3 most likely options are probably 1. CDU+FDP 2. CDU+SPD 3. SPD+Grüne+Linke
hoping for the 3rd option, thinking it will be a the 2nd.
This boggles my mind. I didn't come to Germany from an "ex"-communist country, just to have the questionable "pleasure" to be governed by other "communists"...
Also, I can promise you that if SPD+Grüne+Linke form the governement, Die Linke will fulfill its current agenda exactly as well as FDP fulfilled their agenda in this term... The only thing that might happen is that they could enact a minimum wage. Even then, the consensus those parties would meet will probably be similar to the consensus SPD and CDU had about the VAT (Mehrwertsteuer) during the grand coalition (SPD - no raise in VAT (16%) + CDU - raise to 18% = consensus: raise to 19% -.-). Meaning: I'd be surprises if they actually raised the minimal wage above €8/h.
Your first sentence is very curious - be free to vote against them (assuming you have the right to do so), but if they should ever get voted into government, you should accept that, that's democracy. Btw, they are not full blown communists, they don't claim to be nor does their program indicate such intention. Far left, socialist, sure, but not communist.
However, you are of course right that they would not be able to realize their program (which is the expected modus operandi for coalition government - they have to find consensus). But they'd be able to give a SPD/Grüne government a more leftist touch, which I'd presonally quite like. It's unrealistic, however, as Union and FDP were able to succesfully demonize them in the public opinion. So don't worry
I realize that their agenda can hardly be called communist. What I have in mind are their members. Many of their members from the Eastern provinces are ex-communists (former members of the commmunist party in East Germany or otherwise high in the former hierarchy). Do you have any idea how insanely stupid and/or morally bankrupt you had to be in order to be in the upper echelons of the communist party?
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
So you need examples? Here are just some taken from their answers to the Wahl-o-mat: minimum wage: their request: €10/h now, €12/h in four years. I agree that people should be able to earn enough money to support themselves. I'm against the 1-euro jobs in Germany. Neither €10/h, nor €12/h are that much money. However, there are some major flaws with such a request. First of all, there is gastronomy. Generally, restaurants and co. barely manage to survive and often enough go bankrupt only a few years after they open. Increasing the wages of waiters would hurt the restaurants significantly, while barely doing anything for the waiters themselves that already mainly rely on tips from the customers. Another example are universities. Students working at the university get €9/h in NRW. Increasing their wages to €10 (€12) means an increase of 11%-33%. The provinces (Bundesländer) have to pay for this. However, we know how tight their budget is. Such an increase in their wages means either a 11%-33% cut in the student workers at every university in NRW or the money has to be cut somewhere else. Wages of less than €10/h exist in many communes and all provinces. This puts yet another burden on them. The biggest argument against the minimal wage as proposed by Die Linke is the huge difference in standards between Eastern and Western provinces. It's absolutely unreasonable to expect that something like this could work in the whole country. (Especially enacted as fast as proposed by die Linke)
Their answer to the Euro question: „Voraussetzung für den Fortbestand des Euro ist, dass die Kürzungspolitik, beendet wird. Es ist die Politik von Troika, Merkel & Co, die die Gemeinschaftswährung zerstört. Statt Kürzungen wollen wir höhere Löhne, bessere Sozialstandards und Arbeiterrechte in ganz Europa. Der heute vorherrschende Wettbewerb durch Steuer-, Sozial- und Lohndumping muss durch eine Abstimmung der Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitiken der Euro-Länder ersetzt werden.” ... You don't think that this is a populist rhetoric?
Free electricity: Their proposal: every home gets 300 free kWh plus 200 kWh for every person in the household. Using rounded down numbers: 80.000.000*200 + 40.000.000*300 = 2,8*10^10 kWh The cost for generation and transport for 2013 is 14,32 cents. 2,8*10^10 * 0,1432 € = ~4*10^9 Euro They want to finance this through the increased governtment income through VAT on the EEG-Umlage, which is around 1*10^9 for 2013. This is only 4 times less than what is needed for their proposal. Additionally, there will be a decrease in this VAT income due to the 2,8*10^10 kWh they want to provide for free. The decrease would be around 250 mio. Furthermore, they want to give a €200 subsidy to everybody who wants to buy new oven/refrigerator/washing machine and want to finance it through the same means. All my numbers are rounded in favor of their proposal. If you take the exact numbers, there would be a few dozen more million euro missing. How is such an impossible proposal anything but populist?
Complete stop of all coal power generation plants: Really? So they want to immediatelly shut down all nuclear power plants (23,3% of all generated power in Germany) and all coal power plants in the next 10-30 years (43,6%). Do you really not see any problem with this?
Retirement with 65: Do you have any idea how big the burden on the state would be if this gets enacted? This is more or less impossible to finance now and will completely impossible in the next few years, considering the ever increasing amount of retirees and life expectancy in Germany.
Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs: Their answer: "Statt Sanktionen benötigen wir mehr gut bezahlte Arbeitsplätze.” Great idea! Let's just create more well paid jobs...
I don't think I need to continue (I certainly could though). Calling die Linke anything but populist is delusional.
so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
On September 19 2013 05:13 Skilledblob wrote: so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
Utopic fantasies are in no way beneficial to any discussion. As a matter of fact, the only thing die Linke has achieved is to destroy any meaningful opposition to CDU. Who knows, maybe this time they will actually manage to fool enough voters and force the government into a gridlock, which will most likely benefit CDU even more in the long run.
On September 19 2013 05:13 Skilledblob wrote: so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
I'd never vote for the FDP and I severely doubt that you read what ggrrg wrote and copy-pasted into his post
Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs: Their answer: "Statt Sanktionen benötigen wir mehr gut bezahlte Arbeitsplätze.” Great idea! Let's just create more well paid jobs...
"Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs" "Just make more jobs then!"
Grade A problemsolving right there. I'm not saying that they don't add something to the democratic process, but if you don't see that they are populistic and often downright stupid, illogical and disagree with themselves, then I can't help you anymore.
And we actually had a discussion here that managed to be without any needless aggression, that suprised me and I was happy about that, but then you write stuff like that. Why do you do that? Why can't you just voice your opinion like an adult instead of starting to throw stuff like that around and poisoning the athmosphere? I tried to stay nice here and I think even in the part here that's actually ontopic one can hear that I reacted accordingly to your needlessly aggressive post, I consciously decided not to clean it up though since it isn't too bad and so you realize how your post actually looks for others.
TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
EDIT: Your attitude aside, yes, I do take people calling me an FDP voter as a serious insult for obvious reasons and since you named some of them in that sentence I'm pretty sure that it was ment that way as well >___>.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
I don't see how anything said about die Linke is hyberbolic (bar my communist remarks). I think I gave enough examples of purely populist instances in their agenda. If you feel like those are not valid or that they actually have some reasonable requests, feel free to list discuss them in this thread.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Reading through their demands or even just their answers in the wahl-o-mat does show that it's mostly just populism, if you have another opinion, feel free to show me that most of the demands they try to get votes with aren't exactly that. Until then don't call my statement a hyperbole and read more carefully, I wasn't talking about Gysi in particular, I actually praised him a few posts before that, but I was talking about his party.
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
And contrary to the guy I was criticizing I wasn't going for the guy I was talking to directly but that party and he didn't seem to mind.
EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ein praktisches Beispiel für Populismus? – Der Vorschlag der „Linken“ für einen „Schutzschirm für Sozialkassen“ und die Reaktionen im Bundestag
Ein Antrag der Linksfraktion auf Staatsgarantien für Sozialversicherungen ist im Bundestag auf geschlossene Ablehnung aller anderen Fraktionen gestoßen. Als „populistisch und brandgefährlich“ wies der haushaltspolitische Sprecher der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, Steffen Kampeter, den Vorstoß am Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2009, zurück. „Wir brauchen eine umfassende Reformdebatte über soziale Leistungen“, sagte der CDU-Politiker in der rund 75-minütigen Bundestagsdebatte. SPD, FDP und Grüne hielten der Linksfraktion vor, unrealistische Vorschläge zu machen, die nicht finanzierbar seien. Die SPD verwies darauf, dass die Bundesregierung bereits Rentenkürzungen für das kommende Jahr ausgeschlossen und eine Schutzklausel verabschiedet hat.
Nach dem Willen der Linksfraktion soll die Bundesregierung gesetzlich regeln, dass auch nach der Bundestagswahl Ende September Sozialleistungen nicht gekürzt werden. Kürzungen der Sozialleistungen wären Gift für die Kaufkraft und würden die jetzige Krise noch verstärken, heißt es in dem Antrag. „Die Bundesregierung muss für die sozialen Sicherungssysteme bürgen und durch eine Staatsgarantie einen wirksamen Schutzschirm für die Menschen spannen.“
Der stellvertretende Chef der Linksfraktion, Klaus Ernst, verwies darauf, dass bis Ende 2010 allein in der Arbeitslosen- und Krankenversicherung die Fehlbeträge auf 50 Milliarden Euro ansteigen würden. Gleichzeitig unterstütze die Bundesregierung marode Banken mit insgesamt 480 Milliarden Euro und halte sie damit künstlich am Leben. „Menschen, die mit der Krise überhaupt nichts zu tun haben, sollen die Krise bewältigen und zahlen“, hielt Ernst der Bundesregierung vor. Der Antrag der Linksfraktion mache hingegen deutlich: "Wir bitten den Bürger nicht zur Kasse.“
Als „Frontalangriff und Verrat an den nachfolgenden Generationen“ bewertete hingegen der CDU-Politiker Kampeter den Antrag der Linksfraktion. Die Bürger erwarteten von der Politik eine kluge Reform der sozialen Sicherungssysteme. Die Linke dagegen fordere von der Politik eine „Selbstblockade des Staates“. Das sei ein „übles Spiel mit der Angst“.
(...)
Die SPD-Haushaltspolitikerin Waltraud Lehn wehrte sich gegen den Vorwurf, die Bundesregierung habe maroden Banken unter die Arme gegriffen. „Wir haben dafür gesorgt, dass Geld fließt für Investitionen“, sagte sie. Außerdem würden die Renten in diesem Jahr steigen. Das zeige: „Auf unseren Sozialstaat ist Verlass, auch in Krisenzeiten.“
(...)
Auch die gesundheitspolitische Sprecherin von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Birgitt Bender, forderte die Linksfraktion auf klarzustellen, wie sie einen Schutzschirm für Sozialleistungen finanzieren wolle. „Wenn Sie sagen ‚keine Kürzungen’, müssen Sie auch sagen, wie viel Mehrbelastung auf die Bürger zukommt.“ In der Rentenversicherung hat die Bundesregierung bereits auf die Befürchtung sinkender Löhne reagiert und eine Rentengarantie für die rund 20 Millionen Ruheständler verabschiedet. Finanziert werden soll die Schutzklausel dadurch, dass künftige Rentenerhöhungen halbiert werden. Sozialminister Olaf Scholz (SPD) erwartet allerdings nicht, dass die Schutzklausel in Anspruch genommen werden muss, da Rentenkürzungen derzeit nicht erkennbar seien.
All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
You do realize that willkommenskultur nach kanadischem vorbild has nothing to do with actually changing the willkommenskultur? Its just a synonym for "less uneducated immigrants from africa and the middle east" without sounding racist.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
You do realize that willkommenskultur nach kanadischem vorbild has nothing to do with actually changing the willkommenskultur? Its just a synonym for "less uneducated immigrants from africa and the middle east" without sounding racist.
No, because that is assuming that the AfD's internal policy-making process reflects a coherent political culture, rather than the powerpoint-style thoughtspeech which I alluded to. AfD's programme includes a cost/benefit-based immigration system, but also for work-permits for Asylum-seekers, which can be subsumed under the same logical principle. As I read the character of AfD's campaign, there is no spleen in them, no under-the-covers innuendo. Their platform is really as bland as they say it is.
The point concerns the shameless catachresis of the political campaign as a whole. It benefits the nebulous atmosphere of the political season by inviting us all to channel ourselves unto an ambiguous slogan.
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT2: An example (sorry that it's in german) + Show Spoiler +
Ein praktisches Beispiel für Populismus? – Der Vorschlag der „Linken“ für einen „Schutzschirm für Sozialkassen“ und die Reaktionen im Bundestag
Ein Antrag der Linksfraktion auf Staatsgarantien für Sozialversicherungen ist im Bundestag auf geschlossene Ablehnung aller anderen Fraktionen gestoßen. Als „populistisch und brandgefährlich“ wies der haushaltspolitische Sprecher der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, Steffen Kampeter, den Vorstoß am Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2009, zurück. „Wir brauchen eine umfassende Reformdebatte über soziale Leistungen“, sagte der CDU-Politiker in der rund 75-minütigen Bundestagsdebatte. SPD, FDP und Grüne hielten der Linksfraktion vor, unrealistische Vorschläge zu machen, die nicht finanzierbar seien. Die SPD verwies darauf, dass die Bundesregierung bereits Rentenkürzungen für das kommende Jahr ausgeschlossen und eine Schutzklausel verabschiedet hat.
Nach dem Willen der Linksfraktion soll die Bundesregierung gesetzlich regeln, dass auch nach der Bundestagswahl Ende September Sozialleistungen nicht gekürzt werden. Kürzungen der Sozialleistungen wären Gift für die Kaufkraft und würden die jetzige Krise noch verstärken, heißt es in dem Antrag. „Die Bundesregierung muss für die sozialen Sicherungssysteme bürgen und durch eine Staatsgarantie einen wirksamen Schutzschirm für die Menschen spannen.“
Der stellvertretende Chef der Linksfraktion, Klaus Ernst, verwies darauf, dass bis Ende 2010 allein in der Arbeitslosen- und Krankenversicherung die Fehlbeträge auf 50 Milliarden Euro ansteigen würden. Gleichzeitig unterstütze die Bundesregierung marode Banken mit insgesamt 480 Milliarden Euro und halte sie damit künstlich am Leben. „Menschen, die mit der Krise überhaupt nichts zu tun haben, sollen die Krise bewältigen und zahlen“, hielt Ernst der Bundesregierung vor. Der Antrag der Linksfraktion mache hingegen deutlich: "Wir bitten den Bürger nicht zur Kasse.“
Als „Frontalangriff und Verrat an den nachfolgenden Generationen“ bewertete hingegen der CDU-Politiker Kampeter den Antrag der Linksfraktion. Die Bürger erwarteten von der Politik eine kluge Reform der sozialen Sicherungssysteme. Die Linke dagegen fordere von der Politik eine „Selbstblockade des Staates“. Das sei ein „übles Spiel mit der Angst“.
(...)
Die SPD-Haushaltspolitikerin Waltraud Lehn wehrte sich gegen den Vorwurf, die Bundesregierung habe maroden Banken unter die Arme gegriffen. „Wir haben dafür gesorgt, dass Geld fließt für Investitionen“, sagte sie. Außerdem würden die Renten in diesem Jahr steigen. Das zeige: „Auf unseren Sozialstaat ist Verlass, auch in Krisenzeiten.“
(...)
Auch die gesundheitspolitische Sprecherin von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Birgitt Bender, forderte die Linksfraktion auf klarzustellen, wie sie einen Schutzschirm für Sozialleistungen finanzieren wolle. „Wenn Sie sagen ‚keine Kürzungen’, müssen Sie auch sagen, wie viel Mehrbelastung auf die Bürger zukommt.“ In der Rentenversicherung hat die Bundesregierung bereits auf die Befürchtung sinkender Löhne reagiert und eine Rentengarantie für die rund 20 Millionen Ruheständler verabschiedet. Finanziert werden soll die Schutzklausel dadurch, dass künftige Rentenerhöhungen halbiert werden. Sozialminister Olaf Scholz (SPD) erwartet allerdings nicht, dass die Schutzklausel in Anspruch genommen werden muss, da Rentenkürzungen derzeit nicht erkennbar seien.
Yeah well I don't see this as a good example of populism. It's their opinion that social spending shall not be cut at all and in fact be raised. So it makes sense to try and get that in the Bundestag. Why is it bad for a party to actually do something about their program?
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote:If you feel like those are not valid or that they actually have some reasonable requests, feel free to list discuss them in this thread.
Well I'm not too focused on economics and social laws and regulations (because I really understand nothing at all of it) but what makes Die Linke outstanding to me is two things: 1. No more war and bring the troops home (guess what, that would be one way to cut a little spending) 2. Complete ban on the export of weapons.
And to be honest, for me that is enough.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
wow, I didn't really know they had anything in their program at all except of economy related stuff. But now that I read that I remember an election poster here in Aachen of them saying *Einwanderung begrenzen* or something on that line (Limit Immigration).
Speaking of a Canadian Willkommenskultur, I was welcomed very coldly this week in Munich when an "uneducated immigrant" of North African Arab descent made off with my laptop. Surely the first measure to keeping a welcoming house is to keep the guests polite.
On September 19 2013 22:37 MoltkeWarding wrote: Speaking of a Canadian Willkommenskultur, I was welcomed very coldly this week in Munich when an "uneducated immigrant" of North African Arab descent made off with my laptop. Surely the first measure to keeping a welcoming house is to keep the guests polite.
Sorry, was my metaphor too Haute Bourgeois for our uprooted generation? I suppose everyone is an immigrant now, even in our own countries, neighbourhoods, sometimes even with our own families.
On September 19 2013 22:55 MoltkeWarding wrote: Sorry, was my metaphor too Haute Bourgeois for our uprooted generation? I suppose everyone is an immigrant now, even in our own countries, neighbourhoods, sometimes even with our own families.
as a german the AfD scares me more then any nazi partie ... its unbelievable they can get people vote them with all the lies they tell ... they act like they come from basis but come from the super rich just... i better stop i rly hate them
as most young internet users of germany i am favoring the pirates quite alot, but the guys in there and voting for them are often so ... i rly hate that they not even TRY to be more serious ... its not cool vote for someone with green/purple hair wearing a blue pair of suspenders in the reichstag ...
and mostly frustrated i am about my german fellow citizen ... super disapointed as much shit merkel does, shes teflon, everything perls off her like she hasnt even done it ... she switch her oppinion every 5 minutes after the wind of the votes ... dont understand me wrong, i support most of what she says right now, but i am sure in 2 months she will say something completly different
but since the spd is going to be a joke, the fpd is already a joke and the green guys are throwing stupid phrases around (no i dont mean this pedophile shit they bring up in press right now thats just rubbish) its the hardest vote ever...
left with what ? the npd (neo nazis) who cant speak proper german, sounds like dwarfnazis on crack and have a brain of a dead mice ? or the left party who wants 10k for everyone for doing nothing and a holiday on moon for everyone ? i dont vote someone when they not even try to say something thats doable
most frustrating vote of my god damn life well the vote help tool in the internet tells me my main party would be the "animal protection party" or "the party" (who have the mottos BEER BEER AND GOOD WEATHER) ... so why the fuck not ... better then dont going vote ^^
for me theres no better country in life then my (as most people think ^^) the gouverment could be worse, and the cabaret/comedy is great with such good deliveres in charge but ... still ... god i wish i would like at least ONE of them
On September 19 2013 22:20 schaf wrote: Yeah well I don't see this as a good example of populism. It's their opinion that social spending shall not be cut at all and in fact be raised. So it makes sense to try and get that in the Bundestag. Why is it bad for a party to actually do something about their program?[1]
Well I'm not too focused on economics and social laws and regulations (because I really understand nothing at all of it) but what makes Die Linke outstanding to me is two things: 1. No more war and bring the troops home (guess what, that would be one way to cut a little spending) 2. Complete ban on the export of weapons.[2]
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
wow, I didn't really know they had anything in their program at all except of economy related stuff. But now that I read that I remember an election poster here in Aachen of them saying *Einwanderung begrenzen* or something on that line (Limit Immigration).[1]
I think the bolded part explains A LOT then, because that's basically where Die Linke fails the most and the hardest :/.
[1] And if you read the example and know some stuff about it then it's actually a very good example for populism, I'll try to give you a short and simple explanation. Basically the lefties are saying "We should save the normal people and not spend billions of government euros on saving some rich fat bankowners and shareowners! We should stop saving banks and help the poor people instead!" Which sounds great, doesn't it? But it isn't, it's really, really bad. And that's basically populism, they say things that SOUND good, but only to those who don't know enough about the topic or only when you first hear it, the reason why EVERY other party said that's completely crazy and irresponsible, because you would cripple your own economy when you let all the banks drown, saving the banks was costly and not much fun and it's infuriating that we had to do that, but NOT saving them may sound nice "Let the banks go bankcrupt when they fail!", but it would cripple our own economy, lose a lot of jobs, make taking a loan nearly impossible for small businesses or people because of the rising interest rates and so on and so on. As I said, I wanna keep it short and simple, but the banks are necessary for our system for many reasons, which range from the trust the people have in german banks to their ability to do their job and much more.
[2] No more wars sounds good as well, I'm very much for a peaceful solution for syria too and think Die Linke (and eventually the other parties) did the right thing by being vehemently against military intervention there, but thinking that we can avoid wars entirely seems a bit utopian to me. Forbidding Gun exports sounds nice too, but there are jobs connected to those exports (which of course can't pay for human lives, but then again they'd just get the guns somewhere else if not from us) though I guess that is more of an ethical issue, I'm afraid I'm not a good enough person to give up a well running industry for a gesture that wouldn't change much in the long run since there is always somebody who wants to sell a weapon. I do agree though that it would probably ethically correct not to sell them.
[3] To be honest, I wouldn't have a problem with limiting immigration, it's not about racism and while I don't think that we shouldn't let in any poor people at all (like people asking for asylum and similar cases), I do think that we should concentrate more on getting more well educated people in the country. The politicians always say that we need immigrants, that less and less babies are born and more and more germans die, but they never say that it may be a good idea to do everything in their power to ensure that we get the best kind of immigrants (economically, of course), which means well educated people. I don't care which colour their skin is, which god they pray to or how they dress, but I would prefer it if the people who come here would be well educated so they can contribute to the greater good . But from my experience with immigrants I also think that less well educated immigrants (and especially their children) need to be given more focus in our educational system as well, extra classes for them and stuff like that always makes people think of racism, but in the end it would be better for them, they'd have more success in life and it would help them too (but that may be a completely different discussion). Point is, political correctness can be pretty bad in a lot of ways and actually harm those it tries to protect (e.g. minorities), people aren't all equal and giving people some extra help educationally or maybe even forcing them to take it, like extra-reading/german classes for immigrants after the normal classes wouldn't be racism, it would only mean that we see a problem and do what we can to fix it.
I am going to bite the bullet and take this infamous Wahl-o-mat here:
My favoured parties, according to the automated calcuator, are supposed to be in the following order:
Partei der Vernunft Republikaner AfD Bayernpartei Buergerbewegung pro Deutschland Buergerrechts Bewegung NPD FDP CDU/CSU Nichtwaehler Bibeltreuer Christen Rentner Freie Waehler Soziale Gleichheit Volkabstimmung Tierschutz Oekologisch Piraten Familie Marxistisch-Leninistisch Gruene SPD Linke Die Partei Frauen Innovation und Gerechtigkeit Violetten
On September 19 2013 23:31 MoltkeWarding wrote: I am going to bite the bullet and take this infamous Wahl-o-mat here:
My favoured parties, according to the automated calcuator, are supposed to be in the following order:
Partei der Vernunft Republikaner AfD Bayernpartei Buergerbewegung pro Deutschland NPD FDP CDU/CSU Nichtwaehler Bibeltreuer Christen Rentner Freie Waehler Volkabstimmung Tierschutz Oekologisch Piraten Familie Marxistisch-Leninistisch Gruene SPD Linke Die Partei Frauen Innovation und Gerechtigkeit
nazis on 2 (republicans) lefties on the last places, dont write to much cause i nearly know exactly what you voted now ^^
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
i would vote for internet stuff, but the pirate party is completely left wing in all other matters. And FPD is full of corrupt people, cant vote fort them.
i cant understand people are for the linke theme "no more weapon exports" we have 7% and usa and russia are with ~30% on first so we cant feel bad right ? its just millions and billions of $ at least OUR weapons work xD
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
i would vote for internet stuff, but the pirate party is completely left wing in all other matters. And FPD is full of corrupt people, cant vote fort them.
election advertisement: Marriage for homosexuals actual vote: everyone against it.
jaeh but also you give MONEY to the AfD with your vote ... if thats the best to give money to a party of such people ... read exactly what they want PLEASE read it before you vote for them ... sure i understand vote for fpd is not possible, you wont say ok to cdu to be so lefty now and that spd etc is unvoteable for a conservatire currently is easy to understand but ... plz read the script exactly what they want AND who say it, i am sure you change your mind
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ok, since you brought up this "Reichtum für alle" for a third time now, I'm going to take your bait. And I will be direct (sorry if it gets too personal for you now).
Have you even spend a minute to think about, what they could mean, when they say "wealth for all"? Because, the whole point of this statement seems to be over your head. Do you really think "prosperity for all" means "a lot of money for everybody"? Really?
So, stop for a minute and reflect on it. What is "richness" for you? Is money the only thing one can and should get plenty of? Should abundance of personal possessions by a small group really be the only goal of politics in our society? Is the whole point of politics to divide us into "rich" and "poor", is this some kind of law of nature?
For me "Everybody should be rich" translates to "Stop thinking in those categories". We are all humans born equally, to label one group as "poor" and then ignore them and their sufferings because 'that is the way we do it in a capitalist society', is unjust. Can there ever be a society, where everybody is given the same amount of freedom and opportunity in his life? Probably not. But does that in turn mean we should just accept inequality as a fact of life and do nothing about it? Everybody competes only for himself, getting rich from exploiting others. Is that what we should strife for?
For someone to be rich, someone has to be poor. Simple as that.
On September 19 2013 23:31 MoltkeWarding wrote: I am going to bite the bullet and take this infamous Wahl-o-mat here:
My favoured parties, according to the automated calcuator, are supposed to be in the following order:
Partei der Vernunft Republikaner AfD Bayernpartei Buergerbewegung pro Deutschland NPD FDP CDU/CSU Nichtwaehler Bibeltreuer Christen Rentner Freie Waehler Volkabstimmung Tierschutz Oekologisch Piraten Familie Marxistisch-Leninistisch Gruene SPD Linke Die Partei Frauen Innovation und Gerechtigkeit
nazis on 2 (republicans) lefties on the last places, dont write to much cause i nearly know exactly what you voted now ^^
No you don't, try taking the test and answer honestly and even as a very left leaning guy you can come up with some very weird parties on top, I've seen that often enough with people who'd never vote anything else than a left-leaning party.
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
i would vote for internet stuff, but the pirate party is completely left wing in all other matters. And FPD is full of corrupt people, cant vote fort them.
election advertisement: Marriage for homosexuals actual vote: everyone against it.
Funny how you vote AfD, which is pretty as homophobic as it can get, but criticize the FPD for voting against same sex marriage.
Moreover, due to the way how coalitions work the smaller party often needs to side with the larger one, even if they have a different opinion, so it is no suprise that they vote different to what they really want.
This is the way how it works, you cannot really bring that up to criticize someone.
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ok, since you brought up this "Reichtum für alle" for a third time now, I'm going to take your bait. And I will be direct (sorry if it gets too personal for you now).
Have you even spend a minute to think about, what they could mean, when they say "wealth for all"? Because, the whole point of this statement seems to be over your head. Do you really think "prosperity for all" means "a lot of money for everybody"? Really?
So, stop for a minute and reflect on it. What is "richness" for you? Is money the only thing one can and should get plenty of? Should abundance of personal possessions by a small group really be the only goal of politics in our society? Is the whole point of politics to divide us into "rich" and "poor", is this some kind of law of nature?
For me "Everybody should be rich" translates to "Stop thinking in those categories". We are all humans born equally, to label one group as "poor" and then ignore them and their sufferings because 'that is the way we do it in a capitalist society', is unjust. Can there ever be a society, where everybody is given the same amount of freedom and opportunity in his life? Probably not. But does that in turn mean we should just accept inequality as a fact of life and do nothing about it? Everybody competes only for himself, getting rich from exploiting others. Is that what we should strife for?
For someone to be rich, someone has to be poor. Simple as that.
For me it translates into a phrase used to catch the attention of poor people and old DDR-nostalgics (denglish, oh yeah). And to be honest, I think your interpretation of it is very far out there, lol. I would have accepted it if you would have said that they want to decrease the number of poor people as much as they can (which is the most positive way I can think of), but I very much doubt that the guy who came up with that phrase thought "All those normal citizens who walk past this poster will think "Stop thinking in those categories", that's just utopic and if I have to be completely honest I would also say naive. Wanting to make the society more equal (in the sense of making more people less poor), isn't exactly something Die Linke monopolizes as a goal.
EDIT: Don't worry about getting too personal though, you did fine in that post (even though there was a funny overabundance of rhetorical questions ).
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
Voting AfD will not move a Grand Coalition to the right! I am not sure, why you would expect that. 1. The CDU and FDP will not collate with AfD. 2. A CDU + FDP coalition is more to the right than a CDU + SPD one. 3. If AfD gets into the Bundestag, CDU + FDP is not possible anymore. Which makes CDU + SPD almost the only option then.
So, if you want to move the next government more conservative, you should simply vote CDU. A vote for AfD ends up either useless (because they did not get over 5%) or backfires for you.
I was wondering about the no coalition with AfD announcement. Certainly it is the proper thing to say in the campaign, since it creates exactly the hesitation among CDU-AfD swing voters which you are invoking. However if you look at the electoral mathematics as to who has declared what, it is evident that none of these slogans can be taken at face value. So far, the following declarations have been made: Mr. Steinbrueck will not enter a coalition with a CDU led by Merkel. SPD will not join with the Linke. Greens will not join with the CDU/CSU. CDU will not join with the AfD.
This knocks out virtually all likely combinations, apart from the (admittedly likely) re-election of CDU/FDP. Yet we all know that post-electoral negotiations will turn something up. Germany is not Belgium.
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
Voting AfD will not move a Grand Coalition to the right! I am not sure, why you would expect that. 1. The CDU and FDP will not collate with AfD. 2. A CDU + FDP coalition is more to the right than a CDU + SPD one. 3. If AfD gets into the Bundestag, CDU + FDP is not possible anymore. Which makes CDU + SPD almost the only option then.
So, if you want to move the next government more conservative, you should simply vote CDU. A vote for AfD ends up either useless (because they did not get over 5%) or backfires for you.
It would move the CDU back to the right. As it stands right now the CDU can shamelessy steal voters from the left without fear of losing voters to other conservative parties. If the AFD gets in the Bundestag they may be force to adopt conservative positions again. But maybe it is just too much to hope for. The CDU under Merkels leadership is just a black spd nowadays. The only real reason to vote for the CDU is to block die Grünen from the government which is pretty much assured according to the polls.
On September 20 2013 00:05 MoltkeWarding wrote: I was wondering about the no coalition with AfD announcement. Certainly it is the proper thing to say in the campaign, since it creates exactly the hesitation among CDU-AfD swing voters which you are invoking. However if you look at the electoral mathematics as to who has declared what, it is evident that none of these slogans can be taken at face value. So far, the following declarations have been made: Mr. Steinbrueck will not enter a coalition with a CDU led by Merkel. SPD will not join with the Linke. Greens will not join with the CDU/CSU. CDU will not join with the AfD.
This knocks out virtually all likely combinations, apart from the (admittedly likely) re-election of CDU/FDP. Yet we all know that post-electoral negotiations will turn something up. Germany is not Belgium.
Merkel has said in atleast one interview already as well that a CDU-Green coalition won't happen because they are too far apart, so I guess that goes both ways.
There are some parties that are favored, since I agree with most of their politics, but then they also have a lot of points I strongly disagree with as well.
There isn't really a party that's just right for me so far... just some that are less bad than others.
Has anyone taken a look at the FAZ headline today? According to the INSA survey, only 16% of likely AfD voters are defectors from CDU/CSU, behind FDP defectors (22%) and ahead of Linke defectors (9%) The number defecting from Greens and SPD are miniscule. However, a greater portion of likely AfD voters are either protest voters, or defectors from another alternative party.
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ok, since you brought up this "Reichtum für alle" for a third time now, I'm going to take your bait. And I will be direct (sorry if it gets too personal for you now).
Have you even spend a minute to think about, what they could mean, when they say "wealth for all"? Because, the whole point of this statement seems to be over your head. Do you really think "prosperity for all" means "a lot of money for everybody"? Really?
So, stop for a minute and reflect on it. What is "richness" for you? Is money the only thing one can and should get plenty of? Should abundance of personal possessions by a small group really be the only goal of politics in our society? Is the whole point of politics to divide us into "rich" and "poor", is this some kind of law of nature?
For me "Everybody should be rich" translates to "Stop thinking in those categories". We are all humans born equally, to label one group as "poor" and then ignore them and their sufferings because 'that is the way we do it in a capitalist society', is unjust. Can there ever be a society, where everybody is given the same amount of freedom and opportunity in his life? Probably not. But does that in turn mean we should just accept inequality as a fact of life and do nothing about it? Everybody competes only for himself, getting rich from exploiting others. Is that what we should strife for?
For someone to be rich, someone has to be poor. Simple as that.
For me it translates into a phrase used to catch the attention of poor people and old DDR-nostalgics (denglish, oh yeah). And to be honest, I think your interpretation of it is very far out there, lol. I would have accepted it if you would have said that they want to decrease the number of poor people as much as they can (which is the most positive way I can think of), but I very much doubt that the guy who came up with that phrase thought "All those normal citizens who walk past this poster will think "Stop thinking in those categories", that's just utopic and if I have to be completely honest I would also say naive. Wanting to make the society more equal (in the sense of making more people less poor), isn't exactly something Die Linke monopolizes as a goal.
EDIT: Don't worry about getting too personal though, you did fine in that post (even though there was a funny overabundance of rhetorical questions ).
Again, I feel, your response is rather shallow. None of these questions where rhetorical, and neither was my interpretation 'out there'.
You think "Reichtum für alle" and "Reichtum besteurern" is some kind of contradiction and therefore funny. While I (and the voters of the Linke) see it basically as the exact same demand. All money is created by dept. So, by definition for someone to have a lot of money there has to be someone with a lot of dept. So, demanding to tax the rich more or demanding to give to the poor more, is the same fucking thing. Nothing funny or contradictory about it...
On September 20 2013 00:20 MoltkeWarding wrote: Has anyone taken a look at the FAZ headline today? According to the INSA survey, only 16% of likely AfD voters are defectors from CDU/CSU, behind FDP defectors (22%) and ahead of Linke defectors (9%) The number defecting from Greens and SPD are miniscule. However, a greater portion of likely AfD voters are either protest voters, or defectors from another alternative party.
I think it was the same for the pirate party when they were popular 1-2 years ago.
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
Voting AfD will not move a Grand Coalition to the right! I am not sure, why you would expect that. 1. The CDU and FDP will not collate with AfD. 2. A CDU + FDP coalition is more to the right than a CDU + SPD one. 3. If AfD gets into the Bundestag, CDU + FDP is not possible anymore. Which makes CDU + SPD almost the only option then.
So, if you want to move the next government more conservative, you should simply vote CDU. A vote for AfD ends up either useless (because they did not get over 5%) or backfires for you.
It would move the CDU back to the right. As it stands right now the CDU can shamelessy steal voters from the left without fear of losing voters to other conservative parties. If the AFD gets in the Bundestag they may be force to adopt conservative positions again. But maybe it is just too much to hope for. The CDU under Merkels leadership is just a black spd nowadays. The only real reason to vote for the CDU is to block die Grünen from the government which is pretty much assured according to the polls.
Ok, you are right insofar as establishing a party right from the CDU as a possible coalition partner will move the CDU to the right in the long run. No doubt, should the AfD still be relevant in four years and seen as mature enough by Merkel to work together. Than there would be an way to 'turn the CDU around' for you. But for the coming election period, this option looks very very unlikely.
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ok, since you brought up this "Reichtum für alle" for a third time now, I'm going to take your bait. And I will be direct (sorry if it gets too personal for you now).
Have you even spend a minute to think about, what they could mean, when they say "wealth for all"? Because, the whole point of this statement seems to be over your head. Do you really think "prosperity for all" means "a lot of money for everybody"? Really?
So, stop for a minute and reflect on it. What is "richness" for you? Is money the only thing one can and should get plenty of? Should abundance of personal possessions by a small group really be the only goal of politics in our society? Is the whole point of politics to divide us into "rich" and "poor", is this some kind of law of nature?
For me "Everybody should be rich" translates to "Stop thinking in those categories". We are all humans born equally, to label one group as "poor" and then ignore them and their sufferings because 'that is the way we do it in a capitalist society', is unjust. Can there ever be a society, where everybody is given the same amount of freedom and opportunity in his life? Probably not. But does that in turn mean we should just accept inequality as a fact of life and do nothing about it? Everybody competes only for himself, getting rich from exploiting others. Is that what we should strife for?
For someone to be rich, someone has to be poor. Simple as that.
For me it translates into a phrase used to catch the attention of poor people and old DDR-nostalgics (denglish, oh yeah). And to be honest, I think your interpretation of it is very far out there, lol. I would have accepted it if you would have said that they want to decrease the number of poor people as much as they can (which is the most positive way I can think of), but I very much doubt that the guy who came up with that phrase thought "All those normal citizens who walk past this poster will think "Stop thinking in those categories", that's just utopic and if I have to be completely honest I would also say naive. Wanting to make the society more equal (in the sense of making more people less poor), isn't exactly something Die Linke monopolizes as a goal.
EDIT: Don't worry about getting too personal though, you did fine in that post (even though there was a funny overabundance of rhetorical questions ).
Again, I feel, your response is rather shallow. None of these questions where rhetorical, and neither was my interpretation 'out there'.
You think "Reichtum für alle" and "Reichtum besteuern" is some kind of contradiction and therefore funny. While I (and the voters of the Linke) see it basically as the exact same demand. All money is created by dept. So, by definition for someone to have a lot of money there has to be someone with a lot of dept. So, demanding to tax the rich more or demanding to give to the poor more, is the same fucking thing. Nothing funny or contradictory about it...
Why would all money be created by debt? There are a lot of ways to make money without creating debts for anybody. (You may be talking about the trade surplus of germany which is created by a trade deficit from other countries, otherwise it doesn't make much sense, but even that has nothing to do with this discussion) And of course it's only a contradiction if you take it literally, what makes it funny is that a party that mostly directs its politics after what SOUNDS good makes something that SOUNDS so obviously contradicting is hilarious though. And of course your interpretation was "out there" as I said, I can't imagine that most people who saw "Reichtum für alle" thought that it means "Stop thinking in those categories" and I also can't imagine that the guy who wrote that thought that most people would think so because it's pretty far away from what's actually on the poster and needs some interpretation for somebody to even get there and since Die Linke is MOSTLY voted by people with a bad or incomplete education and posters are supposed to tell you something with one quick look, I don't think that most Linke voters would immediately get to the same point where you got. Either explain WHY you think it isn't out there and tell me why you think that it's completely obvious that most people would think the way you think and that it was intended that way, or stop disagreeing with me. Because if you give no reasons we will end up going "You're wrong!" "No, you're wrong!" until the end of this thread. And before you say "that's very insulting etc.etc." it's a proven fact that that's where most of Die Linke's voters come from, countrywide it's mostly the poor and uneducated, which is why they are more succesful in the poorer states, if you read the Sueddeutsche (the biggest LEFT-leaning newspaper in germany), then you may have seen a statistic there about the election in bavaria and saw what kind of people voted which parties. And as I said, Die Linke doesn't monopolize the wish to tax rich people more. Oh and I would welcome it if you wouldn't call my posts shallow when I actually explain why you're wrong while you just say that I'm wrong and make weird smileys that guys usually use on the net when they hit on chicks through facebook.
On September 19 2013 23:34 LaNague wrote: i will probably vote AfD.
It will be a vote for conservative directions, it will be a vote against FDP, it will be a vote for Merkel and CDU-SPD coalition, but as i said with hinting to them to be more conservative.
Voting AfD will not move a Grand Coalition to the right! I am not sure, why you would expect that. 1. The CDU and FDP will not collate with AfD. 2. A CDU + FDP coalition is more to the right than a CDU + SPD one. 3. If AfD gets into the Bundestag, CDU + FDP is not possible anymore. Which makes CDU + SPD almost the only option then.
So, if you want to move the next government more conservative, you should simply vote CDU. A vote for AfD ends up either useless (because they did not get over 5%) or backfires for you.
It would move the CDU back to the right. As it stands right now the CDU can shamelessy steal voters from the left without fear of losing voters to other conservative parties. If the AFD gets in the Bundestag they may be force to adopt conservative positions again. But maybe it is just too much to hope for. The CDU under Merkels leadership is just a black spd nowadays. The only real reason to vote for the CDU is to block die Grünen from the government which is pretty much assured according to the polls.
Ok, you are right insofar as establishing a party right from the CDU as a possible coalition partner will move the CDU to the right in the long run. No doubt, should the AfD still be relevant in four years and seen as mature enough by Merkel to work together. Than there would be an way to 'turn the CDU around' for you. But for the coming election period, this option looks very very unlikely.
I pretty much gave up on a conservative government from this election. Grand Coalition or CDU/FDP isnt much of a difference in the current political climate. And the AFD doesnt even need to be a coalition option. Im betting on furthers left movements from the CDU losing them more voters on the right than they gain on the left. Merkel does not have any ideology so she will just follow the surest way to maintain her power. Like she always does.
On September 20 2013 00:40 SilentchiLL wrote: [...] Why would all money be created by debt? [...]
All of this is very confusing to me and I might have misunderstood all about this... but I think all money starts out as credit taken out at the central bank. Perhaps that's what was meant in that post about debt and money.
On September 19 2013 23:43 MoltkeWarding wrote: Hm, apparently the Partei der Vernunft is a front for Austrian economists. Ron Paul supporters, flood over?
I never heard of them before seeing your Wahl-O-Mat result. But looking at their homepage, I found they have a section about Ron Paul, so they are probably German Ron Paul fans
On September 20 2013 00:40 SilentchiLL wrote: Why would all money be created by debt? There are a lot of ways to make money without creating debts for anybody.
No there is not! This is economics 1.01 ( or rather general education)! If you don't even know, what money is and where it comes from and what the meaning of dept is (personal and national), than please educate yourself!
[..] Since Die Linke is MOSTLY voted by people with a bad or uncomplete education [..] [..] It's a proven fact that that's where most of Die Linke's voters come from, countrywide it's mostly the poor and uneducated [..]
I have had it with you, so I am going to spell it out: You are talking out of your ass! No proven fact at all, just pure bullshit and prejudices.
Most uneducated vote CDU by far. Greens have the highest educated voters average. Die Linke is right in the middle with a lean towards higher education. And that is a fact!
On September 20 2013 00:40 SilentchiLL wrote: Why would all money be created by debt? There are a lot of ways to make money without creating debts for anybody.
No there is not! This is economics 1.01 ( or rather general education)! If you don't even know, what money is and where it comes from and what the meaning of dept is (personal and national), than please educate yourself!
[..] Since Die Linke is MOSTLY voted by people with a bad or uncomplete education [..] [..] It's a proven fact that that's where most of Die Linke's voters come from, countrywide it's mostly the poor and uneducated [..]
I have had it with you, so I am going to spell it out: You are talking out of your ass! No proven fact at all, just pure bullshit and prejudices.
Most uneducated vote CDU by far. Greens have the highest educated voters average. Die Linke is right in the middle with a lean towards higher education. And that is a fact!
Okay, apparently you ACTUALLY ment the creation of money, and not making money. My point still stands though, because while money is first created through debt, it would only stay that way if you assume that banks are not making any profits. You once again refuse to explain yourself, tell me why you think that money can only be created by debt, so I could atleast try to prove properly that you are wrong (in the long run, of course), if you are wrong. If you would have done that in the first place we wouldn't have had that silly misunderstanding about making money and creating money as well. And if you read back you'll see that I was referencing a statistic from bavaria, and I wouldn't let you quote me on it, but I read once that the kind of people who vote Die Linke differs immensely by the region, though I'd also say that the fact that Die Linke had increased its votes by 37% that year (they gained 3,2 and had 8,7 before, which is a lot ) was due to the fact that many people who traditionally didn't vote Die Linke voted them in 2009. And if you compare the numbers correctly then you see that the CDU don't have "the most uneducated votes by far" since they may have 37% of the lower secondary school votes, but the percentages of other schools are all in the 30% range as well and the difference for the SPD is actually bigger (28% of the total votes of the CDU come from the lower secondary school, 31,1% of the SPD's total votes come from there), simple math. So should you want to reply again I would like you to explain what you say for once, your last post was the first one with an actual attempt at that with the statistic, but that was only the lower half of the post, in the upper half you just questioned my education without saying why I'm stupid.
EDIT: I actually just remembered WHY Die Linke got so big 2009 was the year in which the SPD lost -11,2% (which is gigantic and still known as the "Wahlfiasko" of the SPD) and many of their votes went over to Die Linke (of course they lost some in the election before that too, when they lost the majority with the greens due to it and were forced into the grand coalition that caused the Wahlfiasko, but the they only lost 4,3 then and the CDU lost 3,3 in the same year (05).
On September 20 2013 00:40 SilentchiLL wrote: Why would all money be created by debt? There are a lot of ways to make money without creating debts for anybody.
No there is not! This is economics 1.01 ( or rather general education)! If you don't even know, what money is and where it comes from and what the meaning of dept is (personal and national), than please educate yourself!
[..] Since Die Linke is MOSTLY voted by people with a bad or uncomplete education [..] [..] It's a proven fact that that's where most of Die Linke's voters come from, countrywide it's mostly the poor and uneducated [..]
I have had it with you, so I am going to spell it out: You are talking out of your ass! No proven fact at all, just pure bullshit and prejudices.
Most uneducated vote CDU by far. Greens have the highest educated voters average. Die Linke is right in the middle with a lean towards higher education. And that is a fact!
This study is meaningful only in context and drawing the 'conclusions' you draw, shows your utter lack of understanding for that context.
Of the people finishing school in these years the following percentage had University qualification:
That means that people born around 1940 had to be among the 'smartest' 6% to reach a qualification you seem to consider equal or at least comparable to what every second school finisher born around 1990 did. I don't think so. University qualification today means less than ever before in german history.
It also means that if voters for a party are significantly older on average the quoted statistics become utterly meaningless.
Use of statistics is often cringe-worthy on this site, but stuff like this makes me lose what little faith in humanity I have left.
On September 20 2013 02:43 lord_nibbler wrote: Ok, fist things first:
On September 20 2013 00:40 SilentchiLL wrote: Why would all money be created by debt? There are a lot of ways to make money without creating debts for anybody.
No there is not! This is economics 1.01 ( or rather general education)! If you don't even know, what money is and where it comes from and what the meaning of dept is (personal and national), than please educate yourself!
[..] Since Die Linke is MOSTLY voted by people with a bad or uncomplete education [..] [..] It's a proven fact that that's where most of Die Linke's voters come from, countrywide it's mostly the poor and uneducated [..]
I have had it with you, so I am going to spell it out: You are talking out of your ass! No proven fact at all, just pure bullshit and prejudices.
Most uneducated vote CDU by far. Greens have the highest educated voters average. Die Linke is right in the middle with a lean towards higher education. And that is a fact!
This study is meaningful only in context and drawing the 'conclusions' you draw, shows your utter lack of understanding for that context.
Of the people finishing school in these years the following percentage had University qualification:
That means that people born around 1940 had to be among the 'smartest' 6% to reach a qualification you seem to consider equal or at least comparable to what every second school finisher born around 1990 did. I don't think so. University qualification today means less than ever before in german history.
It also means that if voters for a party are significantly older on average the quoted statistics become utterly meaningless.
Use of statistics is often cringe-worthy on this site, but stuff like this makes me lose what little faith in humanity I have left.
That's actually a very obvious point that I didn't think of at all. Now I feel stupid (in a good way).
So fater clicking through the wahlomat one last time, this time also choosing my "weights" for the points, here's my result: ödp 88,5% (can't vote for them, as they dont run for the election in the state where I live, Hessia. Probably wouldn't do so anyway; simply because it would feel like a wasted vote. Would at least consider it if I could, though.) Grüne 78,1% Piraten 71,9% SPD 67,7% Linke 65,6% DIE PARTEI 64,6% AFD 63,5% FDP 62,5% CDU 56,3%
So Yeah. At least my results are now more distiguishable (is this even an english word?) than when I first checked it some weeks ago. While I in many ways disagree with the AFD, I still hope that they make it to the Bundestag. They give voice to a euro-crisis-management-scepticism a substantial amount of germans have, but that imho is not taken seriously by the parties currently represented in the Bundestag. This sentiment is too big to not have parliamentaric representaion. Well that's my understanding of democracy at least. We will also see then if they are have some heavy-right-leaning tendencies as the other parties and some media want to make look like. Same for hoping the pirates making, but with much less disagreement. Probably not gonna happen though TBH I find it kinda sad that "we care for your money" (AFD) is much more popular than "we care for your rights"(Pirates).
My first vote is going to the SPD anyway, as in my voting district it's either SPD or CDU. Second vote, Pirates or greens. Because of their ideas, not so much the people that represent them.
On September 22 2013 03:25 AsnSensation wrote: man how times have changed, all the party candidates except for Steinbrück and Merkel on Pro7 primetime. #Raabisking
I guess they desperately want to "appeal to the younger people"
Not only younger people. That stuff is being advertised on ANY channel. I heard about the "battle between merkel and steinbrück" from N24 news.
On September 22 2013 03:25 AsnSensation wrote: man how times have changed, all the party candidates except for Steinbrück and Merkel on Pro7 primetime. #Raabisking
I guess they desperately want to "appeal to the younger people"
Not only younger people. That stuff is being advertised on ANY channel. I heard about the "battle between merkel and steinbrück" from N24 news.
I thought it was pretty funny that a lot of people considered Raab the host among the 4 during the tv debate, considering that he's an entertainer and the rest are anchors, talkshowhost etc.
He actually asked stuff the average person wants to know while Peter Kloeppel from RTL asked hilarious shit like: "Mrs Merkel, do you feel sorry for Mr Steinbrück?" lmao
These: BAföG soll unabhängig vom Einkommen der Eltern gezahlt werden. Begründung der Partei„In keinem anderen Land ist Bildung so stark abhängig vom Geldbeutel der Eltern wie in Deutschland. Diese Abhängigkeit muß beendet werden, indem alle Studenten unabhängig vom Geldbeutel der Eltern BAföG erhalten können, wenn sie das wollen.”
That doesn't even make the remotest sense, as it'd give MORE money to kids with rich parents than now and less to poor families... Fucking retards...
These: BAföG soll unabhängig vom Einkommen der Eltern gezahlt werden. Begründung der Partei„In keinem anderen Land ist Bildung so stark abhängig vom Geldbeutel der Eltern wie in Deutschland. Diese Abhängigkeit muß beendet werden, indem alle Studenten unabhängig vom Geldbeutel der Eltern BAföG erhalten können, wenn sie das wollen.”
That doesn't even make the remotest sense, as it'd give MORE money to kids with rich parents than now and less to poor families... Fucking retards...
wahl-o-mat has the tendency to give extremist higher percentages because the questions are so generic
On September 22 2013 05:33 Yoshi- wrote: Well, if the pro7 results are even remotely close to reality then the next 4 years will be quite sad
nah it's because of the average TV Total viewer that's why you get these results. Granma from backwoods village numer 12432958 is not watching that show and wont call either, but she'll go vote for the CHRISTIAN party because her priest told her to
On September 22 2013 08:08 Yoshi- wrote: Even for the average TV Total viewer 50% for Die Linke would just be sad.
I'd rather have wildly optimistic, slightly delusional politicians who suck at math but have solid moral basics than a super-conservative, bigoted government whose moral compass is based upon the deranged ideology of the Catholic church.
How can you support a party that:
- opposes gay adoption rights - wants to cut welfare in case of people being reluctant to do demeaning jobs - supports public surveillance - supports on-line surveillance
On September 22 2013 08:08 Yoshi- wrote: Even for the average TV Total viewer 50% for Die Linke would just be sad.
I'd rather have wildly optimistic, slightly delusional politicians who suck at math but have solid moral basics than a super-conservative, bigoted government whose moral compass is based upon the deranged ideology of the Catholic church.
im pretty much still not too sure who to vote for, spd grüne or linke, but after today i kinda leen more towards linke
i was kinda surprised both spd and grüne hating die linke so much today since i feel like they could very well need them unless they got a secret plan with cdu (which obviously makes me not vote for them)
On September 22 2013 08:44 teddyoojo wrote: im pretty much still not too sure who to vote for, spd grüne or linke, but after today i kinda leen more towards linke
i was kinda surprised both spd and grüne hating die linke so much today since i feel like they could very well need them unless they got a secret plan with cdu (which obviously makes me not vote for them)
I think it's mostly the part of the Linke that's former SED. If you look around in this thread, there was this post that should show you how this can be a pretty emotional topic for people. I mean that story about someone's relative disappearing into a Stasi prison and never coming home again... just being reported as deceased to his family.
Greens are involved in this as they are a fusion of West Germany's Greens and East Germany's liberals that were struggling for freedom.
SPD have connections to the Linke because of that camp around Lafontaine.
On September 22 2013 05:33 Yoshi- wrote: Well, if the pro7 results are even remotely close to reality then the next 4 years will be quite sad
nah it's because of the average TV Total viewer that's why you get these results. Granma from backwoods village numer 12432958 is not watching that show and wont call either, but she'll go vote for the CHRISTIAN party because her priest told her to
On September 22 2013 05:33 Yoshi- wrote: Well, if the pro7 results are even remotely close to reality then the next 4 years will be quite sad
nah it's because of the average TV Total viewer that's why you get these results. Granma from backwoods village numer 12432958 is not watching that show and wont call either, but she'll go vote for the CHRISTIAN party because her priest told her to
lol The 1930s are that way <-
Unfortunately certain people want those times to stay
On September 22 2013 11:52 Danglars wrote: I hear the race is still neck-and-neck. How truthful is that from peering over across the pond?
I dont have any indicators because I usually dont believe in pre-election surveys. The election starts in 1 Hour and 20 minutes and I say when the first countings begin we can have the race ;D
Its probably going to be Merkel(CDU) though ... damn
Edit: found this: pretty cute and neat for non-germans :D
edit 2: i should stop surfing on YT... cant stop laughing...
Lol, just voted. The woman that checked my Paper and ID said
"lets see if this one got the right stand." me: "10402" "uh huh. Yeah you are right." *assistant hands me the Voting Bill with the shiniest smile ever*
Who the hell goes to the wrong Voting Stand? °_° This felt weird...
On September 22 2013 15:26 Daumen wrote: Lol, just voted. The woman that checked my Paper and ID said
"lets see if this one got the right stand." me: "10402" "uh huh. Yeah you are right." *assistant hands me the Voting Bill with the shiniest smile ever*
Who the hell goes to the wrong Voting Stand? °_° This felt weird...
Is that proof that she had been having that problem all day?
On September 22 2013 11:52 Danglars wrote: I hear the race is still neck-and-neck. How truthful is that from peering over across the pond?
I dont have any indicators because I usually dont believe in pre-election surveys. The election starts in 1 Hour and 20 minutes and I say when the first countings begin we can have the race ;D
Its probably going to be Merkel(CDU) though ... damn
On September 22 2013 15:26 Daumen wrote: Lol, just voted. The woman that checked my Paper and ID said
"lets see if this one got the right stand." me: "10402" "uh huh. Yeah you are right." *assistant hands me the Voting Bill with the shiniest smile ever*
Who the hell goes to the wrong Voting Stand? °_° This felt weird...
Is that proof that she had been having that problem all day?
What? no.
The way she said it was just rude and very weird. On the other hand the assistant was totally happy to see me ;D
Being rude early in the morning is almost a criminal offense ;D
btw, did the Party AfD seriously suggest that People that live in poor circumstances and fear for their very existence should be able to sell their organs in a regulated environment? Am I the only one that is at least a bit disgusted by that?
On September 22 2013 11:52 Danglars wrote: I hear the race is still neck-and-neck. How truthful is that from peering over across the pond?
I dont have any indicators because I usually dont believe in pre-election surveys. The election starts in 1 Hour and 20 minutes and I say when the first countings begin we can have the race ;D
Its probably going to be Merkel(CDU) though ... damn
Just been voting. It was so fucking empty lol. I mean yes it is sunday morning, but literally there were like 2 people in the building (who were voting and not vote helpers) and like 3 people coming towards the building for voting when I was leaving.
on the Bavarian test-run last Sunday, the sample size of 3 (my parents and me in different election offices) all saw queues a lot longer than at previous elections
On September 22 2013 16:32 chrisolo wrote: Just been voting. It was so fucking empty lol. I mean yes it is sunday morning, but literally there were like 2 people in the building (who were voting and not vote helpers) and like 3 people coming towards the building for voting when I was leaving.
Fucking tragedy.
How can you not go voting T_T So stupid.
Gosh, you got up early for this *yawn* it's not even 10am over here. Probably most people are still sitting in the curch, having relaxed breakfast or recovering from hangover. Or some just got up because they were watching eSports all night ;-)
Anyway I'll stay at home today, far too rainy for my taste.
On September 22 2013 16:32 chrisolo wrote: Just been voting. It was so fucking empty lol. I mean yes it is sunday morning, but literally there were like 2 people in the building (who were voting and not vote helpers) and like 3 people coming towards the building for voting when I was leaving.
Fucking tragedy.
How can you not go voting T_T So stupid.
I just came back from voting. There was NO ONE else in the building. I didnt see anyone leave while I was coming and nobody entered while I was leaving. And the place was for two districts!
Remember that about 25% of all those eligible to vote are expected to prefer postal voting. (Can anybody enlighten me if this is a big thing in other countries aswell?) But in the end I guess you'll be right and too many people stay at home.
I think one reason for this is that people on the streets were doing a horrible job at speaking to people. While going to our farmer's market yesterday I wanted to talk to a few parties to see if I could get anything out of it for a blog. I know that I'm looking pretty young but apart from the pirates nobody tried to talk to me. In the end I was so frustrated I went to a guy from the CDU and asked why they don't talk to people. We had an interesting conversation afterwards but you have to go there by yourself and ask them to talk to you. Most will try to give you a flyer and are done with that sometimes they don't even know anything about their parties wishes and agenda.
It's an election campaign for those who will vote no matter what.
This election I am surprisingly relaxed. No idea why, it just doesnt feel like "omg the world is going to end if my party doesnt win". I have a small wishlist for the results: - AfD not getting over 5% - SPD participating in the government (dont care about the koalition)
On September 22 2013 17:15 esperanto wrote: This election I am surprisingly relaxed. No idea why, it just doesnt feel like "omg the world is going to end if my party doesnt win". I have a small wishlist for the results: - AfD not getting over 5% - SPD participating in the government (dont care about the koalition)
That's it. Wish you all a happy election-sunday.
but wouldnt it be useful for you if the AfD is getting in? less likeable for CDU/FDP to get majority
On September 22 2013 17:15 esperanto wrote: This election I am surprisingly relaxed. No idea why, it just doesnt feel like "omg the world is going to end if my party doesnt win". I have a small wishlist for the results: - AfD not getting over 5% - SPD participating in the government (dont care about the koalition)
That's it. Wish you all a happy election-sunday.
but wouldnt it be useful for you if the AfD is getting in? less likeable for CDU/FDP to get majority
Get the pirates in! AfD is far too close to the right according to different sources. I'd rather live with Merkel than with those *****. The pirates on the other hand have a lot of interesting positions and I would love to see how they evolve in the Bundestag. Might be a disaster, but could turn out great if they just get the time. Sadly I heard alot that people want to vote for them but they aren't going to because the vote will be lost under 5%.
On September 22 2013 17:15 esperanto wrote: This election I am surprisingly relaxed. No idea why, it just doesnt feel like "omg the world is going to end if my party doesnt win". I have a small wishlist for the results: - AfD not getting over 5% - SPD participating in the government (dont care about the koalition)
That's it. Wish you all a happy election-sunday.
but wouldnt it be useful for you if the AfD is getting in? less likeable for CDU/FDP to get majority
You are right. But I really dont want to see them in parliament. The seem harmless in the beginning but when you have a closer look many of them are real nazis. I was at an event with some of their kandidates in my home region, they were speaking about "parasites from other countries" and "beeing truly german".
On September 22 2013 17:15 esperanto wrote: This election I am surprisingly relaxed. No idea why, it just doesnt feel like "omg the world is going to end if my party doesnt win". I have a small wishlist for the results: - AfD not getting over 5% - SPD participating in the government (dont care about the koalition)
That's it. Wish you all a happy election-sunday.
but wouldnt it be useful for you if the AfD is getting in? less likeable for CDU/FDP to get majority
You are right. But I really dont want to see them in parliament. The seem harmless in the beginning but when you have a closer look many of them are real nazis. I was at an event with some of their kandidates in my home region, they were speaking about "parasites from other countries" and "beeing truly german".
lol. might be that some from NPD are switching to AfD (for this election) because they see no point in voting NPD due to 5% mark. but in general i believe that there are much less from the extreme right side than exspected.
On September 22 2013 16:32 chrisolo wrote: Just been voting. It was so fucking empty lol. I mean yes it is sunday morning, but literally there were like 2 people in the building (who were voting and not vote helpers) and like 3 people coming towards the building for voting when I was leaving.
Fucking tragedy.
How can you not go voting T_T So stupid.
I just came back from voting. There was NO ONE else in the building. I didnt see anyone leave while I was coming and nobody entered while I was leaving. And the place was for two districts!
So where I voted (at around 12 a,m.), I thought there were quite a lot of people voting. But that's just my subjective experience. While noone had to wait, there was a decent number of people coming and going into the building. Every single person I talked about it in the last weeks said they would go voting. With around 25% overall postal voting expected, I think the total voter turnout will be (slighty) higher than the last elections.
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
I voted pirates. My vote will make roughly 0.00...001% anyway, but I just wish we finally get some proper internet laws.
On September 22 2013 16:32 chrisolo wrote: Just been voting. It was so fucking empty lol. I mean yes it is sunday morning, but literally there were like 2 people in the building (who were voting and not vote helpers) and like 3 people coming towards the building for voting when I was leaving.
Fucking tragedy.
How can you not go voting T_T So stupid.
I just came back from voting. There was NO ONE else in the building. I didnt see anyone leave while I was coming and nobody entered while I was leaving. And the place was for two districts!
So where I voted (at around 12 a,m.), I thought there were quite a lot of people voting. But that's just my subjective experience. While noone had to wait, there was a decent number of people coming and going into the building. Every single person I talked about it in the last weeks said they would go voting. With around 25% overall postal voting expected, I think the total voter turnout will be (slighty) higher than the last elections.
the voting last week (bavarian election) got 64% which is pretty damn high for a "landtagswahl". i dont see why we shouldnt get a high percentage today aswell edit. slow post for the win
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
I voted pirates. My vote will make roughly 0.00...001% anyway, but I just wish we finally get some proper internet laws.
of course some opinions from AfD are unrealistic but "die linke" also has some points where everyone knows this wont happen.
the opponents of the afd like to claim that they would be right that is common fashion in germany, the words "right" and "nazi" are thrown around all the time, i am tired of that. especially for the left-party (die linke) - whoever does not share their opinion is automatically a nazi (thats exaggerated of course but i think you get what i meant)
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
"reintroducing the mark" sorry but this is plain wrong. it is a shame that many people are so uninformed. the afd sees this as the worst case scenario. they do want to keep the EURO, just not the way it is now.
A great historian once wrote that the left would rather be dull than vulgar, the right would rather be vulgar than dull. And there we have things in their true distinctions!
The German proscription of anything which smacks of being "right-wing" is the effective banishment of the human personality from politics, the fundamental dulness of Mr. Gysi not excepted. Helmuth Kohl was the most bouffant thing the collective temper of the nation could take. As for his treacherous protoge Ms. Merkel, the people appreciate her because of how skillfully she evades the mud. And modern Germany has an unhealthy fancy for presenting herself to the world as both clean and washed.
On September 22 2013 20:11 MapleLeafSirup wrote: the opponents of the afd like to claim that they would be right that is common fashion in germany, the words "right" and "nazi" are thrown around all the time, i am tired of that. especially for the left-party (die linke) - whoever does not share their opinion is automatically a nazi (thats exaggerated of course but i think you get what i meant)
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
"reintroducing the mark" sorry but this is plain wrong. it is a shame that many people are so uninformed. the afd sees this as the worst case scenario. they do want to keep the EURO, just not the way it is now.
Oh yea instead of going back to the old currency that only germany uses, they want to kick out everyother country from the euro, so that only germany got the Euro, that such a difference
On September 22 2013 20:48 MoltkeWarding wrote: A great historian once wrote that the left would rather be dull than vulgar, the right would rather be vulgar than dull. And there we have things in their true distinctions!
The German proscription of anything which smacks of being "right-wing" is the effective banishment of the human personality from politics, the fundamental dulness of Mr. Gysi not excepted. Helmuth Kohl was the most bouffant thing the collective temper of the nation could take. As for his treacherous protoge Ms. Merkel, the people appreciate her because of how skillfully she evades the mud. And modern Germany has an unhealthy fancy for presenting herself to the world as both clean and washed.
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
On September 22 2013 20:11 MapleLeafSirup wrote: the opponents of the afd like to claim that they would be right that is common fashion in germany, the words "right" and "nazi" are thrown around all the time, i am tired of that. especially for the left-party (die linke) - whoever does not share their opinion is automatically a nazi (thats exaggerated of course but i think you get what i meant)
On September 22 2013 19:54 Mataza wrote:
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
"reintroducing the mark" sorry but this is plain wrong. it is a shame that many people are so uninformed. the afd sees this as the worst case scenario. they do want to keep the EURO, just not the way it is now.
Oh yea instead of going back to the old currency that only germany uses, they want to kick out everyother country from the euro, so that only germany got the Euro, that such a difference
Well, technically the Netherlands and Finland are also wealthy enough to keep the Euro, so we'll just make a currency union with those two countrys and all will be fine
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
Why is it that whenever I write a stereotype about the Germans, some German always tries argues the point by incarnating that very stereotype?
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
Why is it that whenever I write a stereotype about the Germans, some German always tries argues the point by incarnating that very stereotype?
I don't know, maybe because you try to be provocative without actually knowing much about our history or poilitics? Just a guess without knowing much about you. Here, have a smiley:
Hey, ACrow, did you know that Germany had a history prior to 1933, that in the 19th century "national egoism" was mostly propagated by the left and that the forces of peace in Germany were largely those of the authoritarian right? True story.
I have never gone through the German school system, but I have sat beside history Lehramt students who are going to be responsible for moulding the souls of the following generation. Lord preserve us all.
On September 22 2013 21:40 Mataza wrote: Do excuse us Moltke. There are many more germans than that one stereotype you encountered in a thread full of germans.
As for history it is largely irrelevant as german politics nowadays move slow as molasses, much like I expect many other nations politics to be.
Did not Heinrich Heine already write about this in the 1840s?
How can you folks maintain consistency in your fears of deja vu when they keep coming back to the same premises?
If I can sum up my argument in one laconic sentence it is this: Learning only one thing from history is worse than learning nothing from history.
On September 22 2013 21:14 JustPassingBy wrote: Is there a fixed time when the first preliminary results will be out?
After the voting is over 6pm
But don't they also make polls at the venue? Shouldn't they get somewhat accurate projections from them?
They have to wait until 18:00, until they can publish anything, because a result estimation before 18:00 might influence people, who did´nt vote until that time. At 18:00 you can not vote anymore, so the results can be published.
i cant wrap my mind around the fact that educated people vote for the AfD.... might as well be voting for the NPD, since the AfD attracts a lot of frustrated NPD politicians.
but seems like being anti-everything is something very popular these days. Not coming up with solutions but rather hating everything and wanting to convert back to the middle ages seems appealing to some? weird.
Be aware that the first numbers at 6 p.m. are only estimations based on people who are asked what they voted for. After that, at about 6:15 there will be the first numbers which are also (but not exclusivly) are based on actual counted votes.
To the Euro: I think the statement of the afd is, that the euro must work in a way that we dont avoid the "no bail out clause", so that every state is responsible for their own household. They only want to kick states or in worst case reintroduce the DM if the other countries do not agree to that.
On September 22 2013 21:47 Maxhster wrote: i cant wrap my mind around the fact that educated people vote for the AfD.... might as well be voting for the NPD, since the AfD attracts a lot of frustrated NPD politicians.
but seems like being anti-everything is something very popular these days. Not coming up with solutions but rather hating everything and wanting to convert back to the middle ages seems appealing to some? weird.
On September 22 2013 21:46 MoltkeWarding wrote: If I can sum up my argument in one laconic sentence it is this: Learning only one thing from history is worse than learning nothing from history.
why is learning one thing from history worse than learning nothing? i mean, it is not like germany is going to be communistic leaded, soon(TM).
I voted Pirate Party again, the same as 4 years ago.
Though they may have no chance, it's still better to vote according to your belief, than to vote a party that will certainly make it. Only this way, the democratic system can continue to work well. Will be pretty exciting to watch, if the AfD will make it. Some more democratic plurality in the parliament would be good.
I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
On September 22 2013 22:30 Caladan wrote: I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
Because contrary to the believes of some people, the entire nsa scandal is pretty much irrelevant and most people simply doesn't care because it really isn't anything to care about
On September 22 2013 21:47 Maxhster wrote: i cant wrap my mind around the fact that educated people vote for the AfD.... might as well be voting for the NPD, since the AfD attracts a lot of frustrated NPD politicians.
but seems like being anti-everything is something very popular these days. Not coming up with solutions but rather hating everything and wanting to convert back to the middle ages seems appealing to some? weird.
I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
Because contrary to the believes of some people, the entire nsa scandal is pretty much irrelevant and most people simply doesn't care because it really isn't anything to care about
Yeah, it's like in old Rome... all you need to give your citizens to shut up, is Food and Games, Food and Games... Liberty and self-determination - who cares? Dumb people. -_-
On September 22 2013 22:30 Caladan wrote: I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
Because contrary to the believes of some people, the entire nsa scandal is pretty much irrelevant and most people simply doesn't care because it really isn't anything to care about
Yeah, it's like in old Rome... all you need to give your citizens to shut up, is Food and Games, Food and Games... Liberty and self-determination - who cares? Dumb people. -_-
On September 22 2013 22:30 Caladan wrote: I will never understand, how anyone can vote CDU/Union after the recent NSA scandals and how Merkel is doing nothing against it...
Hello, unknown brother.
Meh, I doubt that Steinbrück would have done anything more than Merkel right now, and for the most people it's only a choice between CDU/FDP and SPD/Grüne. The only ones who are crying out loud about this topic is the pirate party, which shouldn't be a surprise.
edit: for clarification, I am only talking about Merkel, not that idiot Friedrich.
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
Why is it that whenever I write a stereotype about the Germans, some German always tries argues the point by incarnating that very stereotype?
The stuff published at 18 CEST are just the first predictions of some institutes based on inquiries
The real result will be published late in the night (23 CEST or something). But sooner or later the extrapolations of the known votes will be more or less converged to the real result (most likely at 20 CEST or so..).
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
The prediction at 18 cest has always been pretty close to the real one, nothing relevant will change in the 5 hours after that. The difference between the real result and the prediction is normally somewhere below 1 percent point
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Yeah, I'm surprised about that as well, I always assumed most French males were at least bi-sexual and that straight people were a rather small minority in France.
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Yeah, I'm surprised about that as well, I always assumed most French males were at least bi-sexual and that straight people were a rather small minority in France.
On September 22 2013 20:11 MapleLeafSirup wrote: the opponents of the afd like to claim that they would be right that is common fashion in germany, the words "right" and "nazi" are thrown around all the time, i am tired of that. especially for the left-party (die linke) - whoever does not share their opinion is automatically a nazi (thats exaggerated of course but i think you get what i meant)
On September 22 2013 19:54 Mataza wrote:
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
"reintroducing the mark" sorry but this is plain wrong. it is a shame that many people are so uninformed. the afd sees this as the worst case scenario. they do want to keep the EURO, just not the way it is now.
Oh yea instead of going back to the old currency that only germany uses, they want to kick out everyother country from the euro, so that only germany got the Euro, that such a difference
Well, technically the Netherlands and Finland are also wealthy enough to keep the Euro, so we'll just make a currency union with those two countrys and all will be fine
Netherlands and Finland are NOT wealthy enough to keep they euro, not with Germany in it. The effects have already been near catastrophic for both countries and are getting worse fast. A vote for AfD is a vote for a better Europe without this disaster that they call euro.
On September 22 2013 21:30 MoltkeWarding wrote: Hey, ACrow, did you know that Germany had a history prior to 1933, that in the 19th century "national egoism" was mostly propagated by the left and that the forces of peace in Germany were largely those of the authoritarian right? True story.
this is actually wrong. The First International was already founded in the 19th century and the most important parts of the basis in socialist/communist theory was talking about the international working class. "forces of peace" were right wing? Never heard about this. I'm wondering about the period u are talking about? Maybe WW1 consent by social democrats? Yes, that happened but the leading forces were right-wing. Are you talking about the revolution in 1848? This was definitely not really carried by conservative/monarchistic powers, but it was rather about unification than "national egoism". Problem is a real working class as the left power we are talking about here, wasnt really existing yet. The time afterwards was dominated by aggrressive Prussian expansion and German unification, fueled by Bismarck and Prussian monarchy. The last years were not really about national egoism but about internal power struggle with the awaking working class/social democratic party. The next change in foreign policy came with nationalistic powers under Wilhelm II. trying to cut their piece of colonies out of the world. Still no left wing...
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Yeah, I'm surprised about that as well, I always assumed most French males were at least bi-sexual and that straight people were a rather small minority in France.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Yoshi- wrote: The prediction at 18 cest has always been pretty close to the real one, nothing relevant will change in the 5 hours after that. The difference between the real result and the prediction is normally somewhere below 1 percent point
It could get very interesting today, should the last minute polls be even remotely close to the actual result. If F.D.P. and maybe AFD are as close to the 5% hurdle as they seem to be, then every minute variation might make a big difference. If of course the exit polls at 6pm indicate something like 6%+ for FDP and 4%- for AFD, then yes, no surprise should be expected.
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
Why is it that whenever I write a stereotype about the Germans, some German always tries argues the point by incarnating that very stereotype?
My life on this web site ...
Holy moly, if any opinion disagreeing with you is discredited as "stereotype", why even bother opening a topic for discussion. Don't be so full of yourselves, please.
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
On September 22 2013 23:47 aXa wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote:
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
There is a strong resistance towards euro bonds. There are always talks here, that france want to have euro bonds. And the conclusion is, that france wants, that germany carries the debts of southern europe. Furthermore the french nationalism is always seen critical in germany (but i guess this topic is worth a own thread).
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
On September 22 2013 23:47 aXa wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote:
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
There is a strong resistance towards euro bonds. There are always talks here, that france want to have euro bonds. And the conclusion is, that france wants, that germany carries the debts of southern europe. Furthermore the french nationalism is always seen critical in germany (but i guess this topic is worth a own thread).
Okay but, how is Hollande related to that French nationalism you are talking about? Also, Hollande is no more pro euro bond than sarkozy is
france in general is often viewed in this context. There is not a lot of distinctions between hollande and sarkozy (regarding nationalism).
Military parades, french language (and the refusal to speak english) and all this "grande nation" stuff is one of the main things i hear about france. There is always a bit a scepticism towards France in Germany.
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
On September 22 2013 23:47 aXa wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote:
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
Why are you even bringing this up? I was asking German people their opinions on the current French president. Gay people getting the right to marry is nice and dandy (no really, it's good that their marriage is now legal), unfortunately such an issue is ridiculously irrelevant compared to the incredible incompetence that Hollande is showing in important issues. The socialists seem to be better at berating the former government rather than fixing anything.
I don't want to go too far off topic at all so I'm going to stop here, in fact please don't even start a discussion. I just wanted German people to give their opinion on our current French president as a way to pass time until we get the results of Germany's election. I'm interested in this question and this thread is an OK thread to do so since we're not too far off topic and I don't think the question deserves its own thread. So please, just please, don't go on silly tangents about gay rights and shit.
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
On September 22 2013 23:47 aXa wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote:
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
Why are you even bringing this up? I was asking German people their opinions on the current French president. Gay people getting the right to marry is nice and dandy (no really, it's good that their marriage is now legal), unfortunately such an issue is ridiculously irrelevant compared to the incredible incompetence that Hollande is showing in important issues. The socialists seem to be better at berating the former government rather than fixing anything.
I don't want to go too far off topic at all so I'm going to stop here, in fact please don't even start a discussion. I just wanted German people to give their opinion on our current French president as a way to pass time until we get the results of Germany's election. I'm interested in this question and this thread is an OK thread to do so since we're not too far off topic and I don't think the question deserves its own thread. So please, just please, don't go on silly tangents about gay rights and shit.
In my experience what German people think about Holande: They don´t care.
Most of the topics discussed in Germany and German media are either Germany "only" related, € crisis related (still with very german centric point of view) or far away like syria.
It feels like that germany is a bit disenchanted on foreign politicians. A couple of years ago a loot of people looked at other countries and thought that there the politians are "better". But now we see people like Hollande which kind a lied in his election or Putin with the anti gay laws. Not even thinking on "yes finally a good guy" Obama which could be a ideal for politicans worldwide but decided it would be better to keep bombing.
On September 23 2013 00:16 Gonozal wrote: france in general is often viewed in this context. There is not a lot of distinctions between hollande and sarkozy (regarding nationalism).
Military parades, french language (and the refusal to speak english) and all this "grande nation" stuff is one of the main things i hear about france. There is always a bit a scepticism towards France in Germany.
Well I can easily understand why we are perceived that way. French people mostly forget that we are and always were a militaristic nation, and sometimes even our ridiculous defense budget or even 14 july doesn't ring any bell.
And of course we perceive ourself in a very different manner, at least the younger generation.
Nationalism or even patriotism are not words we would describe ourself with. They are too strongly tied with FN, our far right party. Culture, social and economical issues are whats most important to us.
Our culture make us look like jerk to other nation. Truth is, we are easily offendable and not very flexible when it comes to our cultural habits, so yeah it's hard to not pass as total assholes. But I really don't think we try to force our views to other nation, or feel superior in any manner but cuisine. Our refusal to speak english comes mainly from the fact that our schools sucks at teaching languages.
Anyway, i'd say that well educated young people highly regard germany right now. We admire the fact you have a model that works a bit better than ours when it comes to growth, and the infinite volume of German products that are available in France made us appreciate Deutsche Qualität. As someone who grew up in Alsace, learned german, had austauschpartner and went to germany numerous time, my point of view is obviously a bit biased.
I believe Europe is the most important thing in our future, even if it is flawed right now. I wish France and Germany had similiar views on the way to go about Europe, because it won't happen without one or the other.
Why are you even bringing this up? I was asking German people their opinions on the current French president. Gay people getting the right to marry is nice and dandy (no really, it's good that their marriage is now legal), unfortunately such an issue is ridiculously irrelevant compared to the incredible incompetence that Hollande is showing in important issues. The socialists seem to be better at berating the former government rather than fixing anything.
I don't want to go too far off topic at all so I'm going to stop here, in fact please don't even start a discussion. I just wanted German people to give their opinion on our current French president as a way to pass time until we get the results of Germany's election. I'm interested in this question and this thread is an OK thread to do so since we're not too far off topic and I don't think the question deserves its own thread. So please, just please, don't go on silly tangents about gay rights and shit.
I bring up what I want, and in case you didn't notice, I wasn't even talking or responding to you. I don't want to engage any conversation with you, because the first post I read from you was packed with insults. Guess what? You can express the fact you don't like hollande without cursing. I'd rather go off topic than to be disrespectful.
On September 23 2013 00:26 Incognoto wrote: don't want to go too far off topic at all so I'm going to stop here, in fact please don't even start a discussion. I just wanted German people to give their opinion on our current French president as a way to pass time until we get the results of Germany's election.
Well i personally don't like him very much, mostly because of the slight 'Europe's not going to get ruled by Germany' stuff that came out of his party, and sometimes from himself. France seems to be struggling a little bit more with the European crisis than we did, so things like this during election are just natural, but i still didn't like it very much. As someone said before he seems quite nationalistic.
What i do like are his/his parties political positions in principal, but sadly it doesn't look like he gets to much done.
On September 23 2013 00:38 aXa wrote: Anyway, i'd say that well educated young people highly regard germany right now.
I think that is in general pretty , troo. In our generation there isn't much hate at all and most people are connected enough to not dig up old resentments. I frequently here people talking about the French-German relations are 'cooling down' , but that's probably only true on a diplomatic level. The people are getting along just fine.
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote: So when is Merkel going to get re-elected? At what time will she be able to confirm that she won't have to move anything out of her office?
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
We would laugh at him if he wouldn't be important to us as well, therefore we are just as sad as the frenchies are about him.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote: i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Sarkozy worked better with merkel so most german probably would prefer him just for that, if not for innerpolitical reasons in france (of course he disagreed with her before an election or something like that to show his people that he's a strong man and so on, but all in all I think he was a lot easier to work with for merkel, which is probably why she supported his re-election too (even though she failed)).
On September 22 2013 23:47 aXa wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:40 Maxhster wrote:
On September 22 2013 23:30 Incognoto wrote:
Edit: Hey Zatic, here's a funny question. What does Germany think of the fat piece of lard we have for a president at the moment?
i guess most germans think that there was only a way up from Sarkozy? Sarkozy was perceived as being similar to Berlusconi you know. But what really intrigues me is the blatant homophobia in france, never knew you frenchies were so full of hypocrisy.
Please, don't mistake all of us for homophobic people because some loud people made a fuss about gay marriage. Most people in France are proud this law was finally passed.
Pretty sure those people exist in every country, so it can't have been such a suprise to most people.
It was a surprise because usually in France, homophobic people are ashamed to admit they are in public. Well organized demonstration were not expected.
How can Sarkozy can be perceived as a better partner than Hollande? Hollande made Ayrault, a germanophile and german speaker as his prime minister because he firmly believes that Germany is France most important partner.
Of course he believes that, because it's obvious and those surely are some nice gestures, but for merkel he's still a more troublesome guy to deal with than sarkozy. Sarkozy may have made a bigger deal out of disagreeing with merkel to get the sympathies of his people, but he actually found a consent and agreed with her more easily than holland does.
On September 22 2013 23:40 Yoshi- wrote: The prediction at 18 cest has always been pretty close to the real one, nothing relevant will change in the 5 hours after that. The difference between the real result and the prediction is normally somewhere below 1 percent point
It could get very interesting today, should the last minute polls be even remotely close to the actual result. If F.D.P. and maybe AFD are as close to the 5% hurdle as they seem to be, then every minute variation might make a big difference. If of course the exit polls at 6pm indicate something like 6%+ for FDP and 4%- for AFD, then yes, no surprise should be expected.
...or maybe we have a history with the right wing in which we learnt that its totalitarian demeanor and national egoism leads only to destruction and damages a society.
Why is it that whenever I write a stereotype about the Germans, some German always tries argues the point by incarnating that very stereotype?
My life on this web site ...
Holy moly, if any opinion disagreeing with you is discredited as "stereotype", why even bother opening a topic for discussion. Don't be so full of yourselves, please.
Jesus christ dude, relax, with your amount of posts you should know by now that he's not being serious or bitter about it, what the fuck?
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
edit: hahaha FDP 4,7% ? pleaaaaaaase
So, what's wrong with Merkel and her policies? I'm curious. It's not like I know what's right either because I know very little of German politics overall? ;o
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
edit: hahaha FDP 4,7% ? pleaaaaaaase
Since he said "only voteable" I bet that it is either Linke or AFD, only these voters would actually believe such a bullshit
As expected, Merkel again. Lord help us all. The political commentaries in France are going to be awesome at least, given our current obsession with Germany.
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
edit: hahaha FDP 4,7% ? pleaaaaaaase
Since he said "only voteable" I bet that it is either Linke or AFD, only these voters would actually believe such a bullshit
i'm not going to state here what i voted but i'm still trying to understand how people can still support merkel and her party after all this bullshit. people are really living in a dream world or just don't care, stupid lemmings.
4 seats missing to CDU alone gouverment without coalition ? WTF it never was like that in germany EVER ... its because the 4,X for fdp 4,X for afd so the 4X for cdu are worth alot ... really scary
On September 23 2013 01:10 Epx wrote: i'm not going to state here what i voted but i'm still trying to understand how people can still support merkel and her party after all this bullshit. people are really living in a dream world or just don't care, stupid lemmings.
probem is people throwing their votes in the mud like voting for AFD etc so all that is good for cdu ... but afd etc voter not understand that they vote semi for cdu ^^
as i said 4 !!! seats missing for cdu allone,
so it will be 100% cdu+spd because cdu+green would just not work i think
On September 23 2013 01:10 Drake wrote: 4 seats missing to CDU alone gouverment without coalition ? WTF it never was like that in germany EVER ... its because the 4,X for fdp 4,X for afd so the 4X for cdu are worth alot ... really scary
On September 23 2013 01:10 Drake wrote: 4 seats missing to CDU alone gouverment without coalition ? WTF it never was like that in germany EVER ... its because the 4,X for fdp 4,X for afd so the 4X for cdu are worth alot ... really scary
Yes, I can't really understand how so many people really want Merkel and the CDU. I mean she is not really that bad but nothing that should come close to govern without coalition.
So with the outcome so far I guess it'll be a great coalition.
On September 23 2013 01:10 Drake wrote: 4 seats missing to CDU alone gouverment without coalition ? WTF it never was like that in germany EVER ... its because the 4,X for fdp 4,X for afd so the 4X for cdu are worth alot ... really scary
Yes, I can't really understand how so many people really want Merkel and the CDU. I mean she is not really that bad but nothing that should come close to govern without coalition.
So with the outcome so far I guess it'll be a great coalition.
yeah. unless die grünen want to coalitate (no idea if that word exists) or the FDP gets over 5%
On September 23 2013 01:10 Drake wrote: 4 seats missing to CDU alone gouverment without coalition ? WTF it never was like that in germany EVER ... its because the 4,X for fdp 4,X for afd so the 4X for cdu are worth alot ... really scary
Yes, I can't really understand how so many people really want Merkel and the CDU. I mean she is not really that bad but nothing that should come close to govern without coalition.
So with the outcome so far I guess it'll be a great coalition.
yeah. unless die grünen want to coalitate (no idea if that word exists) or the FDP gets over 5%
Yes, but I guess Die Grünen are too stubborn and I don't think the FDP will make it, ZDF sees them at 4,5%, so it looks really bad for them.
Sad, sad day for the FDP ... wow. I was pretty sure it wouldn't be a succesful election for them, but never imagined it would be such a desaster...
So, what now ? CDU/SPD coalition was ruled out by the SPD beforehand (well, mainly by Steinbrück, but backed by pretty much every other SPD politician I saw interviewed). The only options to get a majority seem to be Die Grünen and Die Linke. The first one is unlikely to work out, and the latter... will never ever happen.
To be honest, it was like that before. FDP doesn't do anything anyway. I do not know why so many people voted black. I hate Merkel so much for sitting out everything.
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
edit: hahaha FDP 4,7% ? pleaaaaaaase
So, what's wrong with Merkel and her policies? I'm curious. It's not like I know what's right either because I know very little of German politics overall? ;o
She doesn'T act but only reacts. With a gigantic delay.
On September 23 2013 00:55 Epx wrote: just came home from voting the only voteable party in my opinion.
really excited now to see the final results, that's the first time i'm really interested in our election too. changes are really needed.
When Merkel finally becomes Chancellor there will be the changes you hope for. Or something.
And please tell me who the voteable party is. Because I was staring at that piece of paper today and didn't know what the fuck I was even doing voting.
edit: hahaha FDP 4,7% ? pleaaaaaaase
So, what's wrong with Merkel and her policies? I'm curious. It's not like I know what's right either because I know very little of German politics overall? ;o
She doesn'T act but only reacts. With a gigantic delay.
like the catholic curch. reactiontime of a shifting sand dune
FDP still at 4.7% and out, I hope the prognosis stays that way Quite surprising that the Union is so close to an absolute majority, I would have never guessed such a high percentage for a single party.
Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
i possibly made a mistake along the way... so not sure if numbers are correct.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
Beggar-thy-neighbor policies of Germany continue...
But fear not, since 60% of Germany's exports go to the rest of Europe and all their neighbors are out of money they will soon follow on the road to ruin.
On September 23 2013 01:10 Epx wrote: i'm not going to state here what i voted but i'm still trying to understand how people can still support merkel and her party after all this bullshit. people are really living in a dream world or just don't care, stupid lemmings.
Why won't you state it? Which horrible thing will happen when you do it? Seriously, don't call every party bullshit except one and then say "b-b-b-but I can't say which one I voted". When you made the effort to VOTE the party then you shouldn't be ashamed of it.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
I just said that to illustrate what 50% in parliament actually means in terms of the total population.
Its not just minors that are not eligible to vote but also non germans that live here permanently. And minors do have interests too apart from candy that arent represented. With the demographic change towards more old people and less kids i think those interests are more frequently forgotten.
Its true that not all of them are able to express their interests appropriately but its not like they just dont matter.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
I just said that to illustrate what 50% in parliament actually means in terms of the total population.
Its not just minors that are not eligible to vote but also non germans that live here permanently. And minors do have interests too apart from candy that arent represented. With the demographic change towards more old people and less kids i think those interests are more frequently forgotten.
Its true that not all of them are able to express their interests appropriately but its not like they just dont matter.
The CDU actually scores very high in polls about young people who aren't able to vote yet, may have something to do with the fact that they have never seen anything else than a merkel government.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
I just said that to illustrate what 50% in parliament actually means in terms of the total population.
Its not just minors that are not eligible to vote but also non germans that live here permanently. And minors do have interests too apart from candy that arent represented. With the demographic change towards more old people and less kids i think those interests are more frequently forgotten.
Its true that not all of them are able to express their interests appropriately but its not like they just dont matter.
Easy solution: Give parents an additional vote for every underage child they have living under their roof.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
I just said that to illustrate what 50% in parliament actually means in terms of the total population.
Its not just minors that are not eligible to vote but also non germans that live here permanently. And minors do have interests too apart from candy that arent represented. With the demographic change towards more old people and less kids i think those interests are more frequently forgotten.
Its true that not all of them are able to express their interests appropriately but its not like they just dont matter.
The CDU actually scores very high in polls about young people who aren't able to vote yet, may have something to do that they have never seen anything else than a merkel government.
Merkel is somehow seen like a natural state for Germany, most people are seemingly not even able to imagine not having her as chancellor.
On September 23 2013 01:29 SpikeStarcraft wrote: Its kinda sad to see that possibly 15% of the voters are not represented in the parliament + 30% nonvoter. and only 62% of the population is eligible to vote..
That means you basically need the support of ~20% of the population to have 50% in the parliament...
you would like that minors would be eligible to vote too? we might have to deal with a free candy party then?
I just said that to illustrate what 50% in parliament actually means in terms of the total population.
Its not just minors that are not eligible to vote but also non germans that live here permanently. And minors do have interests too apart from candy that arent represented. With the demographic change towards more old people and less kids i think those interests are more frequently forgotten.
Its true that not all of them are able to express their interests appropriately but its not like they just dont matter.
Easy solution: Give parents an additional vote for every underage child they have living under their roof.
Brilliant, they will totally vote for the best interest of their children.
On September 23 2013 01:46 Maxhster wrote: you gotta hand it to Merkel, she gets reelected without having done anything in her previous terms. Thats the biggest scam that anybody can achieve.
It's so true, doing nothing is the way to go nowadays. Just do nothing and repeat the same sentence for years, say everything is fine, there you go, be the chancellor.
I just hope that Calico start-up financed by Google will be able to data mine its way to immortality for humans. If that happens fast enough, we could have an Eternal Chancellor Merkel.
What is wrong with my country?Cant believe so many want Merkel back with her stupid "Everything is alright in Germany" Campaign.Stuff is getting so expensive because of that stupid 19% Mwst bullshit.Not talking about other stuff that is also wrong.Well I guess a country where someone like Dieter Bohlen can sell 1 million books taxes cant be high enough.
On September 23 2013 01:52 sharkie wrote: man the Merkel hate in this thread is getting ridicilous she is way better than obama could ever be (who I am sure would get all your votes)
be happy you actually have a leader who IS decent and not downright horrible like other countries
be happy you dont have to live under this "leader"
On September 23 2013 01:51 Ropid wrote: I just hope that Calico start-up financed by Google will be able to data mine its way to immortality for humans. If that happens fast enough, we could have an Eternal Chancellor Merkel.
hahahahahahahaah... NO should that happen, then i hope google also builds a spaceship so that i can fly far far away from this planet.
On September 23 2013 01:53 Tresher wrote: What is wrong with my country?Cant believe so many want Merkel back with her stupid "Everything is alright in Germany" Campaign.Stuff is getting so expensive because of that stupid 19% Mwst bullshit.Not talking about other stuff that is also wrong.Well I guess a country where someone like Dieter Bohlen can sell 1 million books taxes cant be high enough.
expensive? Ever been to Austria? You dont even know what expensive means lol
On September 23 2013 01:52 sharkie wrote: man the Merkel hate in this thread is getting ridicilous she is way better than obama could ever be (who I am sure would get all your votes)
be happy you actually have a leader who IS decent and not downright horrible like other countries
Be happy she isn't horrible? That shouldn't be the standard we measure our "leader" with.
On September 23 2013 01:46 Maxhster wrote: you gotta hand it to Merkel, she gets reelected without having done anything in her previous terms. Thats the biggest scam that anybody can achieve.
It's not like she had much of a challenge... with the self-destructive agenda of the Greens, the fairy-tale agenda of die Linke, the abysmal performance of the FDP in the last 4 years, the choices suddenly become rather slim.
On September 23 2013 01:52 sharkie wrote: man the Merkel hate in this thread is getting ridicilous she is way better than obama could ever be (who I am sure would get all your votes)
be happy you actually have a leader who IS decent and not downright horrible like other countries
Be happy she isn't horrible? That shouldn't be the standard we measure our "leader" with.
Seriously? Did you look at the other parties. Merkel was the only logical choice.
On September 23 2013 01:55 Epx wrote: the cdu and merkel have done NOTHING in the last 4 years, she never takes a stand. HOW CAN PEOPLE REALLY VOTE THEM?!?!?!
On September 23 2013 01:53 Tresher wrote: What is wrong with my country?Cant believe so many want Merkel back with her stupid "Everything is alright in Germany" Campaign.Stuff is getting so expensive because of that stupid 19% Mwst bullshit.Not talking about other stuff that is also wrong.Well I guess a country where someone like Dieter Bohlen can sell 1 million books taxes cant be high enough.
expensive? Ever been to Austria? You dont even know what expensive means lol
I still prefer Austria over Germany. OK, things are a bit more expensive, but we also earn more money
On September 23 2013 01:51 Ropid wrote: I just hope that Calico start-up financed by Google will be able to data mine its way to immortality for humans. If that happens fast enough, we could have an Eternal Chancellor Merkel.
hahahahahahahaah... NO should that happen, then i hope google also builds a spaceship so that i can fly far far away from this planet.
Don't worry, by then they'll also be able to send a clone of her with you, to "govern" the colony
On September 23 2013 01:53 Tresher wrote: What is wrong with my country?Cant believe so many want Merkel back with her stupid "Everything is alright in Germany" Campaign.Stuff is getting so expensive because of that stupid 19% Mwst bullshit.Not talking about other stuff that is also wrong.Well I guess a country where someone like Dieter Bohlen can sell 1 million books taxes cant be high enough.
expensive? Ever been to Austria? You dont even know what expensive means lol
I still prefer Austria over Germany. OK, things are a bit more expensive, but we also earn more money
who earns more money?
Not teachers, nor IT specialists/programmers
I don't know about the other jobs, but who earns more money in Austria than Germany?
On September 23 2013 01:52 sharkie wrote: man the Merkel hate in this thread is getting ridicilous she is way better than obama could ever be (who I am sure would get all your votes)
be happy you actually have a leader who IS decent and not downright horrible like other countries
Be happy she isn't horrible? That shouldn't be the standard we measure our "leader" with.
Seriously? Did you look at the other parties. Merkel was the only logical choice.
On September 23 2013 01:55 Epx wrote: the cdu and merkel have done NOTHING in the last 4 years, she never takes a stand. HOW CAN PEOPLE REALLY VOTE THEM?!?!?!
how could you ever vote the others?
pretty easy, its like someone ask you "you are for this guy who wanna kill you or, ... WHO CARES i take the other guys" ^^
On September 23 2013 02:03 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/CSU getting so many votes is the proof that things aren't as bleak in our country as everyone makes themselves believe every day.
well the opposition is weaker then ever and makes sentences like "islam is part of germany" even if its true you instant lose alot of your voters ...
but merkel (cdu only) gouverment and we learn what bleak is
I guess I want CDU+Greens. Those CDU fuckers need something liberal to spice up their decision making and the Greens are the only ones available this round. CDU+SPD, I'm not sure those two would actually differ enough to create interesting planning for the future.
On September 23 2013 01:55 Epx wrote: the cdu and merkel have done NOTHING in the last 4 years, she never takes a stand. HOW CAN PEOPLE REALLY VOTE THEM?!?!?!
Well she's not really demanding and everywhere else in Europe there is recession, budget cuts, more taxes. People just like to stay out of it and dont want to mess with the economy by raising taxes when earnings from taxes have never been higher in Germany.
On September 23 2013 01:53 Tresher wrote: What is wrong with my country?Cant believe so many want Merkel back with her stupid "Everything is alright in Germany" Campaign.Stuff is getting so expensive because of that stupid 19% Mwst bullshit.Not talking about other stuff that is also wrong.Well I guess a country where someone like Dieter Bohlen can sell 1 million books taxes cant be high enough.
expensive? Ever been to Austria? You dont even know what expensive means lol
I still prefer Austria over Germany. OK, things are a bit more expensive, but we also earn more money
I don't think that's as true as you wish it to be.
On September 23 2013 02:03 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/CSU getting so many votes is the proof that things aren't as bleak in our country as everyone makes themselves believe every day.
well the opposition is weaker then ever and makes sentences like "islam is part of germany" even if its true you instant lose alot of your voters ...
but merkel (cdu only) gouverment and we learn what bleak is
On September 23 2013 02:05 Ropid wrote: I guess I want CDU+Greens. Those CDU fuckers need something liberal to spice up their decision making and the Greens are the only ones available this round. CDU+SPD, I'm not sure those two would actually differ enough to create interesting planning for the future.
hahaha. greens and liberal. oh boy. people who want to make energy a luxury so we "safe" the planet are anything but liberal.
I don't know whether to be happy or sad. FDP and AfD not in and The Left in again; all of these are great results.
On the other side: a Union only government is not really what I wanted and this wasn't even my worst case scenario; I didn't thought that this was possible. So mixed feelings.
Also: I was intentionally angry at the SPD not to talk with The Left to find a way to make Rot-Rot-Grün happen, but now it looks like it is not even possible anymore.
How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
The Left is representing opinions that no other parties in the Bundestag represent. That's already good. Also their good political points are quite often taken by the other parties. They move something and that's good.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
That's exactly the point of the left and how their ideas work theoretically. Instead of someone working overtime six days a week or what you are thinking of, it would make more sense for businesses to employ more people and distribute the work more. Unemployment goes down.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
Because Die Linke wants 10€ minimum wage....
and???
thats more then the minimum wages in ither european countries you tried it to compare to.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
Because Die Linke wants 10€ minimum wage....
Well you have to start somewhere. The main point right now is getting there, 9 euro or 10 euro that will come afterwards and the numbers will be adjusted. Although 9 euro would mean the person still receives monetary help from the state once in rent.
10€ minimum wage makes so many jobs disappear. At our local movie theatre they normally pay something like 8€ (same for McD). They will be hurt, every farmer who needs seasonal worker will suffer and some of them won't be able to survive.
As for the "more taxes means more low paid jobs"-part: The jobs which earn you more than 100k are normally not jobs were just can employ some unemployed guy with no degree. These are jobs which require atleast some kind of deeper knowledge. You can't just use some random guy for these positions.
As you said, theoretically it's good but it just won't work properly in reality.
On September 23 2013 02:24 Sooooil wrote: How is it good that the FDP is not in the parliament but the left is? The Left just promises some stupid tax regulations and minimum wage that just WON'T work. It's sad to see that so many people just believe that its longterm useful to have such high taxes for rich people. More than 60% taxes for ppl earning more than 100k just will make people lazy who could earn that money as it won't be worth your while to work harder to earn more money.
Well thank god it would only be 53% taxes for rich people, that's just going back to the number we had in the past with Kohl. And how can you say minimum wages won't work, when it does in other nations and the industry itself wishes for minimum wages to assure fair competition.
Because Die Linke wants 10€ minimum wage....
and???
thats more then the minimum wages in ither european countries you tried it to compare to.
i didnt compare it to anything
and you give zero reasons why 10€ minimum is bad in comparison to other minimum wages
With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
On September 23 2013 02:45 Sooooil wrote: 10€ minimum wage makes so many jobs disappear. At our local movie theatre they normally pay something like 8€ (same for McD). They will be hurt, every farmer who needs seasonal worker will suffer and some of them won't be able to survive.
As for the "more taxes means more low paid jobs"-part: The jobs which earn you more than 100k are normally not jobs were just can employ some unemployed guy with no degree. These are jobs which require atleast some kind of deeper knowledge. You can't just use some random guy for these positions.
As you said, theoretically it's good but it just won't work properly in reality.
It's not about an exact number , it's about the idea in general . First rule of negotionating is allways starting with an unrealistic goal that you don't get screwed over too far when you undoubtly will have to make compromises.
I have always loved that train of thought. Raise the taxes and more people will become nurses because... more people will study to be nurses because... higher taxes?
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I want an opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
I know, that this is´nt the right place to discuss our general election system, but atm. it looks like this:
Germany has 80 million people, of which about 60 million are allowed to vote. That is about 75%. Out of those about 70% voted, and out of those about 42,5% voted CDU/CSU. So in the end, the CDU/CSU will probably rule 100% of the population, becuase they got elected by 0,75*0,7*0,425=0,223125, so about 22% of it.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
It's the first time this happened in all those years and will probably remain the last time, so don't worry.
On September 23 2013 01:22 Blurio wrote: To be honest, it was like that before. FDP doesn't do anything anyway. I do not know why so many people voted black. I hate Merkel so much for sitting out everything.
So you rather have a government that reacts quickly and does not reconsider facts and does not evaluate developement. I think Merkels way is very good, not shiny, not outspoken and not IN YOUR FACE but also not "wrong". Even if Steinbrück had won, he would act more like merkel when in office. Also "hate" is a very strong word.
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
I voted pirates. My vote will make roughly 0.00...001% anyway, but I just wish we finally get some proper internet laws.
There's two reasons that I voted AfD, and they're not about reintroducing the DM because that actually seems a bit backwards in this day and age. 1) It has become commonplace that the EU will break ANY rule it is built on to keep the markets quiet. There is not a single electable party that talks about this except the AfD. No bailouts, Maastricht rules, independence of the ECB, it's all out the window, nobody gives a fuck. The stability and integrity of the EU, which is supposed to be our future, is more and more compromised. 2) Nobody talks about the fact that the German populace was never ASKED a damn thing. We weren't asked about the Euro, the ESM or anything. EU and German politicians just ordered us to engage in massive commitments without ever getting actual approval. This huge democratic deficit cannot stand, and the AfD wishes to introduce more direct referendums.
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
I voted pirates. My vote will make roughly 0.00...001% anyway, but I just wish we finally get some proper internet laws.
There's two reasons that I voted AfD, and they're not about reintroducing the DM because that actually seems a bit backwards in this day and age. 1) It has become commonplace that the EU will break ANY rule it is built on to keep the markets quiet. There is not a single electable party that talks about this except the AfD. No bailouts, Maastricht rules, independence of the ECB, it's all out the window, nobody gives a fuck. The stability and integrity of the EU, which is supposed to be our future, is more and more compromised. 2) Nobody talks about the fact that the German populace was never ASKED a damn thing. We weren't asked about the Euro, the ESM or anything. EU and German politicians just ordered us to engage in massive commitments without ever getting actual approval. This huge democratic deficit cannot stand, and the AfD wishes to introduce more direct referendums.
the problem is afd is made by the elite they akt like they would be your voice, they are just a hardcore fdp who tricked you alot
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
I know, that this is´nt the right place to discuss our general election system, but atm. it looks like this:
Germany has 80 million people, of which about 60 million are allowed to vote. That is about 75%. Out of those about 70% voted, and out of those about 42,5% voted CDU/CSU. So in the end, the CDU/CSU will probably rule 100% of the population, becuase they got elected by 0,75*0,7*0,425=0,223125, so about 22% of it.
the 30% nonvoters chose to support all parties according to their results. Noone forced them to not vote.
This time was had 2 parties very close to 5%, so thats unfortunate.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Its kinda ironic that the FDP tried to "lend" votes from the CDU on the hustings to somehow make 5%. The CDU was not amused and wanted all the votes. In retrospect they would probably be happier if they had "lent" them 0.5% so the FDP can take the 5% hurdle and continue the current coalition instead of looking for a new partner.
The FDP does seem like an easier partner than SPD or the greens.
On September 22 2013 19:28 PraefektMotus wrote: So, just voted AfD. Time to shake things up a little bit.
You just want to watch the world burn. Be honest. Reintroducing the mark, stopping many obligations we have with the EU. No one can tell where that will lead.
I voted pirates. My vote will make roughly 0.00...001% anyway, but I just wish we finally get some proper internet laws.
There's two reasons that I voted AfD, and they're not about reintroducing the DM because that actually seems a bit backwards in this day and age. 1) It has become commonplace that the EU will break ANY rule it is built on to keep the markets quiet. There is not a single electable party that talks about this except the AfD. No bailouts, Maastricht rules, independence of the ECB, it's all out the window, nobody gives a fuck. The stability and integrity of the EU, which is supposed to be our future, is more and more compromised. 2) Nobody talks about the fact that the German populace was never ASKED a damn thing. We weren't asked about the Euro, the ESM or anything. EU and German politicians just ordered us to engage in massive commitments without ever getting actual approval. This huge democratic deficit cannot stand, and the AfD wishes to introduce more direct referendums.
the problem is afd is made by the elite they akt like they would be your voice, they are just a hardcore fdp who tricked you alot
Well maybe that's your perception. As it stands, no party tackled those problems except them.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
Ok thanks. That's half a million idiots more or less .
@ Incognito The Left arent Communists...They are Democratic Socialists u want too see Communist Geman Partys? google MLPD or KPD...There u see The Communist Partys...
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
I know, that this is´nt the right place to discuss our general election system, but atm. it looks like this:
Germany has 80 million people, of which about 60 million are allowed to vote. That is about 75%. Out of those about 70% voted, and out of those about 42,5% voted CDU/CSU. So in the end, the CDU/CSU will probably rule 100% of the population, becuase they got elected by 0,75*0,7*0,425=0,223125, so about 22% of it.
the 30% nonvoters chose to support all parties according to their results. Noone forced them to not vote.
This time was had 2 parties very close to 5%, so thats unfortunate.
Yeah, sure, the non-voters have themselves to blame and it is also surely a good thing that 6 year olds or something aren´t allowed to vote either (Otherwise, we might get NPD-guys give out candy at schools again [Yes, that actually happened during a state election]). But still, I don´t see a good reason, why we could´nt lower the 5%-limit to 3 or 4 percent. There are quite a few parties (and with that votes), that would get in and the joke parties (Die Partei and stuff) would still be out.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
lol communism xD ^^^^^^^^ xDddd
No german (relevant) party stands for communism and no, social equity is not communism.
This is a horrible endresult, I am ashamed for my country.
The only thing that is shameful is reading some people opinion, yours included. But guess you really shouldn't read political dicussions online, in those the vocal majority is rather stupid
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
lol communism xD ^^^^^^^^ xDddd
No german (relevant) party stands for communism and no, social equity is not communism.
This is a horrible endresult, I am ashamed for my country.
The only thing that is shameful is reading some people opinion, yours included. But guess you really shouldn't read political dicussions online, in those the vocal majority is rather stupid
So you are telling me that I'm wrong? What exactly? Are there relevant communist parties in Germany or does social equity mean communism? Tell me
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
lol communism xD ^^^^^^^^ xDddd
No german (relevant) party stands for communism and no, social equity is not communism.
This is a horrible endresult, I am ashamed for my country.
The only thing that is shameful is reading some people opinion, yours included. But guess you really shouldn't read political dicussions online, in those the vocal majority is rather stupid
I guess u voted FDP? calm down buddy i give u some tissues later
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
so much, yo
less than 2005. probably because some voted for AfD
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Dunno, seeing what happened each time they got into a Landtag, the NPD getting into Bundestag once isn't really that bad. Each time they got into basically any parliament, they started acting even more stupid then otherwise and lost a lot of support due to that.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
lol communism xD ^^^^^^^^ xDddd
No german (relevant) party stands for communism and no, social equity is not communism.
This is a horrible endresult, I am ashamed for my country.
The only thing that is shameful is reading some people opinion, yours included. But guess you really shouldn't read political dicussions online, in those the vocal majority is rather stupid
So you are telling me that I'm wrong? What exactly? Are there relevant communist parties in Germany or does social equity mean communism? Tell me
That this is a horrible end result and that one can actually be ashamed of it. That is just as wrong as it can get, a horrible result would have been if either pirates/linke/afd/fpd would have gotten a relevant result. But CDU/SPD is one of the best two best coalitions, the other being SPD/greens. Out of the possibles outcome this is easily the best/second best any who actually thinks otherwise is a fool.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
lol communism xD ^^^^^^^^ xDddd
No german (relevant) party stands for communism and no, social equity is not communism.
This is a horrible endresult, I am ashamed for my country.
The only thing that is shameful is reading some people opinion, yours included. But guess you really shouldn't read political dicussions online, in those the vocal majority is rather stupid
So you are telling me that I'm wrong? What exactly? Are there relevant communist parties in Germany or does social equity mean communism? Tell me
That this is a horrible end result and that one can actually be ashamed of it. That is just as wrong as it can get, a horrible result would have been if either pirates/linke/afd/fpd would have gotten a relevant result. But CDU/SPD is one of the best two best coalitions, the other being SPD/greens. Out of the possibles outcome this is easily the best/second best any who actually thinks otherwise is a fool.
rofl are you kidding? you are such a lemming, open your eyes please.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
It seems much, but compared to other European countries, the right wing populisitic parties don't have much ground here.
This picture from Wikipedia shows European national parliaments with representatives from right-wing populist parties in 2010. In dark brown, those in government.
Compared to other nations it is not as bad in Germany.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
Have you ever talked to the average German? There are a lot of stupid people in Germany that I'm not surprised that some, probably just a tiny fraction, of them are attracted to ring wing extremist opinion.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
On September 23 2013 03:03 SpikeStarcraft wrote: [quote]
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
It seems much, but compared to other European countries, the right wing populisitic parties don't have much ground here.
This picture from Wikipedia shows European national parliaments with representatives from right-wing populist parties in 2010. In dark brown, those in government.
Compared to other nations it is not as bad in Germany.
Well luckily the right-wing partie(s) ( do the other ones will exist ? ) in Germany are total loons and/or completely incompetent and thats blatantly obvious to just about everyone ( save a few hundred thousand ) .
On September 23 2013 02:52 Scorch wrote: With the FDP, AfD and other parties failing to get into the Bundestag, a whopping 15% of votes basically go to waste. This means that the CDU's 42% may be enough to win an absolute majority in seats. I consider any one party government problematic for the democracy, and certainly one with only 42% of the popular vote.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
How the hell is that depressing? Look at ANY other european country, then be happy because they are kept so well in check in Germany.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
So you know that they have ex-SED members and still vote for them? I guess corruption beyong belief, totalitarian opression, and sending people to gulages doesn't go against your moral principles... This is really sad...
I agree that temp-work (I assume you mean "Zeitarbeit") is despicable and that German troops should not be involved in foreign conflicts on a large scale. However, the rest of their agenda is ridiculous. As already partly shown here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=410943¤tpage=15#284 Minimum-wage as proposed by them cannot work either. For some small insight you can look through this very thread.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
It seems much, but compared to other European countries, the right wing populisitic parties don't have much ground here.
This picture from Wikipedia shows European national parliaments with representatives from right-wing populist parties in 2010. In dark brown, those in government. + Show Spoiler +
Compared to other nations it is not as bad in Germany.
That doesn't make me feel any better. I know every country has its extremists, and that they are more popular in other countries, but still, anything > 0% is more than I'd like.
this system was developed for good reasons as other systems ended in disaster.
yeah that system is important but when 15% are not represented in parliament then thats a bad consequence.
Especially because its so close.
I think 2% would be enough of a hurdle to keep the troubesome small parties from interrupting the Bundestag too much. But maybe its just because I actually want an actual opposition that does not consider Cuba a paradise on Earth.
I think 2% gets awfully close to a number that would allow the NPD to enter and thats not a pleasant thought.
Yeah, what's NPD's result today btw? Does someone know?
Around 1.2% according to TAZ
That is... depressing. Just wow
what is depressing? so much? so few? that the source is from the taz?
That it is so many. It must mean a few hundred thousand voted for them. That's a lot of people who make me kinda nervous.
Have you ever talked to the average German? There are a lot of stupid people in Germany that I'm not surprised that some, probably just a tiny fraction, of them are attracted to ring wing extremist opinion.
Tbh most of the people I talk to now are a part of the university in some way. Sometimes I forget this is not an accurate representation of Germany as a whole.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
Well, we are going by the assumption that you don't lie about that. I think one of the TL commandments is not to do that, too.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
So you know that they have ex-SED members and still vote for them? I guess corruption beyong belief, totalitarian opression, and sending people to gulages doesn't go against your moral principles... This is really sad...
I agree that temp-work (I assume you mean "Zeitarbeit") is despicable and that German troops should not be involved in foreign conflicts on a large scale. However, the rest of their agenda is ridiculous. As already partly shown here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=410943¤tpage=15#284 Minimum-wage as proposed by them cannot work either. For some small insight you can look through this very thread.
So u call me basicly Moraly broke? First off. They dotn send anyone too Gulags neither they do supress anyone get ur facts straight first.Secoundly,I could assume to that u are Morally broke since u clearly want Sanctions and Continue with Hartz4..I guess u German then. i tell u a something now i Know someoen who worked 35 Years by "Opel" un Bochum. As we all know they want to close this factory. hes 53 Years old now tell me how he is aible to find a Job with that Age and if u say "Yes they are plenty of Jobs" Yes they are but he has to Support hes Family with the Wage he gets so noe lets say he comes into Hartz4 and u know how the German Society act towards thoose People....So u will call him Lazy too? That hes money he gets goes only into Tobacco and Alcohol? Or even Sanction him since he refuses to work for a "Zeitarbeits" Company because of the Human contemptuous wages they pay. Sorry but ur Posts make me very Angry. If any Typos are in it and TL mods want too send me a warning AGAIN for this i kindly want too remind u that this is Kind of Racist. Thank you.
ARD now has at CDU/CSU now 3 seats from absolute majority. FDP is out. out. out. I'll wake up tomorrow and have to check it again to make sure it's not a dream. AfD not in, even though there a lot of idiots in this party, I still believe euro-scepticism whould be in the parliament.
So CDU-SPD coalition most likely happening now. CDU surey not too happy about that, as this means that despite their huge win, they will still have fewer ministers than before.
On September 23 2013 04:10 Mafe wrote: ARD now has at CDU/CSU now 3 seats from absolute majority. FDP is out. out. out. I'll wake up tomorrow and have to check it again to make sure it's not a dream. AfD not in, even though there a lot of idiots in this party, I still believe euro-scepticism whould be in the parliament.
So CDU-SPD coalition most likely happening now. CDU surey not too happy about that, as this means that despite their huge win, they will still have fewer ministers than before.
Is it certain that CDU won't have a majority on their own?
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
So you know that they have ex-SED members and still vote for them? I guess corruption beyong belief, totalitarian opression, and sending people to gulages doesn't go against your moral principles... This is really sad...
I agree that temp-work (I assume you mean "Zeitarbeit") is despicable and that German troops should not be involved in foreign conflicts on a large scale. However, the rest of their agenda is ridiculous. As already partly shown here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=410943¤tpage=15#284 Minimum-wage as proposed by them cannot work either. For some small insight you can look through this very thread.
So u call me basicly Moraly broke? First off. They dotn send anyone too Gulags neither they do supress anyone get ur facts straight first.Secoundly,I could assume to that u are Morally broke since u clearly want Sanctions and Continue with Hartz4..I guess u German then. i tell u a something now i Know someoen who worked 35 Years by "Opel" un Bochum. As we all know they want to close this factory. hes 53 Years old now tell me how he is aible to find a Job with that Age and if u say "Yes they are plenty of Jobs" Yes they are but he has to Support hes Family with the Wage he gets so noe lets say he comes into Hartz4 and u know how the German Society act towards thoose People....So u will call him Lazy too? That hes money he gets goes only into Tobacco and Alcohol? Or even Sanction him since he refuses to work for a "Zeitarbeits" Company because of the Human contemptuous wages they pay. Sorry but ur Posts make me very Angry. If any Typos are in it and TL mods want too send me a warning AGAIN for this i kindly want too remind u that this is Kind of Racist. Thank you.
On September 23 2013 04:10 Mafe wrote: ARD now has at CDU/CSU now 3 seats from absolute majority. FDP is out. out. out. I'll wake up tomorrow and have to check it again to make sure it's not a dream. AfD not in, even though there a lot of idiots in this party, I still believe euro-scepticism whould be in the parliament.
So CDU-SPD coalition most likely happening now. CDU surey not too happy about that, as this means that despite their huge win, they will still have fewer ministers than before.
Is it certain that CDU won't have a majority on their own?
No, it's not. But it's very likely. If you want me to guess percentages, I would say it's 80+% for non-absolute-majority.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
So you know that they have ex-SED members and still vote for them? I guess corruption beyong belief, totalitarian opression, and sending people to gulages doesn't go against your moral principles... This is really sad...
I agree that temp-work (I assume you mean "Zeitarbeit") is despicable and that German troops should not be involved in foreign conflicts on a large scale. However, the rest of their agenda is ridiculous. As already partly shown here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=410943¤tpage=15#284 Minimum-wage as proposed by them cannot work either. For some small insight you can look through this very thread.
So u call me basicly Moraly broke? First off. They dotn send anyone too Gulags neither they do supress anyone get ur facts straight first.Secoundly,I could assume to that u are Morally broke since u clearly want Sanctions and Continue with Hartz4..I guess u German then. i tell u a something now i Know someoen who worked 35 Years by "Opel" un Bochum. As we all know they want to close this factory. hes 53 Years old now tell me how he is aible to find a Job with that Age and if u say "Yes they are plenty of Jobs" Yes they are but he has to Support hes Family with the Wage he gets so noe lets say he comes into Hartz4 and u know how the German Society act towards thoose People....So u will call him Lazy too? That hes money he gets goes only into Tobacco and Alcohol? Or even Sanction him since he refuses to work for a "Zeitarbeits" Company because of the Human contemptuous wages they pay. Sorry but ur Posts make me very Angry. If any Typos are in it and TL mods want too send me a warning AGAIN for this i kindly want too remind u that this is Kind of Racist. Thank you.
Alphabetization is not a form of racism.
Lots of denglish in this thread but this was a gem. Maybe he just wants to present a compelling argument that we need higher taxes for investments in education?
On September 23 2013 04:18 75 wrote: if the Union will get like 302 seats and have majority, they will make a coaltion though, wont they?
You didn't understood the system?
There is no reason to make a coalition if you have the majority
Sure there is. Not everyone votes according to the party line 100% of the time. If you only have the majority by a few seats it is more than likely that a coalition will be formed.
On September 23 2013 03:19 Incognoto wrote: So Germany is CDU only? No FPD?
Somehow that sounds very nice
Its a Nightmare.
wait! my bad
i meant that it was CDU only and no SPD
fpd out is indeed a shame i think because i kind of like their views
sorry
i don't like communism lol ^^
I am Socialist...Thats why i elected the Left.
I believe you that you would like to be a socialist, but voting for the Left doesn't make you one.
Chances are: - you haven't even read the party's agenda - you have no idea where a significant portion of the party's members stem from and how morally bankrupt they are - you're either incapable of contemplating over semi-complex systems or simply refuse to do so
Overall, chances are that you wasted your vote on a party that neither represents your ideals, nor has any capability of implementing what you wished for even if they were elected into power.
I did Read there Agenda and sorry but someoen from Bulgaria doesnt have the RIGHT to tell me what i have too vote and who not. U dont even KNOW German Partys do u? And i know they mostly ex SED Party Members They want too ban Temp-Work which is modern Slavery. They want a minium wage. They want that German Soldiers come home and dont particpiate in any Conflicts. i can go on...So dont Judge me.
Just because my country on an online forum is listed as Bulgaria, doesn't mean I live there...
So you know that they have ex-SED members and still vote for them? I guess corruption beyong belief, totalitarian opression, and sending people to gulages doesn't go against your moral principles... This is really sad...
I agree that temp-work (I assume you mean "Zeitarbeit") is despicable and that German troops should not be involved in foreign conflicts on a large scale. However, the rest of their agenda is ridiculous. As already partly shown here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=410943¤tpage=15#284 Minimum-wage as proposed by them cannot work either. For some small insight you can look through this very thread.
So u call me basicly Moraly broke? First off. They dotn send anyone too Gulags neither they do supress anyone get ur facts straight first.Secoundly,I could assume to that u are Morally broke since u clearly want Sanctions and Continue with Hartz4..I guess u German then. i tell u a something now i Know someoen who worked 35 Years by "Opel" un Bochum. As we all know they want to close this factory. hes 53 Years old now tell me how he is aible to find a Job with that Age and if u say "Yes they are plenty of Jobs" Yes they are but he has to Support hes Family with the Wage he gets so noe lets say he comes into Hartz4 and u know how the German Society act towards thoose People....So u will call him Lazy too? That hes money he gets goes only into Tobacco and Alcohol? Or even Sanction him since he refuses to work for a "Zeitarbeits" Company because of the Human contemptuous wages they pay. Sorry but ur Posts make me very Angry. If any Typos are in it and TL mods want too send me a warning AGAIN for this i kindly want too remind u that this is Kind of Racist. Thank you.
I do not think that you know how things worked in communist regimes. I also, do not think that you realize what atrocities the StaSi have commited under the SED.
As far as your acquaintance is concerned. It's sad that there are people with such fates. Do not fool yourself that the Left could change something about it, though.
Even though im happy CDU got so many votes, and im even happier Angela Merkel gonna keep her position, i think it wouldnt be too good if CDU could do it all by themselves. CDU/FDP together would be my "dream combination", but FDP is highly unlikly to make it. Its going to end up with CDU/SPD probably, which means there will probably a lot of blaming and no real progress...well, all in all to bad of an election for my taste, gotta see how it turns out when the final numbers are there.
German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
i dont like AfD either, but saying thats against democracy is a little extrem for my taste... agree with the rest though, so many people now voting - most of them will probably still complain how everything is bad and that the gouvernment sucks, even though they didnt even vote for another <.<
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
i dont like AfD either, but saying thats against democracy is a little extrem for my taste... agree with the rest though, so many people now voting - most of them will probably still complain how everything is bad and that the gouvernment sucks, even though they didnt even vote for another <.<
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
Any quick comparisons to the previous elections?
Slightly more people voted, like 3 % or so
A party that has people in leading positions that only want people to vote that have a job is not democratic
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
i dont like AfD either, but saying thats against democracy is a little extrem for my taste... agree with the rest though, so many people now voting - most of them will probably still complain how everything is bad and that the gouvernment sucks, even though they didnt even vote for another <.<
On September 23 2013 04:27 UmberBane wrote:
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
Any quick comparisons to the previous elections?
Slightly more people voted, like 3 % or so
A party that has people in leading positions that only want people to vote that have a job is not democratic
I made a typo, i meant to say "so many people NOT voting". Of course everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they are german.
Edit: gah, im readin gthings people dont even write >.<. I didnt really bother to read much from AfD, they really want only people with a job being able to vote? Then im even happier they didnt make it
On September 23 2013 04:18 75 wrote: if the Union will get like 302 seats and have majority, they will make a coaltion though, wont they?
There is no reason to make a coalition if you have the majority
Wouldn't it be a pain in the ass though to work with such a tiny majority?
na, would be fine nobody in the cdu/csu has the courage to say anything against great broodmother Merkel and König Horst
I disagree. People who would not say something, might still vote against her, as the elections of the chancellor is alwayssecret to my knowledge. There quite a number of examples in german politics where a party/coalition did in fact have a majority by 1,2,3 seats and they didn't get their candidate elected (at least not in the first round, though ometimes in later rounds). I don't think it will happen, and if it did, I would expect quite a number of votings to not go in favor of the CDU. Be it thanks to sickness of some CDU-mp or hidden grudges or whatever.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One of our older presidents said "beware of the party that´s more to the right then the cdu". That happened. So yeah alarm bells should ring.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
i dont like AfD either, but saying thats against democracy is a little extrem for my taste... agree with the rest though, so many people now voting - most of them will probably still complain how everything is bad and that the gouvernment sucks, even though they didnt even vote for another <.<
On September 23 2013 04:27 UmberBane wrote:
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
Any quick comparisons to the previous elections?
Slightly more people voted, like 3 % or so
A party that has people in leading positions that only want people to vote that have a job is not democratic
I made a typo, i meant to say "so many people NOT voting". Of course everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they are german.
that is not what I meant, Konrad Adam one of the leads of AFD had made several claims that he doesn't want people without a job(including students and people with a disability to vote) And that is not democratic
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
i dont like AfD either, but saying thats against democracy is a little extrem for my taste... agree with the rest though, so many people now voting - most of them will probably still complain how everything is bad and that the gouvernment sucks, even though they didnt even vote for another <.<
On September 23 2013 04:27 UmberBane wrote:
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
Any quick comparisons to the previous elections?
Slightly more people voted, like 3 % or so
A party that has people in leading positions that only want people to vote that have a job is not democratic
I made a typo, i meant to say "so many people NOT voting". Of course everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they are german.
that is not what I meant, Konrad Adam one of the leads of AFD had made several claims that he doesn't want people without a job(including students and people with a disability to vote) And that is not democratic
Edited my post, missread what you wanted to say. Sorry
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One of our older presidents said "beware of the party righter then the cdu". That happened. So yeah alarm bells should ring.
except CDU is now basically like SPD, there is a vacany on the conservatice side. There is now also a missing liberal party since FDP got schooled for being corrupt and the Pirates messed up big time by making a lot of leftist redistribution demands and generally being stupid about everything. They could have been a new liberal party with the whole Internet/NSA topics as a push. Like the greens were once just a movement against nuclear enegry, but developed into a (relatively) proper political party.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One guy does not a party line make. There are always bad apples in any party. As long as AfD is not putting this forward as their party agenda I'm completely willing to tolerate one man's opinion and disregard it as the nonsense it is. There are much more important issues at stake.
Cdu with spd now for the government? Sad fdp didnt make it, guess this will be a turn towards the left. Rising minimum wages and rising taxes for higher incomes in germany. Saw on cnn that france government was verry pleased with the outcome of the election, wich isnt a good sign. Well guess its good for europe, dont think its that good for germany, Merkels last term annyway? Nach uns die sintflut.
On September 23 2013 04:43 Rassy wrote: Cdu with spd now for the government? Sad fdp didnt make it, guess this will be a turn towards the left. Rising minimum wages and rising taxes for higher incomes in germany. Saw on cnn that france government was verry pleased with the outcome of the election, wich isnt a good sign. Well guess its good for europe, dont think its that good for germany, Merkels last term annyway? Nach uns die sintflut.
it will be difficult, noone wants to partner up with merkel i am sure. And the others also cant unite themselves against merkel.
They might fail getting together a working government.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One guy does not a party line make. There are always bad apples in any party. As long as AfD is not putting this forward as their party agenda I'm completely willing to tolerate one man's opinion and disregard it as the nonsense it is. There are much more important issues at stake.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
AfD is supported by well known germans who have an bad reputation. I know i am narrow minded in this issue but for me AfD is the new name of NPD since NPD lawyers support them. Against Europe and against the Euro is no option for me.
we live in a society which systematically excludes whole parts of the population from proper education, proper conditions of living and information. and then you complain that these people dont want to vote or are not able to do so.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One guy does not a party line make. There are always bad apples in any party. As long as AfD is not putting this forward as their party agenda I'm completely willing to tolerate one man's opinion and disregard it as the nonsense it is. There are much more important issues at stake.
You seem to clearly not understand the ideology of the AfD and the problem with this party in the german political enviroment. They are ultra-conservative with ideology from 18. century. They´re market fundamentalist. They say you should be able to sell your organs if you don´t have work. They want to withdraw the right to vote for the "under class". They are absurd and dangerous if they seize any political might.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
AfD is supported by well known germans who have an bad reputation. I know i am narrow minded in this issue but for me AfD is the new name of NPD since NPD lawyers support them. Against Europe and against the Euro is no option for me.
we live in a society which systematically excludes whole parts of the population from proper education, proper conditions of living and information. and then you complain that these people dont want to vote or are not able to do so.
Who is excluded in Germany? Please give me an example...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology. o
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
Edit: I think "Wahlschein ungültig machen" would be "to spoil the vote". Votes that cannot be accepted because the form has been filled out incorrectly or damaged or whatever are called "spoilt votes" or "spoiled votes". You can do this intentionally (and some people do) so I guess the verb "spoil" would be used for that.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One guy does not a party line make. There are always bad apples in any party. As long as AfD is not putting this forward as their party agenda I'm completely willing to tolerate one man's opinion and disregard it as the nonsense it is. There are much more important issues at stake.
You seem to clearly not understand the ideology of the AfD and the problem with this party in the german political enviroment. They are ultra-conservative with ideology from 18. century. They´re market fundamentalist. They say you should be able to sell your organs if you don´t have work. They want to withdraw the right to vote for the "under class". They are absurd and dangerous if they seize any political might.
They are also the only anti-euro party which is pretty much the only thing that matters to me. I don't believe they actually have those things in their official agenda and even if they did they would never happen. If only some other parties had the sense to be more eurosceptics we wouldn't need to be having this discussion. It's a crying shame that the leading country in Europe is so blindly leading us on this path of misery.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
Oh yes. Though at least a part of Germans would probably say that things don't concern you if you aren't a citizen. I'd say they'd be wrong. As long as you are a tax paying member of the society things most definitely do concern you.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
One guy does not a party line make. There are always bad apples in any party. As long as AfD is not putting this forward as their party agenda I'm completely willing to tolerate one man's opinion and disregard it as the nonsense it is. There are much more important issues at stake.
You seem to clearly not understand the ideology of the AfD and the problem with this party in the german political enviroment. They are ultra-conservative with ideology from 18. century. They´re market fundamentalist. They say you should be able to sell your organs if you don´t have work. They want to withdraw the right to vote for the "under class". They are absurd and dangerous if they seize any political might.
They are also the only anti-euro party which is pretty much the only thing that matters to me. I don't believe they actually have those things in their official agenda and even if they did they would never happen. If only some other parties had the sense to be more eurosceptics we wouldn't need to be having this discussion. It's a crying shame that the leading country in Europe is so blindly leading us on this path of misery.
The truth is it´s the other way around.The return to the "Deutsche Mark" is only a construct to hide their ideology for the things they want to do.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
I'm a post-doc at a university. It's hard enough finding a job as it is, finding one in a specific country is very difficult so moving to a different country was a necessity. Plus I am still European and the result of the German election will affect a lot of Europe. But this is de-railing the thread somewhat I feel.
Edit: And as Dulak points out, I pay tax in Germany (and have done for years) yet have no say in how that money is spent.
Voting rights really should be granted to (NOT tied to) taxpaying members of a society. Electorate nationalism feels like a relic nowadays. But I suspect this is way down the list of dumb things humans do that should be changed at some point :p
On September 23 2013 05:16 75 wrote: too bad that spd/grüne dont want to make a coalition with die linke. would have laughed if merkel cant get kanzler with ~49% of seats.
only person who would laugh are CDU, they'd get clear majority at the re-elections...
On September 23 2013 05:16 75 wrote: too bad that spd/grüne dont want to make a coalition with die linke. would have laughed if merkel cant get kanzler with ~49% of seats.
only person who would laugh are CDU, they'd get clear majority at the re-elections...
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
I'm a post-doc at a university. It's hard enough finding a job as it is, finding one in a specific country is very difficult so moving to a different country was a necessity. Plus I am still European and the result of the German election will affect a lot of Europe. But this is de-railing the thread somewhat I feel.
Edit: And as Dulak points out, I pay tax in Germany (and have done for years) yet have no say in how that money is spent.
so you would like to be able to vote in 2 countries? assuming the country you are from does indeed have a democracy. if not, why dont you become a german then? i believe there is that possibility, and if you are invested in the country as much that you would like to vote here then step up, and become a german.
In germany foreigners are able to participate in the Kommunalwahlen and therefore contribute to the political circus.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
I'm a post-doc at a university. It's hard enough finding a job as it is, finding one in a specific country is very difficult so moving to a different country was a necessity. Plus I am still European and the result of the German election will affect a lot of Europe. But this is de-railing the thread somewhat I feel.
Edit: And as Dulak points out, I pay tax in Germany (and have done for years) yet have no say in how that money is spent.
Don't worry about derailing the thread. There are posters in here that claim members of the left party are "sending people into gulags". So as long as you're not completely clueless or insane I'd say you're on the save side.
On September 23 2013 05:19 Taguchi wrote: Voting rights really should be granted to (NOT tied to) taxpaying members of a society. Electorate nationalism feels like a relic nowadays. But I suspect this is way down the list of dumb things humans do that should be changed at some point :p
well that makes it sound too easy but in general yeah... It's a shame people who've been here for years aren't allowed to vote. My father's from sweden, came in when he was 30 or something like that and isn't allowed to vote in anything besides local mayor elections and stuff like that besides being here for a shitton of years and having a family in germay.
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
I'm a post-doc at a university. It's hard enough finding a job as it is, finding one in a specific country is very difficult so moving to a different country was a necessity. Plus I am still European and the result of the German election will affect a lot of Europe. But this is de-railing the thread somewhat I feel.
Edit: And as Dulak points out, I pay tax in Germany (and have done for years) yet have no say in how that money is spent.
Don't worry about derailing the thread. There are posters in here that claim members of the left party are "sending people into gulags". So as long as you're not completely clueless or insane I'd say you're on the save side.
I take this as a personal attack. Please educate yourself about the history of the DDR and common practices in communist regimes.
On September 23 2013 05:19 Taguchi wrote: Voting rights really should be granted to (NOT tied to) taxpaying members of a society. Electorate nationalism feels like a relic nowadays. But I suspect this is way down the list of dumb things humans do that should be changed at some point :p
well that makes it sound too easy but in general yeah... It's a shame people who've been here for years aren't allowed to vote. My father's from sweden, came in when he was 30 or something like that and isn't allowed to vote in anything besides local mayor elections and stuff like that besides being here for a shitton of years and having a family in germay.
Really weird imo.
pretty sure he'd be allowed to if he changed citizenship?
On sidenote, I would so love it if it was possible to make a list of journalist question in main political talkshows/news sorted by questions about -polticians -possible coalitions -actual politics ("Inhalte"). All those journalists always complaining about lack of politics, but I don't think they ever really ask questions about it.
ggrrg, although i dislike the left as much as the next guy (me being a social democrat) they are nowhere near as bad as anything you might have experienced in eastern europe. People should be warned about their SED and stasi past, but their party program isnt completely delusional like the one from the AfD for example.
Alot of the left members actually came from the most left wing of the SPD, and therefore cannot be counted as communists, even though there are some communist tendencies on the far left of that party.
So probably no CDU only government. There is a majority left of the CDU with SPD, Greens and The Left. I wish they could get it together to overtake Merkel and change the chancellor. But they probably won't, which is a shame.
Damn, the CDU can vote down any new propositions to change the Constitution again...
I foresee no Gay Equality for the next 4 years ... :X
On September 23 2013 05:48 Serinox wrote: So probably no CDU only government. There is a majority left of the CDU with SPD, Greens and The Left. I wish they could get it together to overtake Merkel and change the chancellor. But they probably won't, which is a shame.
In the Chancellor-Duel, Steinbrück said he would never coalition with Die Linke.
On September 23 2013 05:44 Maxhster wrote: ggrrg, although i dislike the left as much as the next guy (me being a social democrat) they are nowhere near as bad as anything you might have experienced in eastern europe. People should be warned about their SED and stasi past, but their party program isnt completely delusional like the one from the AfD for example.
Alot of the left members actually came from the most left wing of the SPD, and therefore cannot be counted as communists, even though there are some communist tendencies on the far left of that party.
I'm not comparing the Left with any communist regime. People should be aware of the past of some of their members, though, and consider how much they could possibly care abour people as they claim to do. I disagree about the Left's party agenda. It's about as delusional as it gets...
On September 23 2013 05:44 Maxhster wrote: ggrrg, although i dislike the left as much as the next guy (me being a social democrat) they are nowhere near as bad as anything you might have experienced in eastern europe. People should be warned about their SED and stasi past, but their party program isnt completely delusional like the one from the AfD for example.
Alot of the left members actually came from the most left wing of the SPD, and therefore cannot be counted as communists, even though there are some communist tendencies on the far left of that party.
Aren't there quite some people complaining about parties being too similar? Aren't those similarities the result of adapting your political program to the expectations of your demographic?
It would have been good for the political dicussion if the AfD entered the Bundestag, just to have another voice regarding the euro-crisis. A big coalition or red-red-green would sadly end in hilarity, when inflation finally hits (noticeably) and more people read up on the crisis. But the crisis did not even seem to be a relevant point this election. Some people seem to care more about foreigners paying for using motorways.
On September 23 2013 05:48 Serinox wrote: So probably no CDU only government. There is a majority left of the CDU with SPD, Greens and The Left. I wish they could get it together to overtake Merkel and change the chancellor. But they probably won't, which is a shame.
In the Chancellor-Duel, Steinbrück said he would never coalition with Die Linke.
He also said he would never go into another Große Koalition. My favorite quote is still from Adenauer: "Was interessiert mich mein Geschwätz von gestern?"
I know it's highly unlikely, but I still have not given up hope for an other chancellor instead of Merkel.
On September 23 2013 05:43 Mafe wrote: On sidenote, I would so love it if it was possible to make a list of journalist question in main political talkshows/news sorted by questions about -polticians -possible coalitions -actual politics ("Inhalte"). All those journalists always complaining about lack of politics, but I don't think they ever really ask questions about it.
Why would they start now, they didn't ask questions about politics during the majority of the campaign...
Am I the only one who things that an absolute majority for the CDU would be more problematic for the CDU than a coalition with either SPD or Grüne, considering they hold the majority in the Bundesrat.
On September 23 2013 05:44 Maxhster wrote: ggrrg, although i dislike the left as much as the next guy (me being a social democrat) they are nowhere near as bad as anything you might have experienced in eastern europe. People should be warned about their SED and stasi past, but their party program isnt completely delusional like the one from the AfD for example.
Alot of the left members actually came from the most left wing of the SPD, and therefore cannot be counted as communists, even though there are some communist tendencies on the far left of that party.
Aren't there quite some people complaining about parties being too similar? Aren't those similarities the result of adapting your political program to the expectations of your demographic?
It would have been good for the political dicussion if the AfD entered the Bundestag, just to have another voice regarding the euro-crisis. A big coalition or red-red-green would sadly end in hilarity, when inflation finally hits (noticeably) and more people read up on the crisis. But the crisis did not even seem to be a relevant point this election. Some people seem to care more about foreigners paying for using motorways.
Want to read a article about what the AfD really is?
So let's see if or should i say when and how the SPD bites the bullet and goes in a coalition with the CDU under Merkel again . ( Which last time in the end only benefited the CDU ) or not . The others are very unlikely.
On September 23 2013 05:51 Daumen wrote: Damn, the CDU can vote down any new propositions to change the Constitution again...
I foresee no Gay Equality for the next 4 years ... :X
On September 23 2013 05:48 Serinox wrote: So probably no CDU only government. There is a majority left of the CDU with SPD, Greens and The Left. I wish they could get it together to overtake Merkel and change the chancellor. But they probably won't, which is a shame.
In the Chancellor-Duel, Steinbrück said he would never coalition with Die Linke.
He also said he would never go into another Große Koalition. My favorite quote is still from Adenauer: "Was interessiert mich mein Geschwätz von gestern?"
I know it's highly unlikely, but I still have not given up hope for an other chancellor instead of Merkel.
So you'd rather have 2-3 years of non-Merkel and then the next decade of CDU absolute majority than four more years of Merkel and then change?
On September 23 2013 05:53 JustPassingBy wrote: So, how probable is Black / Green? Even though the Greens are pretty left-wing, their core priorities should still be environmental topics, right?
Not gonna happen. We'll have a great coalition again.
On September 23 2013 05:44 Maxhster wrote: ggrrg, although i dislike the left as much as the next guy (me being a social democrat) they are nowhere near as bad as anything you might have experienced in eastern europe. People should be warned about their SED and stasi past, but their party program isnt completely delusional like the one from the AfD for example.
Alot of the left members actually came from the most left wing of the SPD, and therefore cannot be counted as communists, even though there are some communist tendencies on the far left of that party.
Aren't there quite some people complaining about parties being too similar? Aren't those similarities the result of adapting your political program to the expectations of your demographic?
It would have been good for the political dicussion if the AfD entered the Bundestag, just to have another voice regarding the euro-crisis. A big coalition or red-red-green would sadly end in hilarity, when inflation finally hits (noticeably) and more people read up on the crisis. But the crisis did not even seem to be a relevant point this election. Some people seem to care more about foreigners paying for using motorways.
Want to read a article about what the AfD really is?
The problem is that the other parties do not really discuss the European matter. So if some people are really upset about it, they have no choide but to vote for the AfD, regardless how stupid they are.
Btw is it any likely that none of the parties can manage anything substantional and there would have to be a re-vote ? No likely i would guess but still it's possible.
On September 23 2013 05:53 JustPassingBy wrote: So, how probable is Black / Green? Even though the Greens are pretty left-wing, their core priorities should still be environmental topics, right?
Years ago, I looked into the manifesto and it was pretty liberal actually. There's of course an ecologic and social spin to everything, but the proposed solutions to problems weren't left wing at all. It was all liberal ideas like with the FDP, creating opportunities for the private sector to solve the problems instead of the state.
On September 23 2013 06:05 s3rp wrote: Btw is it any likely that none of the parties can manage anything substantional and there would have to be a re-vote ? No likely i would guess but still it's possible.
If that happens, I think CDU / FDP will get the majority again. Anyways, it is a possibility, the only possibility if the politicians of SPD and Grüne aren't liers, but we know that all politicians are.
Btw. this gif was posted on reddit, I find it hilarious: + Show Spoiler +
On September 23 2013 05:53 JustPassingBy wrote: So, how probable is Black / Green? Even though the Greens are pretty left-wing, their core priorities should still be environmental topics, right?
Years ago, I looked into the manifesto and it was pretty liberal actually. There's of course an ecologic and social spin to everything, but the proposed solutions to problems weren't left wing at all. It was all liberal ideas like with the FDP, creating opportunities for the private sector to solve the problems instead of the state.
So why don't they want to form a coalition with the CDU on national level then?
the problem with populistic parties such as the AfD is that they use 1 popular opinion (euro crisis) to hide all their outright dangerous brown bullshit. Alot of people have fallen for that trick...
On September 23 2013 06:09 Maxhster wrote: the problem with populistic parties such as the AfD is that they use 1 popular opinion (euro crisis) to hide all their outright dangerous brown bullshit. Alot of people have fallen for that trick...
Well the only chance to get rid of something like that is to let them destroy themselves by allowing them to show how much of the fraud they really are . ( If they are )
On September 23 2013 06:09 Maxhster wrote: the problem with populistic parties such as the AfD is that they use 1 popular opinion (euro crisis) to hide all their outright dangerous brown bullshit. Alot of people have fallen for that trick...
The established parties are also to blame though, since they aren't discussing the topic at hand aggressive enough. I'd say parties like AfD are quite usefull because they force the politicians to discuss certain topics and they don't really do any damage as long as they don't get into the parlament.
On September 23 2013 06:09 Maxhster wrote: the problem with populistic parties such as the AfD is that they use 1 popular opinion (euro crisis) to hide all their outright dangerous brown bullshit. Alot of people have fallen for that trick...
The established parties are also to blame though, since they aren't discussing the topic at hand aggressive enough. I'd say parties like AfD are quite usefull because they force the politicians to discuss certain topics and they don't really do any damage as long as they don't get into the parlament.
no as long as they dont get into the parlament none of the other parties will ever bother talking about these topics
they need to get into the parlament to really get others to panic and talk, parties like AfD do way more harm outside than inside
On September 23 2013 06:05 s3rp wrote: Btw is it any likely that none of the parties can manage anything substantional and there would have to be a re-vote ? No likely i would guess but still it's possible.
If that happens, I think CDU / FDP will get the majority again. Anyways, it is a possibility, the only possibility if the politicians of SPD and Grüne aren't liers, but we know that all politicians are.
Btw. this gif was posted on reddit, I find it hilarious: + Show Spoiler +
Yeah i would agree if there's a re-vote the FDP would probably get quite a few more votes of people that would like CDU/FPD to continue .
And i do think the FPD needs to be left out to change back to what made them popular in their earlier days. They're nothing but corrupt leeches these days imho.
On September 23 2013 06:09 Maxhster wrote: the problem with populistic parties such as the AfD is that they use 1 popular opinion (euro crisis) to hide all their outright dangerous brown bullshit. Alot of people have fallen for that trick...
Its the same with Die Linke. Cant believe that so many people vote for those SED assholes.
On September 23 2013 06:16 Daumen wrote: Where can I see how much the Other Parties got?
Where Can I see how my Region voted (first vote) ?
There's going to plenty of statistics in the following days , don't worry. But as long as there's still so many votes to be counted those won't be published.
On September 23 2013 06:16 Daumen wrote: Where can I see how much the Other Parties got?
Where Can I see how my Region voted (first vote) ?
There's going to plenty of statistics in the following days , don't worry. But as long as there's still so many votes to be counted those won't be published.
I cant wait... damn. Didnt vote for the Pirates but I actually hope they get into the Parliament. The need 5% OR 3 wins in the First Vote, right?
On September 23 2013 04:24 cutler wrote: German Election ended well from my point of view. Only two numbers are alarming. AfD alomst made 5% and only 73% actually voted. That means we have 32% people in Germay that are against democracy and free vote. Thats sad...
So people who voted for AfD are against democracy and free vote when they want more referendums on important issues? And also the people who chose not to vote are also against democracy and free vote? Please explain.
Everyone got the duty to vote in democracy cause that how democracy works. Every single vote counts. I know a lot of people dont believe this but i really believe that my vote and my interest in politcs can change something.
If people are frustated with politcs ( and i can understand that) they should make an election and make their vote false. ( in German Wahlschein ungültig machen) i dont really know the correct english term for that. By that act their make an correct vote for democracy without supporting an bad ideology.
Being free means you are also free to not vote. It simply means you accept the outcome of other people's votes. I do believe though that if you don't vote you also better not complain too much about how things are going
I can't vote (I'm not German, I just live in Germany). Am I still allowed to complain?
why should you be allowed to complain? you decided to move to Germany
I'm a post-doc at a university. It's hard enough finding a job as it is, finding one in a specific country is very difficult so moving to a different country was a necessity. Plus I am still European and the result of the German election will affect a lot of Europe. But this is de-railing the thread somewhat I feel.
Edit: And as Dulak points out, I pay tax in Germany (and have done for years) yet have no say in how that money is spent.
Don't worry about derailing the thread. There are posters in here that claim members of the left party are "sending people into gulags". So as long as you're not completely clueless or insane I'd say you're on the save side.
I take this as a personal attack. Please educate yourself about the history of the DDR and common practices in communist regimes.
Too bad I grew up in the DDR. But I'm sure it helps your world view to equal the left party of 2013 with the practices of the security apparatus of a regime that ended over 20 years ago. And for the record, I did not vote for the Left. I just don't like morons.
On September 23 2013 06:27 Spekulatius wrote: Köln II is the south, Sülz, Klettenberg, probably Zollstock too if that helps.
Thanks, kinda helps. I live in the Altstadt, more specifically Belgian Quarter. (No idea though it thats Altstadt Nord or Süd or if that even makes a difference) But I believe since I looked for it by PLZ, Köln I should be the right one.
On September 23 2013 06:05 s3rp wrote: Btw is it any likely that none of the parties can manage anything substantional and there would have to be a re-vote ? No likely i would guess but still it's possible.
If that happens, I think CDU / FDP will get the majority again. Anyways, it is a possibility, the only possibility if the politicians of SPD and Grüne aren't liers, but we know that all politicians are.
Btw. this gif was posted on reddit, I find it hilarious: + Show Spoiler +
Yeah i would agree if there's a re-vote the FDP would probably get quite a few more votes of people that would like CDU/FPD to continue .
And i do think the FPD needs to be left out to change back to what made them popular in their earlier days. They're nothing but corrupt leeches these days imho.
They will do the same as Linke, get a sympathic lawyer that is full of shit with a questionable past like Kubicki
On September 23 2013 06:59 JustPassingBy wrote: Well, all my liberal hopes basically lie in the pirate party. I hope they grow up soon enough and establish a good structure.
I didn't read forecasts except today where they told me basically FDP would be in not out. So I don't know where you got that number from. Forget the pirates asap.
@Yuljan: they also stress civil rights regarding private data.
On September 23 2013 07:14 Perscienter wrote: I didn't read forecasts except today where they told me basically FDP would be in not out. So I don't know where you got that number from. Forget the pirates asap.
@Yuljan: they also stress civil rights regarding private data.
and thats the thing they should have stuck to. The moment they started to diversify their programme they became ineligible.
Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
On September 23 2013 06:59 JustPassingBy wrote: Well, all my liberal hopes basically lie in the pirate party. I hope they grow up soon enough and establish a good structure.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Quite a few of the jobs are jobs that are heavily substituted by the goverment and barely pay anything . Without those the unemployment would be consideribly higher.
Not too happy with the results. Ideologically I am pretty much an anarchist, but of course that is more an utopian dream then anything else. Realistically this makes me kinda torn between FDP, die Linken, die Grünen and Pirates, where all of those parties fit in some areas but not others. All of those parties had worse results then expected.
Even besides my own political opinions I would like to have as much of a pluralistic Bundestag as possible with many different ideas and solutions coming from different political camps, even from someone like the AfD, although personally I don't agree with them at all. Sure this makes the political process often very slow moving but I also think in the end it reaches the best solutions and I would just generally like to see a movement away from people strictly voting along party lines and more with their own reasoning.
Quite sad about the FDP too, but maybe it is a good thing and they refocus on liberal ideas in general in the future and not just fiscal matters with liberal markets and low taxes. Lately I kind of got the idea they only have money in their heads. In my electoral district the fell from 16.6% in 2009 to 1.9%...OUCH!
If you just go by the Wahlomat pirates and greens have almost the exact same political agenda.
I really hoped the pirates could finish stronger. They have a lot of good ideas which they try to communicate in an acceptable (ie not totally populistic) way. I like their concepts for decision-making but as soon as they started to care for more than their niche all the potential voters dropped their support again. As I said before the way the party wants to work might clash with the structures needed if you're in parliament but it has so much more potential to get people involved.
As much as I was hoping that the fdp misses the 5% I'm now hoping that they can reinvent themselves as a truly liberal party. German SPIEGEL had a good article why that would enrich our political climate and I agree with them. + Show Spoiler +
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
On September 23 2013 08:06 smr wrote: If you just go by the Wahlomat pirates and greens have almost the exact same political agenda.
I really hoped the pirates could finish stronger. They have a lot of good ideas which they try to communicate in an acceptable (ie not totally populistic) way. I like their concepts for decision-making but as soon as they started to care for more than their niche all the potential voters dropped their support again. As I said before the way the party wants to work might clash with the structures needed if you're in parliament but it has so much more potential to get people involved.
As much as I was hoping that the fdp misses the 5% I'm now hoping that they can reinvent themselves as a truly liberal party. German SPIEGEL had a good article why that would enrich our political climate and I agree with them. + Show Spoiler +
One of the problems I realized is that the German main media is never reporting about the pirate party. I swear I got more news about their activities over reddit than over any German media...
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
Leiarbeiter should just join the same union like the other workers, then it can push the "same work, same salary" issue.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
If they don't make whatever they agree upon into law, I'd be cool with it too.
On September 23 2013 07:14 Perscienter wrote: I didn't read forecasts except today where they told me basically FDP would be in not out. So I don't know where you got that number from. Forget the pirates asap.
@Yuljan: they also stress civil rights regarding private data.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
a) force everybody to be part of some union (like with health insurance) (more restrictive, I don't like this option)
or
b) every contract signed with a unionless employee has to be signed with the biggest union amongst the other employees (the one who the majority of the employees belong to).
These are just two random suggestion I cam up with in 2min, ofc.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
a) force everybody to be part of some union (like with health insurance) (more restrictive, I don't like this option)
or
b) every contract signed with a unionless employee has to be signed with the biggest union amongst the other employees (the one who the majority of the employees belong to).
These are just two random suggestion I cam up with in 2min, ofc.
Well, you wanted the politicians out of the wage finding process, didn't you? But, these are two laws you are proposing! (And both arguably more restrictive than a simple lower limit on salary.)
Union members have to pay their union fee. You want to force people to pay for something by law, you better have a good justification for it.
Also, I personally don't really get this "keep out the politicians" sentiment on this one issue. I mean, rules and laws determine every aspects in life and business. Politicians set the business tax, the subsidiaries, the income tax, health insurance, working conditions, equality hiring and on and on. So, why this sudden outcry when it comes to minimum wage?
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
a) force everybody to be part of some union (like with health insurance) (more restrictive, I don't like this option)
or
b) every contract signed with a unionless employee has to be signed with the biggest union amongst the other employees (the one who the majority of the employees belong to).
These are just two random suggestion I cam up with in 2min, ofc.
Well, you wanted the politicians out of the wage finding process, didn't you? But, these are two laws you are proposing! (And both arguably more restrictive than a simple lower limit on salary.)
Union members have to pay their union fee. You want to force people to pay for something by law, you better have a good justification for it.
Also, I personally don't really get this "keep out the politicians" sentiment on this one issue. I mean, rules and laws determine every aspects in life and business. Politicians set the business tax, the subsidiaries, the income tax, health insurance, working conditions, equality hiring and on and on. So, why this sudden outcry when it comes to minimum wage?
Can't speak for JustPassingBy, but for myself, I take issue not only with government intervention on the minimum wage, but with a majority of the subjects you list (income tax, "equality hiring," etc.). It's not just the minimum wage thing that we'd discuss political intervention on, but it's the one we happen to be specifically talking about right now.
By the way, I cannot believe how shocked the FDP members were. I mean, how far from reality are they? Wasn't the result already conceivable from the polls? I'm sure they were aware of it?
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
a) force everybody to be part of some union (like with health insurance) (more restrictive, I don't like this option)
or
b) every contract signed with a unionless employee has to be signed with the biggest union amongst the other employees (the one who the majority of the employees belong to).
These are just two random suggestion I cam up with in 2min, ofc.
Well, you wanted the politicians out of the wage finding process, didn't you? But, these are two laws you are proposing! (And both arguably more restrictive than a simple lower limit on salary.)
Union members have to pay their union fee. You want to force people to pay for something by law, you better have a good justification for it.
Also, I personally don't really get this "keep out the politicians" sentiment on this one issue. I mean, rules and laws determine every aspects in life and business. Politicians set the business tax, the subsidiaries, the income tax, health insurance, working conditions, equality hiring and on and on. So, why this sudden outcry when it comes to minimum wage?
Yes, but there is a difference between a law that draws a hard line (which might definitely needs adjusting in the future) and a law which declares part of the public responsible and give them the power they need to satisfy that responsibility.
In the minimum wage scenario, the minimum wage needs to be continuously adjusted to inflation so the politicians have to repeatedly occupy themselves with that topic. In the other scenaio, the union will have to deal with it together with the employer. It's basically giving somebody fish vs. teaching them how to fish and giving them the proper tools to do so.
On September 23 2013 16:35 JustPassingBy wrote: By the way, I cannot believe how shocked the FDP members were. I mean, how far from reality are they? Wasn't the result already conceivable from the polls? I'm sure they were aware of it?
This has 2 parts:
First the FDP was always in the parliament since WW2 and has the most years as part of the government (49). Its like a very old Football club going to league 2. Second almost all of the people you see at these election parties are employed by the government because they are in the FDP, which means they lost their jobs because they did poorly and didn´t make the 5% cut.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
Leiarbeiter should just join the same union like the other workers, then it can push the "same work, same salary" issue.
It's definitely not legal, but like it was already mentioned it does happen a lot and people are way too scared to try to act. In several parts of the country it's a lot safer to just swallow shitty working conditions in the hope to change jobs, rather than trying to fight against your employer. In a best case scenario you'll get 4-5 months worth of wages, but you still end up unemployed, while the company won't really change their ways. I do know a lot of examples from my area (Nordbayern), this is especially cruel in the Automobilzuliefererindustrie.
Also, for your proposal about a forced entry of the union - iirc - is not doable, because it'd hurt the articles about 'positive und negative Koalitionsfreiheit'. Furthermore, a lot of organisations run by the church (especially catholics) have special rules. They might fire you for different reasons, they don't have to have a 'Betriebsrat' and so on and so forth. How and why this is still tolerated I can not understand.
If you speak about Leiharbeiter you should take reality into account. I wouldn't know how bad their situation was, if it wasn't for me having done some Ferienjobs in the aforementioned industry. It's horrible. They have to work like shit, they get paid bad, they have to drive for ages, are most times hated (because they tend to scare the shit out of the 'real' employees - job security and such) and end up being exploited. The basic idea might have been great, but it ended up being a tool to hire cheap labor on a temporary basis. I know about cases where they forced these kind of people to become a "Streikbrecher" - obviously, they could just point out that this was illegal, too, but hey, if you want a real job somewhen, you better do what the company tells you. This topic goes on and on and has way more dimensions to it. Companys start to hire people and try to circumvent the Kündigungsschutz by inventing companies within companies. Bleh.
What disappoints me the most is how people, especially the eldery, read on these topics and still vote for queen Merkel. They tend up hating what goes on, but think she's the lesser evil so to speak. Holy... At least the FDP is gone now. That's great.
On September 23 2013 08:06 smr wrote: If you just go by the Wahlomat pirates and greens have almost the exact same political agenda.
I really hoped the pirates could finish stronger. They have a lot of good ideas which they try to communicate in an acceptable (ie not totally populistic) way. I like their concepts for decision-making but as soon as they started to care for more than their niche all the potential voters dropped their support again. As I said before the way the party wants to work might clash with the structures needed if you're in parliament but it has so much more potential to get people involved.
As much as I was hoping that the fdp misses the 5% I'm now hoping that they can reinvent themselves as a truly liberal party. German SPIEGEL had a good article why that would enrich our political climate and I agree with them. + Show Spoiler +
One of the problems I realized is that the German main media is never reporting about the pirate party. I swear I got more news about their activities over reddit than over any German media...
The election campaign from the pirate party was simply bad. I mean Germany had a huge debate about privacy and the protection of it for weeks up to the electionweeks and the pirates were not able to use it. That is simply inexcusable as a party which is so deeply linked to this topic.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
Well considering the raise of "Leiharbeit" ( not sure how to correctly translate it in context ) and the well non-toleration of unionizing in quite a of those lower income workfields i don't think you can completely stay out of it.
Non-toleration of unionizing? That cannot be legal, can it?
It's not technically BUT the people working in those fields don't have the means to change anything and nothing has really been done so far . I mean most of the people in those workfields don't have a permanent position and can basically fired on the spot without repercusion . And good luck proving you've been fired for trying to unionize. Those people most of the time badly need the money they can't risk their daily job .
There was a something about "Leiharbeiter" at DHL a few months back ( maybe more ) where a reporter got undercover in as a postman. He got considerably less then the guys actually working at DHL ( almost half IRC ) while working more time and having to do unpaid overtime . The second he mentioned unionizing he got an extremely fierce warning about that . The second time he mentioned it he was fired ( he did it on purpose because he was done physically after a few weeks of backbracking work ). At least thats how i remember it.
a) force everybody to be part of some union (like with health insurance) (more restrictive, I don't like this option)
or
b) every contract signed with a unionless employee has to be signed with the biggest union amongst the other employees (the one who the majority of the employees belong to).
These are just two random suggestion I cam up with in 2min, ofc.
Well, you wanted the politicians out of the wage finding process, didn't you? But, these are two laws you are proposing! (And both arguably more restrictive than a simple lower limit on salary.)
Union members have to pay their union fee. You want to force people to pay for something by law, you better have a good justification for it.
Also, I personally don't really get this "keep out the politicians" sentiment on this one issue. I mean, rules and laws determine every aspects in life and business. Politicians set the business tax, the subsidiaries, the income tax, health insurance, working conditions, equality hiring and on and on. So, why this sudden outcry when it comes to minimum wage?
Yes, but there is a difference between a law that draws a hard line (which might definitely needs adjusting in the future) and a law which declares part of the public responsible and give them the power they need to satisfy that responsibility.
In the minimum wage scenario, the minimum wage needs to be continuously adjusted to inflation so the politicians have to repeatedly occupy themselves with that topic. In the other scenaio, the union will have to deal with it together with the employer. It's basically giving somebody fish vs. teaching them how to fish and giving them the proper tools to do so.
I dont actually see whats so hard about defining a minimum wage and adjusting it constantly. The same thing is done very year with pensions, Hartz IV, ect... The goverment constantly defines the ammount of money needed to life and take part in german society (the second part is important, it's not enough to just barely stay alive).
Operating on the maxim that someone that works should be compensated better then someone who doesn't you take the ammount of money needed to life and take part in society, add X% (Leistung muß sich lohnen :-D), divide it by the average hours of work and voila: Fair minimum wage.
So what were the results for the pirate party? I can't seem to find them. I suppose since I don't see them mentioned in any of the mainstream news portals they did not make the cut, am I right?
edit: nvm, those are not the results you are looking for, anyways they did not make the cut or any cut in that matter edit2: nvmnvm, those are the results you are looking for
As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
I certainly am not sad that the FDP did not make the cut, and that comes from somebody who voted for them last time.
FDP had all warning signals they needed for the last 2-3 years, and while they showed first signs of promising movement (Westerwelle down, Rösler new leader), they didn't move at all till the end. Even now, it's only Rösler who has stepped down. Brüderle, who was also responsible for a lot of quack the party did is still in power.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
I certainly am not sad that the FDP did not make the cut, and that comes from somebody who voted for them last time.
FDP had all warning signals they needed for the last 2-3 years, and while they showed first signs of promising movement (Westerwelle down, Rösler new leader), they didn't move at all till the end. Even now, it's only Rösler who has stepped down. Brüderle, who was also responsible for a lot of quack the party did is still in power.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
What the FDP really needs is to disband and never come back. I will gladly not vote them again and again and again
also, calling Rösler as a leader a promising movement is just....
When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a single election?
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
If they don't make whatever they agree upon into law, I'd be cool with it too.
The AfD and Tea party both have partly very conservative ideas, but they also both want the government to be as weak as possible and have not much say.
With the AfD, its just that they have this one topic (euro and EU) that makes them popular. I think the tea party might have that with the Obamacare?
And i am so happy the FDP is out. They were openly corrupt and parasites. And in their decadence they started to openly fight for the spoils for like 2 years.
And now the voters told the politicians that this is not accapteble and is not forgotten at the next election. Very nice, the masses arent always as dumb as a 5 year old.
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
I certainly am not sad that the FDP did not make the cut, and that comes from somebody who voted for them last time.
FDP had all warning signals they needed for the last 2-3 years, and while they showed first signs of promising movement (Westerwelle down, Rösler new leader), they didn't move at all till the end. Even now, it's only Rösler who has stepped down. Brüderle, who was also responsible for a lot of quack the party did is still in power.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
What the FDP really needs is to disband and never come back. I will gladly not vote them again and again and again
also, calling Rösler as a leader a promising movement is just....
I never said Rösler is a promising movement...? Also, it is the beginning of a first step that has to be done before anything can change: get rid of all the "Altlasten".
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
Pardon my vocabulary :/
No problem But to answer your question: No, the downfall of the FDP is unique in the post-war history of the german democracy (at the federal level). At the federal state level however it's a much more common thing that parties (besides CDU/CSU and SPD) lose their seats.
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
Pardon my vocabulary :/
No problem But to answer your question: No, the downfall of the FDP is unique in the post-war history of the german democracy (at the federal level). At the federal state level however it's a much more common thing that parties (besides CDU/CSU and SPD) lose their seats.
Ah, that does clear some things up for me.
And quick question about the relationship between Die Linke and SPD. Is there any bad blood between them that goes back all the way to 1918? Or is it fair to say that the party is leaving the past behind them for the most part?
well it was mindboggling to me anyways that so many people voted fdp in the last one. they just got what the deserved finally.
merkel going even higher... well there was little in other options. spd is just weak , linke just wont go big, grüne failing to use their time and opportunity, pirates jsut making a joke of themselves... but still that this person really gets a even longer period shwos how fucked up german politics are nowadays.
On September 23 2013 07:42 cLAN.Anax wrote: Juuuust poking my head in and dropping a thought or two. (at an airport with an hour to kill before my delayed flight is ready to board)
Merkel appears an awful lot like Clinton if you ask me, based on the description zatic gives. A master at politics and able to sway people to vote for them, even if they ultimately disagree with the candidate.
A publicly funded payment for parents who choose to stay at home and care for their children, aptly ridiculed by the opposition as the "kitchen premium".
I don't want to deal too much with the specific politics here, but this made me laugh at the inanity of it all, lol.
Was very intrigued to learn Germany doesn't have a minimum wage, since 2012 at least. O_o Eurostat says Germany has 5.3% unemployment, which has been steadily dropping since at least mid-2005. Wiki says this:
None; except for construction workers, electrical workers, janitors, roofers, painters, and letter carriers. Minimum wage is often set by collective bargaining agreements in other sectors of the economy and enforceable by law.
The law states that paying a worker an "immoral wage" is illegal. There is no general consensus what constitutes "immoral" payment. One judge at a court in Krefeld, Germany, ruled that a cashier at a supermarket has to earn the equivalent of approximately 7USD per hour. The federal courts in Germany ruled that any wage lower than 75% of the average wage or salary for a specific occupation constitutes illegal payment. However, since there is no well defined legal minimum wage as of February 2013, courts are usually the ones who have the final say and will only rule for individual cases.
Seems like a rather amorphous interpretation to me. :-\
Am I the only one who thinks that it's the union's job to bargain a minimum wage and that the politicians should keep out of it? Maybe we should think of giving the union more power, considering the current situation in the job market, but ultimatively it's the union's job to fight for the right of the employers.
If they don't make whatever they agree upon into law, I'd be cool with it too.
The AfD and Tea party both have partly very conservative ideas, but they also both want the government to be as weak as possible and have not much say.
With the AfD, its just that they have this one topic (euro and EU) that makes them popular. I think the tea party might have that with the Obamacare?
Possibly, but that only makes the Tea Party popular with right-winged individuals; I doubt it garners any support from the left. I think part of the appeal of the Tea Party is it's a group that both American conservatives and libertarians can feel relatively comfortable together with. There's some social conservatism espoused, but it appears to be more of a fiscal libertarianism that they can mostly get behind, so on the general matter of economic freedom, they share a lot of common beliefs.
I wish I actually knew more about our Tea Party, lol. I'm a conservative, but I've never fully referred to myself as a Tea Partier; principles always preclude party for me. Though I've been called a "bagger" for my stances on a regular basis elsewhere, hahaha (never on TL).
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
Pardon my vocabulary :/
No problem But to answer your question: No, the downfall of the FDP is unique in the post-war history of the german democracy (at the federal level). At the federal state level however it's a much more common thing that parties (besides CDU/CSU and SPD) lose their seats.
Well to be fair in the past the FDP never had any competetion besides the two bigs . Then the Green became a serious political power . After that Die Linke , a few years back when they absorded alot of the left wing of the SPD that became unhappy and left , also gained enough of a following to be serious enough force in the parlaments .
Now with the continued political unhappieness of quite a large chuck of the population other new parties like now the AfD become threats to make the cut or at least take a away a decent amount of votes.
In the past all the FDP had as smaller competion where rightwing loons like NPD,DVU etc and extreme leftwing parties like the DKP that were way too extreme to ever get taken serious by enough people .
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: And quick question about the relationship between Die Linke and SPD. Is there any bad blood between them that goes back all the way to 1918? Or is it fair to say that the party is leaving the past behind them for the most part?
Die Linke doesn't really have anything to do with the KPD from back then. Alot of it is left parts of the SPD that left when the SPD became too central/right wing for their taste these days. There's also still back then mostly young remnants of very late DDR times when the regime was already in collapse.
Before the PDS back then merged with the WASG ( left parts of the SPD that left under Oskar Lafontaine ) they where nothing more than remnants of the SED for the most part. Now in most parts of East Germany their a serious player on the federal level and in general now strong enough to make the cut even in the western parts.
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
Pardon my vocabulary :/
No problem But to answer your question: No, the downfall of the FDP is unique in the post-war history of the german democracy (at the federal level). At the federal state level however it's a much more common thing that parties (besides CDU/CSU and SPD) lose their seats.
Ah, that does clear some things up for me.
And quick question about the relationship between Die Linke and SPD. Is there any bad blood between them that goes back all the way to 1918?
The bad blood between Die Linke and all the other major and minor partys lies in the DDR past of Die Linke. Die Linke evolved from the SED who were some kind of the "natural" enemy of the parties in Westgermany (of course the SED has a history which goes back to the Weimarer Republik and further). And they still have a few items on their agenda (for example the dissolving of the NATO, no engagement of the Bundeswehr regardless the cause,...) which makes a coalition with the other parties impossible. Hope that helps you a bit.
And quick question about the relationship between Die Linke and SPD. Is there any bad blood between them that goes back all the way to 1918? Or is it fair to say that the party is leaving the past behind them for the most part?
Well, historically there was bad blood between SPD and the left after a leftist movement was beaten down by the SPD government and the Reichswehr in the Weimar Republic. But that doesn't really play a role any more. The major issue is the history of the PDS (the successor of the SED) and the fact that the WASG ( which joined the PDS to form Die Linke) consisted of former SPD members who seceded after a disagreement over AGENDA 2010 (a number of reformations which were introduced by the SPD/Grüne government)
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
'concentrate on their liberal roots'. I read that - as you so succinctly say - again, and again, and again, but mostly from people who wouldn't dream about voting FDP in the first place. Strangely the party got their best result in history just four years ago, when they were by no means concentrating on liberal roots, but running on an agenda of reducing taxes and more importantly simplyfying the absurd german tax system.
If I had trusted them then, I would have voted FDP, but unsurprisingly they caved in to special interests and passed one major law, benefiting their contributors in the hotel industry.
Already campaigning under a 'liberal whatever' mantra are Greens and Pirates. If FDP wants to compete for that overestimated amount of niche voters, they can happily be my guest. It will virtually ensure we will not hear from them again.
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
'concentrate on their liberal roots'. I read that - as you so succinctly say - again, and again, and again, but mostly from people who wouldn't dream about voting FDP in the first place. Strangely the party got their best result in history just four years ago, when they were by no means concentrating on liberal roots, but running on an agenda of reducing taxes and more importantly simplyfying the absurd german tax system.
If I had trusted them then, I would have voted FDP, but unsurprisingly they caved in to special interests and passed one major law, benefiting their contributors in the hotel industry.
Already campaigning under a 'liberal whatever' mantra are Greens and Pirates. If FDP wants to compete for that overestimated amount of niche voters, they can happily be my guest. It will virtually ensure we will not hear from them again.
Well, I can tell you why I voted for the FDP the last election: they were the only party I know of who had the abolishment of the Wehrdienst in their program (and that for quite some time). And that they did, together with the CDU.
I agree, they pulled a lot of crap during their time in the government (probably more crap than non-crap) and it was up to a certain degree foreseeable before the election, which is why I didn't vote for them this time (edit: and probably never will unless they make some major changes). But that one issue with the Wehrdienst was of highest priority for me, so I am definitely not regretting my vote.
On September 23 2013 20:43 Shiragaku wrote: When I was looking at the results, I was puzzled to see that the CDU, SPD, and CSU with pretty sizeable gains and The Left and Greens suffering moderate losses overall then I saw the FDP. Holy shit did they get wrecked. Is there another example of a large political party losing every single one of their seats in a parliament/diet?
Well the FDP was never considered as a "large" party. They were more like the kingmaker in the system of german parties and made coalitions with CDU and SPD in the past.
Haha, I used the word "large" in comparison to the CDU which is a "major" party and the Greens which is "minor." I guess I should've referred to them as medium sized?
Pardon my vocabulary :/
No problem But to answer your question: No, the downfall of the FDP is unique in the post-war history of the german democracy (at the federal level). At the federal state level however it's a much more common thing that parties (besides CDU/CSU and SPD) lose their seats.
Ah, that does clear some things up for me.
And quick question about the relationship between Die Linke and SPD. Is there any bad blood between them that goes back all the way to 1918?
The bad blood between Die Linke and all the other major and minor partys lies in the DDR past of Die Linke. Die Linke evolved from the SED who were some kind of the "natural" enemy of the parties in Westgermany (of course the SED has a history which goes back to the Weimarer Republik and further). And they still have a few items on their agenda (for example the dissolving of the NATO, no engagement of the Bundeswehr regardless the cause,...) which makes a coalition with the other parties impossible. Hope that helps you a bit.
SED is the result of the forced (by Soviet troops) merger of communist and socialist parties in occupied eastern Germany. It is a post WWII creation. Rest of what he writes is correct tho.
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
'concentrate on their liberal roots'. I read that - as you so succinctly say - again, and again, and again, but mostly from people who wouldn't dream about voting FDP in the first place. Strangely the party got their best result in history just four years ago, when they were by no means concentrating on liberal roots, but running on an agenda of reducing taxes and more importantly simplyfying the absurd german tax system.
If I had trusted them then, I would have voted FDP, but unsurprisingly they caved in to special interests and passed one major law, benefiting their contributors in the hotel industry.
Already campaigning under a 'liberal whatever' mantra are Greens and Pirates. If FDP wants to compete for that overestimated amount of niche voters, they can happily be my guest. It will virtually ensure we will not hear from them again.
I hear a similar mantra here in the U.S. from left-leaning folks. "If only Republicans were more moderate!" Then what? You'd vote for them? Lol. No.
Those people vote Democrat almost exclusively, and I chuckle whenever they think they know what the opposite party should do to attract more votes, as if they want the stronger competition. X-D
On September 23 2013 22:04 Skilledblob wrote: strong competition is what makes a democracy work, so I dont see what's so funny about that
Being in a - possibly overly - generous mood, blob, I will explain.
Democracy is about a competition of concepts to see who can present his ideas best and convince a majority.
It is not about one guy saying "Gee, my ideas are so enlightened, why doesn't every party adopt them?" Aproaching democratic competition with the second mindset is dumb as eff - which at least some people will find wildly entertaining.
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
'concentrate on their liberal roots'. I read that - as you so succinctly say - again, and again, and again, but mostly from people who wouldn't dream about voting FDP in the first place. Strangely the party got their best result in history just four years ago, when they were by no means concentrating on liberal roots, but running on an agenda of reducing taxes and more importantly simplyfying the absurd german tax system.
If I had trusted them then, I would have voted FDP, but unsurprisingly they caved in to special interests and passed one major law, benefiting their contributors in the hotel industry.
Already campaigning under a 'liberal whatever' mantra are Greens and Pirates. If FDP wants to compete for that overestimated amount of niche voters, they can happily be my guest. It will virtually ensure we will not hear from them again.
I hear a similar mantra here in the U.S. from left-leaning folks. "If only Republicans were more moderate!" Then what? You'd vote for them? Lol. No.
Those people vote Democrat almost exclusively, and I chuckle whenever they think they know what the opposite party should do to attract more votes, as if they want the stronger competition. X-D
To be fair the CDU would not be considered conservative in the US and Merkels result is largely based on her stealing votes from the left by the way. So I dont see the point of your statement.
On September 23 2013 22:04 Skilledblob wrote: strong competition is what makes a democracy work, so I dont see what's so funny about that
Being in a - possibly overly - generous mood, blob, I will explain.
Democracy is about a competition of concepts to see who can present his ideas best and convince a majority.
It is not about one guy saying "Gee, my ideas are so enlightened, why doesn't every party adopt them?" Aproaching democratic competition with the second mindset is dumb as eff - which at least some people will find wildly entertaining.
It's actually quite clever. Two elections now the media made the "moderates" John McCain and Mitt Romney. The base were lukewarm to these candidates but were suckered into nominating them due to the popular perception that they had the best shot. In the end the Republican party got stuck with two candidates that no one in the country really liked.
Well without the FDP its really changing the political landscape in Germany. Theres basically only the CDU/CSU on the right wing with no liberal party that kind of balances out all their conservative bullshit that comes along with them.
That's bullshit like more video surveillance in public places, weird incentives for families, discrimination of other partnership arrangements (like single parents, blended families, homosexuals) and a lot of other crap..
In fact the FDP did a bad job of balancing it out so they kinda deserve it. Therefore the right wing is now united but barely not in the majority and the left wing has the majority but is fragmented. The true enemy of the SPD is actually Die Linke. The SPD really has to reunite the left wing if they want to be successful again. (either by forming a coalition with them or win all the voters back from them)
And neither the greens nor the SPD is really interested in becoming the weak partner of a very strong CDU/CSU. They would just get crushed or they simply dont do anything in critical issues.
The last coalition with CDU/CSU and the greens in Hamburg ended up in chaos and reelections after 2 years because it didnt work out and the CDU lost a lot of voters. The last coalition with CDU/CSU and the SPD ended up with the SPD being submissive and losing a lot of voters.
So im not sure if we can find a coalition that lasts for the next 4 years or if we get reelections somewhere along the way. That would be risky too because most certainly you would get either AFD or FDP in parliament then...
On September 23 2013 20:23 Kleinmuuhg wrote: As I am registered to vote in Bavaria chosing my votes this year was really easy again. Why would anyone sane vote for the CSU.
I disagreed with a lot the FDP did over the last few years and I certainly did not vote for them. Still I am sad that such a historic party is not in the Bundestag anymore. On paper, I could see myself voting for a liberal party in the future. Not for the current FDP though.
The party that is closest to my political views (65% wahl-o-mat) is the SPD. Thats why I voted for them. After all I think we should not vote for cancidates, but for content. I think the discussion this year was too much focussed on personalities and not enough on content. I hope this changes in the future, though I am not optimistic.
I also agree with Steinbrück that the SPD shouldve used the Agenda 2010 because its one of the reasons we are as economically stable atm as we are.
What the FDP really needs is to get rid of all the current heads, start anew from scratch and concentrate on their liberal roots. Sadly, some parties don't realize this unless you whack them over the head...
But having said that, should they do exactly that, then I will gladly vote for them again, and again, and again.
'concentrate on their liberal roots'. I read that - as you so succinctly say - again, and again, and again, but mostly from people who wouldn't dream about voting FDP in the first place. Strangely the party got their best result in history just four years ago, when they were by no means concentrating on liberal roots, but running on an agenda of reducing taxes and more importantly simplyfying the absurd german tax system.
If I had trusted them then, I would have voted FDP, but unsurprisingly they caved in to special interests and passed one major law, benefiting their contributors in the hotel industry.
Already campaigning under a 'liberal whatever' mantra are Greens and Pirates. If FDP wants to compete for that overestimated amount of niche voters, they can happily be my guest. It will virtually ensure we will not hear from them again.
Well, I can tell you why I voted for the FDP the last election: they were the only party I know of who had the abolishment of the Wehrdienst in their program (and that for quite some time). And that they did, together with the CDU.
I agree, they pulled a lot of crap during their time in the government (probably more crap than non-crap) and it was up to a certain degree foreseeable before the election, which is why I didn't vote for them this time (edit: and probably never will unless they make some major changes). But that one issue with the Wehrdienst was of highest priority for me, so I am definitely not regretting my vote.
Die Grünen had the stop of Wehrdienst in their platform for a long, long time.
I can only speak for myself of course, but if the FDP would actually try to follow in Brandts and Scheels footsteps, i'd need about 5 seconds to decide what i am going to vote for.
They got slapped hard this election because over the course of the last years/(decades) they turned from a respectable social liberal party into some kind of lobbyist/neo-liberal conservative pet.
Socially/culturally liberal people are going to vote for the greens, young nerds switched over to the pirate party, market liberals switched over to the AfD.
On September 24 2013 03:35 Nyxisto wrote: I can only speak for myself of course, but if the FDP would actually try to follow in Brandts and Scheels footsteps, i'd need about 5 seconds to decide what i am going to vote for.
They got slapped hard this election because over the course of the last years/(decades) they turned from a respectable social liberal party into some kind of lobbyist/neo-liberal conservative pet.
Socially/culturally liberal people are going to vote for the greens, young nerds switched over to the pirate party, market liberals switched over to the AfD.
I am happy that the FDP is throwing arround names and faces right now because it distracts them from their real problems. That's the way that they will disappear forever, keep on going!
On September 24 2013 04:36 Influ wrote: I am happy that the FDP is throwing arround names and faces right now because it distracts them from their real problems. That's the way that they will disappear forever, keep on going!
Their only chance for survival is if there would be re-elections soon in the case of CDU/CSU not finding a coalition partner. In that case enough CDU voters would charity vote for them to push them beyond 5%, I'm afraid. I just hope the SPD doesn't poker too high with pushing their price for a grand coalition. The SPD is in a shitty spot: go for a grand coalition to stay as weak or be even weaker next election as punishment for doing the responsible thing (yeah, the public has that short of a memory) or not do anything and risk reviving the zombie party. Stuck between a rock and a hard place...
On September 23 2013 20:12 Fuzzyhead wrote: the pirates are at 2.2% see here
edit: nvm, those are not the results you are looking for, anyways they did not make the cut or any cut in that matter edit2: nvmnvm, those are the results you are looking for
I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
On September 24 2013 21:26 Encdalf wrote: I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
if they tried a minority government they'd have big problems because the CDU does not have the majority in the Bundesrat either so they would not be able to do anything. I dont think that there will be new elections. It's more likely that the SPD will cave in and do a coalition and after that they can disband the SPD at the next elections
On September 24 2013 21:26 Encdalf wrote: I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
if they tried a minority government they'd have big problems because the CDU does not have the majority in the Bundesrat either so they would not be able to do anything. I dont think that there will be new elections. It's more likely that the SPD will cave in and do a coalition and after that they can disband the SPD at the next elections
I'd agree on that. The question remaining will be how the negotiations turn out. Despite the huge success in the election, the SPD should be in a pretty strong position in this one, just because it seems to be the only possibility to prevent a new election.
On September 24 2013 21:26 Encdalf wrote: I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
I agree that re-elections are very unlikely, but maybe for a different reason: If we would have re-elections, there's a decent chance that the FDP will get more thant 5% this time. And this would mean a safe majority for CDU-FDP, unless the AfD also makes it. So for both the SPD and the greens it's either coalition with the CDU (and possible facing the fate of the SPD 4 years ago / the FDP this time), or re-election with the most likely outcome to be the continuation of what we had for the last 4 years. Neither option looks very pleasant; and red-red-green is as of now just a phantom the FDP and CDU conjure to scare voters from the center away from voting a left-ish party. Real dilemma for SPD especially, as they are supposed to be first go-to-option of the CDU. Whatever they do, the majority of their supporters probably won't like it.
On September 24 2013 21:26 Encdalf wrote: I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
if they tried a minority government they'd have big problems because the CDU does not have the majority in the Bundesrat either so they would not be able to do anything. I dont think that there will be new elections. It's more likely that the SPD will cave in and do a coalition and after that they can disband the SPD at the next elections
I'd agree on that. The question remaining will be how the negotiations turn out. Despite the huge success in the election, the SPD should be in a pretty strong position in this one, just because it seems to be the only possibility to prevent a new election.
actually I am sure CDU would want re-elections on the reason of SPD/Grüne/Linke refused to work together. SPD is in a horrible spot..., CDU are the lucky ones
The best that the SPD could do is to make rediculous demands and the Greens go together with the Union. This has a lot of advantages:
-CDU will have a very hard in the next 4 years because of the minority in the Bundesrat -The Greens can get the same content out of the coalition negotiations as the SPD would like to (not to the same extend but still...) -They avoid risking a comeback from FDP/AfD through reelection -The SPD will maybe get some votes back from the Greens -They have a real try in 4 years with red/red/green and stand true to their excluding this time
The only disadvantage is that some people will probably say that they are avoiding their responsibility but I wonder who could make such claims and have an use out of it.
CDU and The Greens will never come to frution. Its just the CDU would just mess with their base voters. They wont get any laws through the Bundesrat. They cant be that stupid. Same would go for red, red, green.
Best thing what could happen would be a reelction. Worst thing big coalation. CDU and SPD together would be 4 lost years. Nothing would happen. It would be a constant pissing contest and in the end, they always choose the middle ground, which is in most szenarios by far the worst option.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
The SPD will go into a coalition. They just have to create a good show about their internal battle around this to make people somewhat believe that they don't really want to do it. The somewhat fake drama should look as if they are only going into the coalition because they want to do the best for Germany and are sacrificing themselves for the greater good. That might work to make people believe there's some sort of separate "real" SPD that would do things a lot different if they get more votes in four years.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
CDU/CSU 41.5% + SPD 25.7% = 67.2% 64% think they would form a good coalition. 64 / 67.2 = 95% of the people that voted for either SPD/CDU/CSU agree with this coalition.
SPD 25.7% + Die Linke 8.6% + The Greens 8.4% = 42.7% 25% think they would form a good coalition. 25/42.7 = 58% of the people that voted for SPD/Linke/Greens agree with this coalition.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
CDU/CSU 41.5% + SPD 25.7% = 67.2% 64% think they would form a good coalition. 64 / 67.2 = 95% of the people that voted for either SPD/CDU/CSU agree with this coalition.
SPD 25.7% + Die Linke 8.6% + The Greens 8.4% = 42.7% 25% think they would form a good coalition. 25/42.7 = 58% of the people that voted for SPD/Linke/Greens agree with this coalition.
Do you see how its relevant now?
Well your logic is a little bit flawed, because the question 'do you like this coaltition?' wasn't exclusively answered by voters of the respective parties.(Meaning that an FDP voter would probaly be okay with a CDU/SPD government, but not with red-red-green) I'm an SPD member and from what i can tell the internal preferences aren't so clear, there are quite a few people who would like a left wing coalition, if 'Die Linke' would be more pragmantic and cut some of the nonsense out of their program.
It's not just show, many members of the party don't want a CDU/SPD government, because they fear a turnout like 2009 in the next elections.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
CDU/CSU 41.5% + SPD 25.7% = 67.2% 64% think they would form a good coalition. 64 / 67.2 = 95% of the people that voted for either SPD/CDU/CSU agree with this coalition.
SPD 25.7% + Die Linke 8.6% + The Greens 8.4% = 42.7% 25% think they would form a good coalition. 25/42.7 = 58% of the people that voted for SPD/Linke/Greens agree with this coalition.
Do you see how its relevant now?
Well your logic is a little bit flawed, because the question 'do you like this coaltition?' wasn't exclusively answered by voters of the respective parties.(Meaning that an FDP voter would probaly be okay with a CDU/SPD government, but not with red-red-green) I'm an SPD member and from what i can tell the internal preferences aren't so clear, there are quite a few people who would like a left wing coalition, if 'Die Linke' would be more pragmantic and cut some of the nonsense out of their program.
It's not just show, many members of the party don't want a CDU/SPD government, because they fear a turnout like 2009 in the next elections.
Yes thats true but even in worst case if all of the 15% who voted for a party outside of parliament voted in favor of CDU/SPD then it would still be 72.9% acceptance. (64-15)/67.2= 72.9
Thats still better than Red/Red/Green and it applies to them too to some extent. You could also argue that voters of AFD would go to die Linke because some of them are protest voters. and voters of the pirate party are more on the left spectrum.
I agree the SPD is probably very torn between those two options. In that unstable situation it would be very risky to form a coalition with only a small majority in the bundestag. For the SPD its kind of a lose/lose situation.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
No way there will be reelections, there is a like 67% coalition possible nearly all voters are satisfied with. CDU+SPD is 99% certain. Would give merkel an excuse to move slightly towards the left as well and contribute a bit more for europe wich is what all the banks and france+southern countrys want, and wich maybe is neccesary as well. Think a new government within 1 week, dont see a reason why this should take long. (not what i am hoping for btw but thats something different)
Dont think the SPD has a choise in this btw, there are no other options besides reelection wich i doubt will be favourable for the left, there is a change afd might make 5% then since they where so close last time, and the left could be hurt as well because they refused an obvious coalition. Reelection will only make cdu bigger and the left smaller.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
CDU/CSU 41.5% + SPD 25.7% = 67.2% 64% think they would form a good coalition. 64 / 67.2 = 95% of the people that voted for either SPD/CDU/CSU agree with this coalition.
SPD 25.7% + Die Linke 8.6% + The Greens 8.4% = 42.7% 25% think they would form a good coalition. 25/42.7 = 58% of the people that voted for SPD/Linke/Greens agree with this coalition.
Do you see how its relevant now?
Well your logic is a little bit flawed, because the question 'do you like this coaltition?' wasn't exclusively answered by voters of the respective parties.(Meaning that an FDP voter would probaly be okay with a CDU/SPD government, but not with red-red-green) I'm an SPD member and from what i can tell the internal preferences aren't so clear, there are quite a few people who would like a left wing coalition, if 'Die Linke' would be more pragmantic and cut some of the nonsense out of their program.
It's not just show, many members of the party don't want a CDU/SPD government, because they fear a turnout like 2009 in the next elections.
Yes thats true but even in worst case if all of the 15% who voted for a party outside of parliament voted in favor of CDU/SPD then it would still be 72.9% acceptance. (64-15)/67.2= 72.9
Thats still better than Red/Red/Green and it applies to them too to some extent. You could also argue that voters of AFD would go to die Linke because some of them are protest voters. and voters of the pirate party are more on the left spectrum.
I agree the SPD is probably very torn between those two options. In that unstable situation it would be very risky to form a coalition with only a small majority in the bundestag. For the SPD its kind of a lose/lose situation.
Actually you could say it's lose/lose/lose. They can - form a grand coalition. Been there, done that, cost them votes on the left fringe. - form a red/red/green coalition. Been there, done that in local elections in Hessen, cost them votes in the middle. - try to form a red/red/green coalition, fail quickly and messily before it even comes to the first parliamentary votes. Will lead to reelections costing them votes in the middle and leading to FDP likely and AfD possibly entering parliament.
For someone thoroughly fed up with the Post-Schröder-SPD, the potential for Schadenfreude is endless.
Well, technically there's also the option of a minority government, i.e. CDU/CSU as government, all others in opposition, and Merkel&co get the (few) needed votes on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific decision at stake instead of simply coopting whoever shows least reserve towards them for whatever decisions come along over the next years.
Of course, this won't happen since it's easier to convince sb. once and be done with it instead of properly arguing specifics again and again; but at least on paper that doesn't look too bad either, especially since the CDU/CSU is literally almost able to reign alone, so even the pretense of a 'cooperative' coalition is kind of silly.
I'd say chances for a reelection are about 0.01%. Red-red-green has so much to lose. If FDP and AFD came into the Bundestag because of that red-red-green would lose their "majority" again. Maybe they do not want to rule together but they surely do not want those other parties in the parliament. I would also expect that the greens would be the biggest loser because right now they have no face (K. Göring-Eckhardt but they didn't hype her nearly enough. In the end it was all about Trittin.)
The only left party who could win are the pirates and only if Marina Weisband came back because she's extremely popular.
My preferred option would be a CDU minority government. There wouldn't be a total standstill. SPD can't go NO F*** YOU for 4 years or they'll lose voters again and again. In this composition they had the chance to be against whatever the CDU wants but have a few people vote for it if they expect it to be popular with the people. That would show their true wishes but signalize that they take responsibility whenever needed. They could also get new members into the spotlight because everybody who is active now will always be remembered as "beaten by Merkel". Same goes for the greens.
Its not happening. At least if you respect the will of the voters.
rofl of course the majority says they prefer cdu/spd cuz the majority voted for them
shits so damn irrelevant
my biggest fear are reelections and ppl just voting for cdu cuz they cba going a third time so they get the absolute majority on the other hand, i guess cdu will also lose alot of votes cuz stupid ppl cba going a second time
i dunno what to hope for tbh
CDU/CSU 41.5% + SPD 25.7% = 67.2% 64% think they would form a good coalition. 64 / 67.2 = 95% of the people that voted for either SPD/CDU/CSU agree with this coalition.
SPD 25.7% + Die Linke 8.6% + The Greens 8.4% = 42.7% 25% think they would form a good coalition. 25/42.7 = 58% of the people that voted for SPD/Linke/Greens agree with this coalition.
Do you see how its relevant now?
Well your logic is a little bit flawed, because the question 'do you like this coaltition?' wasn't exclusively answered by voters of the respective parties.(Meaning that an FDP voter would probaly be okay with a CDU/SPD government, but not with red-red-green) I'm an SPD member and from what i can tell the internal preferences aren't so clear, there are quite a few people who would like a left wing coalition, if 'Die Linke' would be more pragmantic and cut some of the nonsense out of their program.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
Not only are you desperately trying to be a wise ass, you're also wrong, as the English term for 'Grundgesetz' also is constitution.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
Well considering that 42% voted for the CDU, and far over 50% voted conservative, and given the fact that only 25% of people would like red-red-green, this coalition isn't really an option, even if they get rid of ex-communists and whatnot.
Even if you personally like or dislike the CDU, with their nearly absolute majority it's quite clear that people want the CDU and Merkel in the government.
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
Not only are you desperately trying to be a wise ass, you're also wrong, as the English term for 'Grundgesetz' also is constitution.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
Well considering that 42% voted for the CDU, and far over 50% voted conservative, and given the fact that only 25% of people would like red-red-green, this coalition isn't really an option, even if they get rid of ex-communists and whatnot.
Even if you personally like or dislike the CDU, with their nearly absolute majority it's quite clear that people want the CDU and Merkel in the government.
the grundgesetz was made shortly after the second world war as a basic set of laws that will enable the new german state to build upon that a constitution that has to be accepted through a refferendum by all people of voting age in germany. this still has not happened and that's why we dont have a constitution we have the grundgesetz.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
and if you translate grundgesetz to constitution then you are just plain wrong. Verfassung = constitution, grundgesetz translates to basic law.
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
Not only are you desperately trying to be a wise ass, you're also wrong, as the English term for 'Grundgesetz' also is constitution.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
Well considering that 42% voted for the CDU, and far over 50% voted conservative, and given the fact that only 25% of people would like red-red-green, this coalition isn't really an option, even if they get rid of ex-communists and whatnot.
Even if you personally like or dislike the CDU, with their nearly absolute majority it's quite clear that people want the CDU and Merkel in the government.
the grundgesetz was made shortly after the second world war as a basic set of laws that will enable the new german state to build upon that a constitution that has to be accepted through a refferendum by all people of voting age in germany. this still has not happened and that's why we dont have a constitution we have the grundgesetz.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
and if you translate grundgesetz to constitution then you are just plain wrong. Verfassung = constitution, grundgesetz translates to basic law.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
This is highly offtopic, but you are reading it wrong.
What it really says is that it ONLY loses its power when there is a new constitution that is voted for by the citizens. The intention here is that it can not simply be replaced.
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
Not only are you desperately trying to be a wise ass, you're also wrong, as the English term for 'Grundgesetz' also is constitution.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
Well considering that 42% voted for the CDU, and far over 50% voted conservative, and given the fact that only 25% of people would like red-red-green, this coalition isn't really an option, even if they get rid of ex-communists and whatnot.
Even if you personally like or dislike the CDU, with their nearly absolute majority it's quite clear that people want the CDU and Merkel in the government.
the grundgesetz was made shortly after the second world war as a basic set of laws that will enable the new german state to build upon that a constitution that has to be accepted through a refferendum by all people of voting age in germany. this still has not happened and that's why we dont have a constitution we have the grundgesetz.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
and if you translate grundgesetz to constitution then you are just plain wrong. Verfassung = constitution, grundgesetz translates to basic law.
So you are just being a smart-ass.
He's not really being a smartass when he's wrong I think.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
This is highly offtopic, but you are reading it wrong.
What it really says is that it ONLY loses its power when there is a new constitution that is voted for by the citizens. The intention here is that it can not simply be replaced.
I would interpret it that way too, do we have a neutral lawyer here for a professional opinion? Especially since this site, http://www.iuscomp.org calls it: "Article 146 [Duration of validity of the Basic Law]"
For the others in the thread
Artikel 146
Dieses Grundgesetz, das nach Vollendung der Einheit und Freiheit Deutschlands für das gesamte deutsche Volk gilt, verliert seine Gültigkeit an dem Tage, an dem eine Verfassung in Kraft tritt, die von dem deutschen Volke in freier Entscheidung beschlossen worden ist.
Article 146 [Duration of validity of the Basic Law]
This Basic Law, which since the achievement of the unity and freedom of Germany applies to the entire German people, shall cease to apply on the day on which a constitution freely adopted by the German people takes effect.
The whole point is stupid anyway as 'we don't have a constitution' implies we don't have any kind of constitutional rights, which is obviously not the case. If you want to argue law semantics i think another thread would be more appropriate.
Back on topic:
I personally would really like to see a black-green government. Not only wouldn't we have any kind of opposition otherwise, but i feel like civil rights and humanitarian topics will get under the wheels again if we have a black/red government. Also it might be a bit more interesting and refreshing. Sure tax policies are way different, but i don't think the greens will go with such a left-wing program in the future anyway. On energy-policies on the other hand there aren't even that many differences anymore.
On September 25 2013 05:16 Spekulatius wrote: CDU/SPD coalition would make it possible to change the constitution without having to seek the consent of the opposition. This somehow scares me.
dont worry dude, germany doesnt have a constitution
Not only are you desperately trying to be a wise ass, you're also wrong, as the English term for 'Grundgesetz' also is constitution.
People would like a left wing coalition if Die Linke would get rid of all communists, like the KPF and all the others, stop working with the DKP and stop supporting the "Junge Welt", and then properly handle their past. Then they people might accept a red red green coalition
Well considering that 42% voted for the CDU, and far over 50% voted conservative, and given the fact that only 25% of people would like red-red-green, this coalition isn't really an option, even if they get rid of ex-communists and whatnot.
Even if you personally like or dislike the CDU, with their nearly absolute majority it's quite clear that people want the CDU and Merkel in the government.
the grundgesetz was made shortly after the second world war as a basic set of laws that will enable the new german state to build upon that a constitution that has to be accepted through a refferendum by all people of voting age in germany. this still has not happened and that's why we dont have a constitution we have the grundgesetz.
article 146 in the grundgesetz is the reference for that if you want to look it up
and if you translate grundgesetz to constitution then you are just plain wrong. Verfassung = constitution, grundgesetz translates to basic law.
So you are just being a smart-ass.
actually i was but I forgot that everything is dead serious here
dont think CDU + Greens would work. I think it was Hamburg? where they tried that coalition and it did not work at all.
And it really does not matter if it is a "Grundgesetz" or a "Verfassung". It has at least the same value than any other constitution in any other nation on this planet: it organizes the country, the administration, the judges, the legislation and the personal freedoms. Its laws rank highest in the hierarchy of national laws and are difficult (most) or impossible (some) to alter. A grand coalition would enable CDU/CSU/SPD to change it by themselves and considering recent evolutions (where the EU is headed, the NSA affair, etc.) I think I would have a reason to be worried.
Its a bit of a tricky subject, the question is are we really a sovereign state or are we still occupied? Theres quite some evidence that we're still just a puppet state of the US/UK/France, but thats a topic for another thread.
I think we might need a German politics megathread just like the US and UK one on teamliquid. Since we're quite a lot of Germans discussing German politics on TL talking english with eachother :D
Fun fact: England really doesnt have a written constitution.
I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Since they show up in every new party (I mean, they have to go somewhere as well when they want to stay in politics after leaving the npd, right? ) -and old party, but people don't care as much there- that wasn't the issue, haven't really cared about the pirates in the last 1-2 years, but as far as I know they had a lot of internal conflicts. Since we're in a gamerforum there are probably guys who know a lot more about it, though.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
To be honest I think it is much more about image then actual ideas. Personally I think the Left's and Green's ideas about the Euro and financial crisis were better then those of the other established parties. Now I am no expert in the area but I know some people who know a lot about finance have the same opinion. It's a very complex problem and even experts don't agree what the right course of action would be, so of course the average voter has no fucking idea and most don't even know the different parties ideas to tackle the problem, they just go with public perception and public perception is the CDU and SPD know best how to handle financial things.
So even if the Pirates had brilliant ideas about the Euro and financial crisis people would still not take them seriously because the party is too young and has a silly name...
On September 24 2013 21:26 Encdalf wrote: I don't think that there will be re-elections. Why should there? If CDU/CSU doesn't find a coalition partner, they have to govern as a minority government, since I don't see how a coalition of Linke, SPD and Greens would work.
It is not up to them. If the Chancellor candidate doesn't manage to get an absolute majority in the Bundestag it is up to the President to decide whether the country is better served by a minority government or new elections.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
The Pirates made the same mistakes that the Greens made, they included a lot of "left" ideas like heavy redistribution of money. I dont know why, meaybe they thought that its some kind of trend with younger generations. But they were completely wrong.
People that care for Internet/freedom (Pirates) or enviromental topics (Greens) simply did not vote for them because they heavily disagreed with all the left ideas. There is also SPD and especially the Left party for these things.
And also, the Greens did another misake by trying to enforce a lot of ideas onto people by heavy restrictions. Its a silly example, but for eample the "no meat day" where they want to forbid people to eat meat. This stuff doesnt sit right with people, they dont like to be treated like little kids.
Oh and also, the Pirates had the problem that many idiots flooded their party and since all the parties must be open to the public, they could not do anything against getting hijacked by retards. I dont know if it was Schlömer, but they had a president or something that even told people that he only did it because its easy money and better than getting minimum financual support from state or even having to work.
And in my city their representative was a woman that probably never turned on a PC and her ideas were just "free Bus", "free swimmingpools" "freefreefree".
With those persons as the decision makers...yes you will fail.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
It almost sounds as if they didn't really try.
The biggest part about the failure of the pirate party is not their program, it's the fact that they're a giant unorganized horde of nerds. Most of the time when they're on television, with one or two exceptions, they accomplish to reach a starcraft champagne ceremony level of awkwardness.
Also their large group of voters from the local elections two years ago were protests voters. The 9% they reached in Berlin were, from the start, impossible to reach again. The whole party intern switcharoo around Ponader didn't make it any better.
And regarding the NSA scandal, it just didn't really interest anyone. Although handled very badly by CDU/FDP, the topic could barely mobilize anyone to switch their vote to the opposition or the pirates. That's also due to the fact that the piraty party doesn't have any kind of position on the economy or foreign politics. No one is going to vote for a party which does not cover two of the most important fields of politics. That's why most of the protest voters went over to the AfD.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
It almost sounds as if they didn't really try.
The biggest part about the failure of the pirate party is not their program, it's the fact that they're a giant unorganized horde of nerds. Most of the time when they're on television, with one or two exceptions, they accomplish to reach a starcraft champagne ceremony level of awkwardness.
Also their large group of voters from the local elections two years ago were protests voters. The 9% they reached in Berlin were, from the start, impossible to reach again. The whole party intern switcharoo around Ponader didn't make it any better.
And regarding the NSA scandal, it just didn't really interest anyone. Although handled very badly by CDU/FDP, the topic could barely mobilize anyone to switch their vote to the opposition or the pirates. That's also due to the fact that the piraty party doesn't have any kind of position on the economy or foreign politics. No one is going to vote for a party which does not cover two of the most important fields of politics. That's why most of the protest voters went over to the AfD.
AfD is a good example.
Pirates are a bunch of amateurs with really questionable decisions and even appereance. I have seen election posters where the person didnt even bother to do their hair.
AfD has some strange views, but they have a bunch of professionals at the front that know what they are doing. So they instantly got 5% in their first election. They also did the clever thing to NOT participate in the bavarian election 1 week prior.
The AfD guys also do something wrong with their image. Looking at them creeps me out a little, though I can't quite say why. I just feel something is off about them. Might just be my subconscious being prejudiced.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
It almost sounds as if they didn't really try.
The biggest part about the failure of the pirate party is not their program, it's the fact that they're a giant unorganized horde of nerds. Most of the time when they're on television, with one or two exceptions, they accomplish to reach a starcraft champagne ceremony level of awkwardness.
Also their large group of voters from the local elections two years ago were protests voters. The 9% they reached in Berlin were, from the start, impossible to reach again. The whole party intern switcharoo around Ponader didn't make it any better.
And regarding the NSA scandal, it just didn't really interest anyone. Although handled very badly by CDU/FDP, the topic could barely mobilize anyone to switch their vote to the opposition or the pirates. That's also due to the fact that the piraty party doesn't have any kind of position on the economy or foreign politics. No one is going to vote for a party which does not cover two of the most important fields of politics. That's why most of the protest voters went over to the AfD.
While I mosly agree with your assertions, do you care to elaborate what the bolded part means? I am genuinely asking myself what you mean with that, lol.
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
It almost sounds as if they didn't really try.
The biggest part about the failure of the pirate party is not their program, it's the fact that they're a giant unorganized horde of nerds. Most of the time when they're on television, with one or two exceptions, they accomplish to reach a starcraft champagne ceremony level of awkwardness.
Also their large group of voters from the local elections two years ago were protests voters. The 9% they reached in Berlin were, from the start, impossible to reach again. The whole party intern switcharoo around Ponader didn't make it any better.
And regarding the NSA scandal, it just didn't really interest anyone. Although handled very badly by CDU/FDP, the topic could barely mobilize anyone to switch their vote to the opposition or the pirates. That's also due to the fact that the piraty party doesn't have any kind of position on the economy or foreign politics. No one is going to vote for a party which does not cover two of the most important fields of politics. That's why most of the protest voters went over to the AfD.
While I mosly agree with your assertions, do you care to elaborate what the bolded part means? I am genuinely asking myself what you mean with that, lol.
Teaja getting a big bottle of Champagne after winning the Dreamhack Valencia. Some staff guy shakes it, opens it while Teaja is holding it, nothing happens. The awkwardness was awesome
On September 26 2013 12:56 Mataza wrote: I am usually not that interested in our politics, but after successfully remembering to vote on the election sunday, I really want to know how exactly did the Pirates fuck up so hard?
I'm kinda out of mainstream mediaand try to stay clear of useless drama, so I missed it. Was it about handling the former NPD and rechtsradikal members?
Main issues in this election cycle were economy and Europe. Contributions from Pirates on those topics were rare. Smart, realistic contributions were non-existent, but since I'm also 'kinda out of mainstream media', whoever feel free to correct me with links/quotes.
Pirates do well on their main issues - net culture, privacy, civil rights. During a world-wide banking and economic crisis since Lehman, that's nice but not enough in the eyes of most grown-ups to justify voting for them.
I think the entire NSA affair could have been the topic for the Pirates. Since civil rights in the age of internet is not such a high priority topic - or at least it was not in the past - this affair should have given the Pirates the opportunity to act as ambassadors of the digital generation, explaining the general public what this NSA SNAFU actually means. But their exposition during that time was minimal to non-existent. Especially since the other parties really seemed not qualified in this topic (i.e. "Das Internet ist Neuland" - A. Merkel; "Supergrundrecht Sicherheit" - H.-P. Friedrich (what kind of a clown is this guy?? and that is our minister of internal affairs); "Die Debatte über die NSA-Affäre erkläre ich hiermit für beendet." - R. Pofalla (I never liked this guy, but considering his verbal slander towards an elected representative acting in accordance with his conscience and this chuzpe to just declare that a serious and needed debate is over ... ugh. I usually do not use these kind of words, but this guy is a category one @sshole if there ever was one.).
In short, they somehow fucked it up hard.
I know they fucked up, but here I am still wondering how they managed to do that. With these kind of assists from other parties, any speech should almost write itself. "The other parties have shown no competence. The internet is a thing many germans have grown up with and it is far from neuland etc etc." "The NSA surveillance is a breach of everything we as germans believe in according to our own Grundgesetz"
It almost sounds as if they didn't really try.
The biggest part about the failure of the pirate party is not their program, it's the fact that they're a giant unorganized horde of nerds. Most of the time when they're on television, with one or two exceptions, they accomplish to reach a starcraft champagne ceremony level of awkwardness.
Also their large group of voters from the local elections two years ago were protests voters. The 9% they reached in Berlin were, from the start, impossible to reach again. The whole party intern switcharoo around Ponader didn't make it any better.
And regarding the NSA scandal, it just didn't really interest anyone. Although handled very badly by CDU/FDP, the topic could barely mobilize anyone to switch their vote to the opposition or the pirates. That's also due to the fact that the piraty party doesn't have any kind of position on the economy or foreign politics. No one is going to vote for a party which does not cover two of the most important fields of politics. That's why most of the protest voters went over to the AfD.
While I mosly agree with your assertions, do you care to elaborate what the bolded part means? I am genuinely asking myself what you mean with that, lol.
Teaja getting a big bottle of Champagne after winning the Dreamhack Valencia. Some staff guy shakes it, opens it while Teaja is holding it, nothing happens. The awkwardness was awesome
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
There wasn't any way for Merkel not to win.
And of course nothing changes when you elect the same conservative candidate for the third time.
I'm actually starting to think that a 2-party system like in the US is superior than what Germany has. At least then you would have two possible governments instead of having CDU+X every single election.
But apparently Germans are really happy and satisfied people. Just sucks to have conservative governments when your poverty is what they're trying to conserve.
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
There wasn't any way for Merkel not to win.
And of course nothing changes when you elect the same conservative candidate for the third time.
I'm actually starting to think that a 2-party system like in the US is superior than what Germany has. At least then you would have two possible governments instead of having CDU+X every single election.
But apparently Germans are really happy and satisfied people. Just sucks to have conservative governments when your poverty is what they're trying to conserve.
Just because one previously big party fails, does not mean that the system is wrong. Especially since it worked well in the past and the failure only started recently. In fact, every democratic system should look bad if that happens...
There is a left-wing majority amongst the voters. It's just that both the SPD and Die Grünen do not want to enter a coalition with Die Linke and failed to convince the voters why Die Linke is not a sensible partner for them and hence why they should vote for them instead of Die Linke.
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
There wasn't any way for Merkel not to win.
And of course nothing changes when you elect the same conservative candidate for the third time.
I'm actually starting to think that a 2-party system like in the US is superior than what Germany has. At least then you would have two possible governments instead of having CDU+X every single election.
But apparently Germans are really happy and satisfied people. Just sucks to have conservative governments when your poverty is what they're trying to conserve.
Define what you mean with poverty, because as far as I'm concerned we have a very high living standard in germany. For reference I, as a student, have less money after paying my rent than Hartz IV recipients. There would be Bafög for that, but I'm not eligible anymore. And still I manage to not starve, visit doctors and the like.
Wasn't the question this month which party would give in and be Merkels minor partner? I don't feel particular surprised here. The main hurdle for the "kitchen premium" was just how stupid it sounds on paper. What I mean is "stay at home wives" are quite common because not every woman has the ambition to become an energetic, independent career woman.
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
There wasn't any way for Merkel not to win.
And of course nothing changes when you elect the same conservative candidate for the third time.
I'm actually starting to think that a 2-party system like in the US is superior than what Germany has. At least then you would have two possible governments instead of having CDU+X every single election.
But apparently Germans are really happy and satisfied people. Just sucks to have conservative governments when your poverty is what they're trying to conserve.
Define what you mean with poverty, because as far as I'm concerned we have a very high living standard in germany. For reference I, as a student, have less money after paying my rent than Hartz IV recipients. There would be Bafög for that, but I'm not eligible anymore. And still I manage to not starve, visit doctors and the like.
Wasn't the question this month which party would give in and be Merkels minor partner? I don't feel particular surprised here. The main hurdle for the "kitchen premium" was just how stupid it sounds on paper. What I mean is "stay at home wives" are quite common because not every woman has the ambition to become an energetic, independent career woman.
Woman or man shouldn't matter in the first place, because the premium is not based on gender. If people think that women get a disadvantage because of this, then they should discuss what the root of the problem really is. As I said, it cannot be that premium, since it does not distinguish between man and woman.
The Union are having talks with both the SPD and the Greens about possible coalitions. After two weeks of non committal talks everything looks like we are heading for a grand coalition between the Union and the SPD. The Union probed for common ground with the Greens, but it appears those talks were not considered successful by either the conservatives or the Greens. Much ideological difference still exists between the two, particularly between the Greens and the smaller CSU.
As expected, Merkel is said to yield the introduction of a nation wide minimum wage to the social-democrats. In return, the SPD supposedly has agreed to leave the "kitchen premium" in place, or only slightly change it (essentially moving it from federal to state jurisdiction).
If the two agree on a coalition with those two major hurdles out of the way, I see Merkel dominating the SPD on all other topics. She will probably delay the (much needed) education reform, robbing the SPD off their main argument in favor of higher taxes. Merkel's Union will most certainly not move an inch on the topic of immigration. And when it comes to renewable energy, Union and SPD will most likely work out a vague proposition that will in the end protect businesses and result in higher energy prices for consumers, but will save face for both parties.
so nothing surprising happening here. I'm a little bit sad because I had some optimistic hopes for big changes but that was rather naive I guess
There wasn't any way for Merkel not to win.
And of course nothing changes when you elect the same conservative candidate for the third time.
I'm actually starting to think that a 2-party system like in the US is superior than what Germany has. At least then you would have two possible governments instead of having CDU+X every single election.
But apparently Germans are really happy and satisfied people. Just sucks to have conservative governments when your poverty is what they're trying to conserve.
please never think that the US system is good or superior to another country's democratic system... its the worst kind of party system you can have, its almost not even democratic anymore (choose one or the other)
Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
On October 15 2013 01:45 Restrider wrote: Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
I still don't get it. Why do people think that the losses of the SPD in the election after the grand coalition is primarily due to the CDU and not because of the failure of the people leading the SPD during the coalition?
I think the US system is pretty flawed. The voting system alone is a total mess. Having only 2 major parties has advantages too but looking at the situation right now you can see how bad it can be.
I would compare the tea party movement to the AFD. Its a vocal minority. In the US its not a seperate party but a movement within the republican party that manages to influence the party in such a major way that it has the power to bring politics to a standstill.
Imagine if the AFD was a movement within the Union and would block every single european decision that has to be made. Imagine we had a similar standstill when we have to get a new bailout package for greece next year. The whole crisis would just escalate so quickly. The 5% hurdle and forced alignment with the party programme actually protects us from stuff like that.
On October 15 2013 01:45 Restrider wrote: Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
I still don't get it. Why do people think that the losses of the SPD in the election after the grand coalition is primarily due to the CDU and not because of the failure of the people leading the SPD during the coalition?
It does not matter whether the CDU is at fault or the SPD, what matters is what the SPD basis believes to be true when they vote for or against another grand coalition.
On October 15 2013 01:45 Restrider wrote: Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
I still don't get it. Why do people think that the losses of the SPD in the election after the grand coalition is primarily due to the CDU and not because of the failure of the people leading the SPD during the coalition?
It does not matter whether the CDU is at fault or the SPD, what matters is what the SPD basis believes to be true when they vote for or against another grand coalition.
Which is why I asked WHY the spd basis believes it to be true, not whether it is true or not.
On October 15 2013 01:45 Restrider wrote: Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
I still don't get it. Why do people think that the losses of the SPD in the election after the grand coalition is primarily due to the CDU and not because of the failure of the people leading the SPD during the coalition?
It does not matter whether the CDU is at fault or the SPD, what matters is what the SPD basis believes to be true when they vote for or against another grand coalition.
Which is why I asked WHY the spd basis believes it to be true, not whether it is true or not.
The SPD basis believes it because they lost so many voters after the last Grand-Coalition in 2005. And they're arguing that in public opinion, all positive things from said government were attributed towards the CDU while the SPD took all the blame for the bad decisions.
On October 15 2013 01:45 Restrider wrote: Anyone wondering whether the SPD basis will actually accept another grand coalition? Of course the elites in the SPD secretly want a grand coalition, because they are droolingly trying to get positions in the next administration. But you cannot bribe the party members in the communities with this. And frankly, I do not think that Merkel and the Union can give in too much either, since they have 16 % more than the SPD. And since the SPD basis usually tends to be more left than the party elites... I would not be surprised, if the SPD basis rejects a coalition, when they are asked to voted for or against it. Bear in mind that they still remember the last grand coalition.
I still don't get it. Why do people think that the losses of the SPD in the election after the grand coalition is primarily due to the CDU and not because of the failure of the people leading the SPD during the coalition?
It does not matter whether the CDU is at fault or the SPD, what matters is what the SPD basis believes to be true when they vote for or against another grand coalition.
Which is why I asked WHY the spd basis believes it to be true, not whether it is true or not.
The SPD basis believes it because they lost so many voters after the last Grand-Coalition in 2005. And they're arguing that in public opinion, all positive things from said government were attributed towards the CDU while the SPD took all the blame for the bad decisions.
Thanks for the answer.
Well, they are certainly right about that. They did lose many voters and that can only be the case if the positive things are attributed towards the CDU and not them. But I still don't understand why the general consensus amongst the SPD people is to decline another grand coalition. Obviously the grand coalition is a constant battle for the public opinion, which the SPD clearly lost last time. Not only did the SPD not do any self-reflection (at least none which was visible to me in the media), with this attitude they are entering the battle with a disadvantage should it come to another grand coalition.
Maybe we should just vote again, until either CDU/CSU or SPD/Die Grünen have an absolute majority. It's like the German version of a governmental shutdown, because the politicians act like spoiled brats.
it would actually be the best if the CDU got an absolute majority, because this way there would be no scapegoats from other parties Merkel could throw away to save herself. but most likely the idiots at the SPD top are so blinded by their greed and lust for power that they dont think further then the next paycheck
On October 15 2013 06:53 Skilledblob wrote: it would actually be the best if the CDU got an absolute majority, because this way there would be no scapegoats from other parties Merkel could throw away to save herself. but most likely the idiots at the SPD top are so blinded by their greed and lust for power that they dont think further then the next paycheck
This is correct. But in order to put more pressure on Merkel, they decided to let the SPD basis decide whether they want a new grand coalition or not. And as I stated earlier, those are more left than the elite, still remember the last grand coalition and they do not care for administrative positions that much. This decision could backfire very qickly for the SPD elites...
Yesterday the Bundestag finally elected Angela Merkel as the new German Chancellor.
This past weekend the SPD internal vote resulted in a Yes to the grand coalition contract between SPD and CDU/CSU after almost three months of coalition talks.
Shortly after the SPD vote was announced, the personnel of the future cabinet was leaked one after another. Here is the future government (order by importance, my interpretation):
Angela Merkel (CDU) : Chancellor Sigmal Gabriel (SPD) : Vice-Chancellor, Minister for Economics and Energy Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) : Minister for Foreign Affairs Wolfgang Schäuble (CDU) : Ministry of Finance Thomas de Maizière (CDU) : Minister of the Interior Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) : Minister of Defense Andrea Nahles (SPD) : Minister of Labor and Social Affairs Heiko Maas (SPD) : Minister of Justice Manuela Schwesig (CDU) : Minister of Family Affairs, Seniors, Youth Hermann Gröhe (CDU) : Minister of Health Johanna Wanka (CDU) : Minister for Education Hans-Peter Friedrich (CSU) : Minister of Food and Agriculture Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) : Minister of Transport and Digital Infrastructure Barbara Hendricks (SPD) : Minister for Environment Gerd Müller (CSU) : Minister for Foreign Aid
One can read three important facts from how the three coalition parties make up the cabinet:
1. Angela Merkel retains her dominant position. She keeps her most trusted loyalists (Schäuble, de Maizière, von der Leyen) close and in important positions. Schäuble staying in the Treasury means she will have control over any spending the SPD plans in their social ministries. Von der Leyen made her ambitions for future chancellor candidacy clear with a spectacular move to the Ministry of Defense. And de Maizière does not get degraded at all for his almost complete failure in Defense last year but simply switches back into Interior, a position he held before.
2. On the other hand it is astounding to see how many key offices Merkel granted to the SPD. Considering the strong position Merkel came into the coalition talks from, the SPD basically got everything they could have wished for, and some. Particularly control over Economics, Labor, Energy, and Justice puts the SPD in a potentially powerful position to initiate left-leaning reform. It will be interesting to see if this means the final social-democratization of Merkel, or if she will - with help from her power over the treasury - endlessly delay SPD initiatives and reform, much like she has in previous coalitions with both the SPD and FDP.
3. Merkel duped the CSU in humiliating fashion. The CSU is the smaller, Bavarian-only sister party of the CDU. Looking at the cabinet they basically got the scraps after CDU and SPD had their pick. Transport, with the newly added digital infrastructure function might be the only ministry of some significance they will own. Friedrich, the current Minister of the Interior, gets massively downgraded to Agriculture, and to add insult to injury, that Ministry gets stripped off the consumer protection function, which moves to now SPD-owned Justice. Foreign Aid is basically a joke ministry.
In terms of foreign policy in general and European policy specifically, we can not expect anything but the status quo from Merkel. Steinmeier in Foreign Affairs means virtually nothing, as Merkel has stripped that Ministry of most of its power already. Important foreign politics are done by the Chancellors Office now.
For the rest of their program, a 200 page coalition contract gives some idea of where the new government intends to go. However, looking at the last Union-FDP coalition, that contract doesn't really mean anything. If Merkel changes her mind she won't care what was agreed on last weekend, and suffocate her partners in government in delays and non-commitment.
I guess time will tell - for now we will continue to have an administration free of ideology which will govern short-term and cautious, without taking any political risks.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EBnlotM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9dUBOeY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GqzYspS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6rrbTmx.jpg)
, although our food is cheap as fuck anyways imo) requires some form of financial stability and comes mostly from the more educated (and with this comes wealth more often than not) class.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QDw80mZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4vYZsHH.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/h1mnLFN.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.spreeblick.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/linke.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSSILrHCQAEq3GV.png:large)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSSILrHCQAEq3GV.png:large![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/a/img822/5674/28y7.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4BuSPu5.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-R496A87cO0w/UdgX2WU-dSI/AAAAAAAAz-k/W7KXoNHhxrs/w506-h281/Peter%2BOberender%2BAfD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://konsumpf.de/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Die-PARTEI-A2-Kleines-Haeschen.jpg)
If you vote for another party a bunny dies! Die PARTEI : )![[image loading]](http://www.emaz.de/assets/so-gesehen/Wahlplakate-2013/Republikaneraersche/republikaner-aersche.png)
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Right-wing_populist_parties_in_European_national_parliaments.svg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IxH4PIc.gif)
