European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1011

On December 08 2017 08:39 Acrofales wrote:

Holy shit. I actually started reading that. That's some insane bullshit. Then I came back and saw who posted it. Do you actually believe any of that?

Sefan Lanka is a German biologist with a long history of pseudoscientific outbursts, including a denial that the human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, "exists at all."

In November 2011 he put his money where his mouth is by offering 100,000 euros (about $106,000) to anyone who could prove that the measles virus exists. His position is that the disease is "a psychosomatic illness" caused by "traumatic separations."

The challenge was taken up by David Bardens, a German doctor who compiled evidence from medical journals proving the disease's viral cause. When Lanka rejected the evidence, Bardens sued. Last week a German court found Bardens' evidence persuasive and ordered Lanka to pay. He says he'll appeal.

The case would have the flavor of a legal cabaret act if not for the seriousness of the ongoing measles epidemic in the U.S. and Europe, and Lanka's pathological approach to the issue. Steven Novella of Yale Medical School writes that challenges like Lanka's usually are "pure publicity stunts--they sound grandiose but typically are framed in such a way that the one issuing the challenge can wiggle out of ever having to pay. They are rigged from the beginning, mainly by not spelling out what kind of evidence would meet the challenge." Novella reckons that "Lanka got a little sloppy."

Indeed, the phenomenon of cranks blowing up their own case in court is a long one. The most famous episode involves Oscar Wilde, who in 1895 filed a libel suit against the Marquess of Queensberry, the father of Wilde's lover, Lord Alfred Douglas, for publicly calling him a "somdomite." Queensberry defended the case in the only way possible, by proving Wilde was a homosexual. The outcome left Wilde bankrupt, and led eventually to his imprisonment and exile.

Unlike the Wilde-Queensberry lawsuit, the pseudo-debate over measles triggered by Lanka is no historical footnote. Great Britain is still grappling with a plunge in measles vaccination rates traceable to the fraudulent work of disgraced Dr. Andrew Wakefield, which purported to show a link between the vaccine and autism. Authorities in Lanka's home country of Germany, which by late February had recorded a spike of 574 measles cases since October, are considering making vaccination compulsory.

In the U.S., the measles outbreak that was linked early on to pre-Christmas visits to Disneyland continues to expand. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated its magnitude last week at 176 cases in 17 states. That figure is certainly conservative, as it counts only 118 cases from California, where the state Department of Public Health places the latest figure at 133. Most victims were unvaccinated.

On December 08 2017 08:39 Acrofales wrote:

Holy shit. I actually started reading that. That's some insane bullshit. Then I came back and saw who posted it. Do you actually believe any of that?

On December 08 2017 08:43 Plansix wrote:

For balance:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-a-vaccine-denier-20150320-column.html



The man is a joke that lost at his own game. But somehow the shitty NaturalBlaze managed to convince themselves its a win. Because they are a joke.

On December 09 2017 01:46 mahrgell wrote:
I like the idea, but only if it is done as a real union, with all the consequences this may entail.

So
- no more easy vetos or simply ignoring regulation, if the majority decides, it gets done. Yes this means losing control. And this would be a painful experience for many nations. Like Germany, who got so used to the fact that basically no decision is done against German will. But also Poland, Hungary etc, who simply ignore whatever the EU says. And pretty much every EU nation has been guilty here.
- no more race to the bottom between EU nations, in who can be the best tax avoidance location and have the shittiest labor conditions.
- the financially strong have to actually share, even when there is no direct benefit for themselves. And if this means that German money is spent on Greek infrastructure (without suddenly that infrastructure being owned by German companies) so be it. If this means that German money is suddenly also spent to combat youth unemployment in Spain, so be it.
- on a national level, the EU blame games have to stop. All good is of course the national government, who else. But all the shit is blamed on the EU.

There are more such things...

But in the end the question is: Is this what the majority wants? At the moment I doubt it, even though I believe, that a proper implementation would be something good for most.
But even more I doubt, that those in power on national level would be willing to make it work, instead of butchering it for their own political gain. Any such project would be doomed from the start, because everyone would only talk about what they lose, nobody would talk about what they gain. And seriously nobody needs a new USE, where from the start there are 50.000 exceptions given to various territories right away. Where again it is not about being united, but about "I have to take care the other one doesn't cheat me". Do it proper or don't do it at all.

So in a way I actually share Schulz's vision. I also think it is important that this vision is kept in public.
But I simply don't believe that any attempt of turning this vision into reality has a chance. And the most likely result of such an attempt would be worse than what we have, what we wanted and would likely only achieve to turn even more people away from this vision because "See, it doesn't work".