EPTInstead of protestations of sexism.
European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1050
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Instead of protestations of sexism. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9302 Posts
Germany's Angela Merkel finally reaches coalition deal with SPD After protracted talks, Angela Merkel's conservatives have made a deal with the Social Democrats for a new coalition contract in Germany. The SPD confirmed this in a message to its members, who will have the final say. Koalitionsverhandlungen von Union und SPD Merkel Abfahrt (picture-alliance/dpa/B. von Jutrczenka) Wednesday's key developments • The SPD, CDU and CSU have agreed in principle on a coalition deal, but a vote of SPD members still awaits. • SPD to now have three major portfolios: finance, foreign affairs and labor. • Bavaria's CSU, which advocates a tougher line on immigration than Chancellor Merkel, takes over the Interior Ministry. • Merkel's CDU gains the Economy Ministry and smaller posts, but is giving up the influential Interior and Finance ministries. Why did CDU give up finances? Is this a trap? Thought SPD's position was so weak CDU could force them to accept worse conditions. Giving foreign affairs to a man who called for creating United States of Europe by 2025 and kicking out those not on board with the idea sounds promising. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10900 Posts
The SPDs position wasn't weak, the base was fine with being in the opposition so there was nothing to lose for them. This is basically a suicide mission for Schulz. Btw: Giving the foreign minister to the minor partner is pretty much standard in germany. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9302 Posts
| ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
On February 08 2018 01:53 Sent. wrote: Congrats on continuing to have a stable government. Fun fact: Italy changed PMs 6 times since Merkel took office. Why did CDU give up finances? Is this a trap? Thought SPD's position was so weak CDU could force them to accept worse conditions. Giving foreign affairs to a man who called for creating United States of Europe by 2025 and kicking out those not on board with the idea sounds promising. "continuing", except for a 4+ month hiatus post election, which is unheard in german history (I think). In coalition talks, you cant really impose your position on partner; the SPD was "weak" in the sense of a bad election results, but for the talks they were in a "strong" position, almost equal to the CDU in the sense that neither could get a government without the other. Giving up finances might actually be a trap, yes. Normally the minister of finance is a rather unpopular person, as it is his job to say "we cant afford that". Schäuble was an exception to this rule, as his stance on greece etc gave him a significant boost to hsi popularity within germany imho. I am genuinely not sure if your comment on Schulz in the foreign office is sarcasm or not. Apologies in either case. While I consider the EU to be much more good than bad, I think Schulz often went too far with his pro-EU approach. Also I found it to be very telling that he I cant recall him talking about the EU at all when running for chancellor of germany. A fool who would think this might be related to a stronger EU automatically leading to less strong state governments. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18648 Posts
On February 08 2018 02:35 Mafe wrote: "continuing", except for a 4+ month hiatus post election, which is unheard in german history (I think). In coalition talks, you cant really impose your position on partner; the SPD was "weak" in the sense of a bad election results, but for the talks they were in a "strong" position, almost equal to the CDU in the sense that neither could get a government without the other. Giving up finances might actually be a trap, yes. Normally the minister of finance is a rather unpopular person, as it is his job to say "we cant afford that". Schäuble was an exception to this rule, as his stance on greece etc gave him a significant boost to hsi popularity within germany imho. I am genuinely not sure if your comment on Schulz in the foreign office is sarcasm or not. Apologies in either case. While I consider the EU to be much more good than bad, I think Schulz often went too far with his pro-EU approach. Also I found it to be very telling that he I cant recall him talking about the EU at all when running for chancellor of germany. A fool who would think this might be related to a stronger EU automatically leading to less strong state governments. Finances is unpopular in Germany? In Austria it is the best department one can wish for. You have all the power of the budget here. Imo this is the best deal the SPD could ever have hoped for and hope for in the next few years. Really surprised Union gave them so much, they must be really desperate. | ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
On February 08 2018 02:42 sharkie wrote: Finances is unpopular in Germany? In Austria it is the best department one can wish for. You have all the power of the budget here. Imo this is the best deal the SPD could ever have hoped for and hope for in the next few years. Really surprised Union gave them so much, they must be really desperate. I meant to say that the minister of finance tends to be an unpopular persion in the public opinion (at least that used to be my impression). Of course, you are right that it is a very powerful position nevertheless. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9302 Posts
On February 08 2018 02:35 Mafe wrote: "continuing", except for a 4+ month hiatus post election, which is unheard in german history (I think). In coalition talks, you cant really impose your position on partner; the SPD was "weak" in the sense of a bad election results, but for the talks they were in a "strong" position, almost equal to the CDU in the sense that neither could get a government without the other. Giving up finances might actually be a trap, yes. Normally the minister of finance is a rather unpopular person, as it is his job to say "we cant afford that". Schäuble was an exception to this rule, as his stance on greece etc gave him a significant boost to hsi popularity within germany imho. I am genuinely not sure if your comment on Schulz in the foreign office is sarcasm or not. Apologies in either case. While I consider the EU to be much more good than bad, I think Schulz often went too far with his pro-EU approach. Also I found it to be very telling that he I cant recall him talking about the EU at all when running for chancellor of germany. A fool who would think this might be related to a stronger EU automatically leading to less strong state governments. At first I thought CDU should offer SPD unacceptable terms to provoke them to quit the negotiations, so CDU could pretend they're the ones with open arms and it's FDP/SDP who aren't "mature" enough to compromise. Yeah, it would lead to new elections, but I'd expect the results to be better for CDU than SPD because the latter made themselves look weak by first declaring they're not going to rejoin the coaltion and changing their mind later without a convincing excuse. Their base is angry and they're not likely to win over many new supporters with their current program, why not let them continue to bleed until it will be literally impossible to form a government without CDU? I changed my mind later because I think a coalition with weak SPD is better (or at least less troublesome) than rolling the dice and forming a government with whoever would be the first to accept CDU's terms after the second elections. I'm just surprised that Merkel didn't bully Schulz harder, the man shouldn't be in a position to make strong demands now. I am genuinely not sure if your comment on Schulz in the foreign office is sarcasm or not. Thought about puting "promising" in quotations marks, but that would make it look like I want Schulz and other eurofederalists to try and fail in a spectacular fashion. I only wanted to say that following europolitics should be more fun with guys like Macron and Schulz holding important offices. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
I hope the SPD base takes this leadership down, before they can do even more harm to the party. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10900 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10900 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 08 2018 03:35 Big J wrote: Schulz must be the biggest loser I have ever seen. Comes in with a boom, loses everything and the election, says there is no common ground with the CDU and the FDP will sell out cheap, sells out cheap himself, hands over the party to the next best unpopular flip-flopper and takes the easy backseat post of foreign minister. I hope the SPD base takes this leadership down, before they can do even more harm to the party. Sometimes I almost pity social-democrats. Then I see things like this... Denmark's Social Democrats want to cap 'non-Western' asylum seekers Denmark's Social Democrats, part of the left-wing opposition and the country's largest party, on Monday proposed slashing the number of "non-Western" foreigners allowed into the EU member state. "We want to introduce a cap on the number of non-Western foreigners who can come to Denmark," Social Democrats leader Mette Frederiksen said in a 44-page document which focused in particular on asylum seekers from Africa. "We want to reform our asylum system, among other things, by setting up reception centres outside Europe, and in the future it will not be possible for refugees to obtain asylum in Denmark outside quotas set by the United Nations," she added. https://www.thelocal.dk/20180206/denmarks-social-democrats-want-to-cap-non-western-asylum-seekers ... and remember that they deserve every last bit of what is happening to them. Build the cultural hegemony of the right for years, then complain that both the right and the far-right are strong. A real passion for suicide: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVbJ4NdX4AAOcxB.jpg:large) (Average loss in points for S&D parties between 2000 and 2017.) | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On February 08 2018 04:09 Velr wrote: But its not hard to argue that someone that failed to form a goverment should step down. But as I said, there is just no one that could "coup d'etat" merkel atm. I think it's very hard to argue. Consistency is one of the biggest advantages of German politics. Kicking an accomplished politician out for some bureaucratic mess or technicality is a really bad idea and basically just artificial drama. Italy had six prime ministers since Merkel stepped into office. No thanks I don't want to move into that direction Thinking political problems vanish when you swap people (90% of the time the people are coming in are worse than the ones going out anyway) is really bad. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10900 Posts
You don't have to become italy but seriously.. What are Merkels great achievments except outlasting/tefloning everyone away? Schröder didn't get another term because he actually did something (bad). But at least he did something. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
Depoliticisation is a good thing if the alternative is Trumpism or hysteria of any other sort. I don't expect polticians to do great things, just keep the engine running from day to day. Merkel's pretty good at that That trend of demanding politicians or politics to solve all of society's ills is kind of scaring me tbh. People need to take control of their own lives, that's not Merkel's job. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10900 Posts
Politicians need to have and sell ideas to improve a country. Keeping the status quo alive (and letting the SPD doing the actual reforms - hartz4) will lead to an unpleasent future. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 08 2018 04:42 Nyxisto wrote: Germany is in a pretty good position, especially economically. Who says that politicians need to do great things? Their job is to create an environment in which other institutions can work well together. Doing something bad just so that you have done something is a terrible attitude to have. Depoliticisation is a good thing if the alternative is Trumpism or hysteria of any other sort. I don't expect polticians to do great things, just keep the engine running from day to day. Merkel's pretty good at that With this line your party will end up with single digit scores. People don't vote for so-called "left" parties to repeatedly get centrist managers who think "not having the far-right in power" and having 0.5% of deficit is the optimum of politics. That trend of demanding politicians or politics to solve all of society's ills is kind of scaring me tbh. People need to take control of their own lives, that's not Merkel's job. LOL, nice right-wing coming out. "To hell with collective action to solve social problems, empower yourself and long live individualism! From Hartz IV to billionaire with some effort!" | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On February 08 2018 04:42 Nyxisto wrote: Germany is in a pretty good position, especially economically. Who says that politicians need to do great things? Their job is to create an environment in which other institutions can work well together. Doing something bad just so that you have done something is a terrible attitude to have. Depoliticisation is a good thing if the alternative is Trumpism or hysteria of any other sort. I don't expect polticians to do great things, just keep the engine running from day to day. Merkel's pretty good at that That trend of demanding politicians or politics to solve all of society's ills is kind of scaring me tbh. People need to take control of their own lives, that's not Merkel's job. The politicians are making the laws. If they make laws that is splitting every resource in the country to someone and I enter that world after the cake has been split then what you are saying "taking control of my own life" comes down to killing everyone that stands between me and my needs. The job of politicians is to create systems in which you can have equal chances so that you can take matters in your own hand. I wasn't born in 1945 when prices for resources were cheap. I wasn't around when the big government states sold out. I am around now and now I am being told "believe that things just come to you while we guarantee all the resources around to other people". Well, all the statistics tell us that those who hold these property guarantees, regardless of reason how they acquired them (spoiler: it's mostly inheritance, or building on inheritance), get more of the cake. So I can never have equal chances. So politicians fucked up and they have to fix the rules that prevent me from interacting fairly. | ||
| ||
