|
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. |
agree. It's clear as day that Trump just doesn't see us as allies. Take the "I'll do what I can to make sure there's no Mercedes driving around 5th avenue anymore" [not a literal quote but that's the gist of it] or whatever it was.
That's not someone who has the best for his own country in mind. He straight up wants to crush the EU imo. And as I've said before, it's not like this is the first time he's acting like that towards us. He's nicer towards China and Russia for crying out loud. Arguably because they don't give a fuck about corruption and use personal favors to get their way, which probably isn't something the EU is willing to do. Although it would probably be the best way for the EU to get what they want.
It's time for politicians to come to their senses and realize that Trump isn't just trying to "make America great" by getting better deals or whatever. He's cheering on the UK in Brexit matters because he knows that he can bend them over even harder once they're by themselves, hence trying to hurt the EU in hopes that more of that happens would be my guess.
Personally I think it's a shame that the EU kept neutral in the US-China discussions on trade. I get that you don't want to poke him even more which would only make thigns worse but I do think we need to stand up to this guy and having some allies for that on our side would be nice.
What a world it has become. Here I am writing about getting China and Rusia to be our allies against the US.
|
Well, I don't think it's difficult to see why he wants the EU to be weaker. It's said to be the biggest free trade union, isn't it? That's competition. China is a single country, and so is Russia. Less competition. But yes, people like Macron need to stop praising Trump and start retaliating.
If it's going to be a trade war, let's have it. Is it damaging? Sure, but we shouldn't bow to Trump.
|
On June 01 2018 01:54 sc-darkness wrote:
Well, I don't think it's difficult to see why he wants the EU to be weaker. It's said to be the biggest free trade union, isn't it? That's competition. China is a single country, and so is Russia. Less competition. But yes, people like Macron need to stop praising Trump and start retaliating.
If it's going to be a trade war, let's have it. Is it damaging? Sure, but we shouldn't bow to Trump.
Where do you get the idea the EU isn't standing up for itself?
I again point you to the last time Trump toyed with the idea of tariffs on EU goods and the EU's response of counter tariffs.
|
Yes, I'm aware the EU has some ideas about tariffs now, but the EU is also careful because the US is an ally. There's always this risk of being too soft. Striking a balance is difficult.
|
On June 01 2018 02:01 sc-darkness wrote:
Yes, I'm aware the EU has some ideas about tariffs now, but the EU is also careful because the US is an ally. There's always this risk of being too soft. Striking a balance is difficult. And yet that is not what your saying.
|
No, I think you don't get what I mean. I understand how the EU is going to retaliate, I just don't know if it's too soft or just right. We don't have the full picture; worth of US sanctions vs worth of potential EU sanctions.
|
On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:On May 31 2018 18:34 TheDwf wrote:
Verhofstadt trying his hardest to boost the Italian far-right In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be.
People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade.
Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money"
This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations?
|
On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? Its a lot easier to fuck up a country then it is to fix it. And places like Italy (and Greece) have spend a lot of time fucking up their country.
No its not fair that the young generations are left with the pieces. Guess what, life isn't fair.
Keeping on as if nothing is happening and fucking it up even more for your children, now there's a plan.
And for the record no, I don't like the banks either. I wouldn't shed a tear if some of em end up hanging from lampposts but that doesn't mean voting for a populist who promises the world, fails to deliver on any of it while fucking shit up some more and won't touch the banks either is an acceptable solution.
|
On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations?
I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid.
Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do.
|
On June 01 2018 00:50 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 00:38 RvB wrote:
Does that mean new elections? Ciudadanos is polling high right? No. Pedro Sanchez will be the president if it goes through. I think there is another card the goverment can use, the question of confidence, but i am not sure if that could work.
Initially, yes, but Podemos or PdeCat is gonna dump him first chance they get. They're just waiting for an opportune moment.
|
On June 01 2018 02:30 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid. Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do.
In that case I'd like to see the people who argue for austerity because of its necessity also be in favor of tax increases, especially the progressive kind that will impact the rich more. Typically in the political sphere they will argue at the same time for spending cuts and tax cuts; that tells a different picture from the one you're offering.
In your analogy, the guy is cutting his food because he's overweight, so he eats less, but at the same time he's also like "You know, I'm probably doing too much sports. I'm going to do less sports instead."
|
On June 01 2018 03:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 02:30 sc-darkness wrote:On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid. Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do. In that case I'd like to see the people who argue for austerity because of its necessity also be in favor of tax increases, especially the progressive kind that will impact the rich more. Typically in the political sphere they will argue at the same time for spending cuts and tax cuts; that tells a different picture from the one you're offering. In your analogy, the guy is cutting his food because he's overweight, so he eats less, but at the same time he's also like "You know, I'm probably doing too much sports. I'm going to do less sports instead."
I am! I hate the recent round of tax cuts in the Netherlands. And Spain is a complete mess, but has multiple political crises all happening at once, so let's not discuss that. Just because I'm not in arms every time Macron farts doesn't mean I don't support a fairer distribution of wealth than our current crop of politicians want.
|
On June 01 2018 02:57 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 00:50 Godwrath wrote:On June 01 2018 00:38 RvB wrote:
Does that mean new elections? Ciudadanos is polling high right? No. Pedro Sanchez will be the president if it goes through. I think there is another card the goverment can use, the question of confidence, but i am not sure if that could work. Initially, yes, but Podemos or PdeCat is gonna dump him first chance they get. They're just waiting for an opportune moment.
What could trigger elections? Sanchez could get overthrown afterwards, no?
|
On June 01 2018 03:30 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 03:01 Nebuchad wrote:On June 01 2018 02:30 sc-darkness wrote:On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid. Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do. In that case I'd like to see the people who argue for austerity because of its necessity also be in favor of tax increases, especially the progressive kind that will impact the rich more. Typically in the political sphere they will argue at the same time for spending cuts and tax cuts; that tells a different picture from the one you're offering. In your analogy, the guy is cutting his food because he's overweight, so he eats less, but at the same time he's also like "You know, I'm probably doing too much sports. I'm going to do less sports instead." I am! I hate the recent round of tax cuts in the Netherlands. And Spain is a complete mess, but has multiple political crises all happening at once, so let's not discuss that. Just because I'm not in arms every time Macron farts doesn't mean I don't support a fairer distribution of wealth than our current crop of politicians want.
Then you have a coherent position on this, which is neat. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single party who is in favor of spending cuts and tax increases at the same time. In every situation where that isn't the case, I think we can safely assume that the spending cuts are ideological rather than necessary.
|
@Nyxisto: I read that Wagenknecht plans to launch some movement? Do you have details?
|
On June 01 2018 03:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 02:30 sc-darkness wrote:On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid. Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do. In that case I'd like to see the people who argue for austerity because of its necessity also be in favor of tax increases, especially the progressive kind that will impact the rich more. Typically in the political sphere they will argue at the same time for spending cuts and tax cuts; that tells a different picture from the one you're offering. In your analogy, the guy is cutting his food because he's overweight, so he eats less, but at the same time he's also like "You know, I'm probably doing too much sports. I'm going to do less sports instead."
some of us do argue for the tax increases and austerity.
but you can't expect politicians to kill their careers for sound policy; when ti's ultimately up to the voters. Voters choose bad fiscal policy, so that's what we get. politicians present the arguments that people want to hear to justify their own wants. if you want people who's job is to come up with sensible, rigorous policy then you'll need something other than democracy that's not yet been developed.
|
On June 01 2018 03:40 TheDwf wrote:
@Nyxisto: I read that Wagenknecht plans to launch some movement? Do you have details?
Yeah this has been talked about for a few months. Wagenknecht and her husband (who was an ex SPD member two decades ago) have been talking about a new left-wing movement as an alternative to the existing parties that's supposed to be open to all sorts of people on the left.
Motivation for this isn't entirely clear, people who don't like it (also some within Die Linke) suggest that Wagenknecht is starting some sort of solo campaign because she's become alienated within the party (she's been vocal about criticising Merkel's refugee politics and has been talking about immigrants threatening German jobs etc..), some SPD old-timers voiced support given how weak the party is, Juso leader Kevin Kühnert who campaigned against the Groko said that he doesn't support it, which suprised me a little.
So I guess we'll see what comes out of it. I don't think it's supposed to replace any of the parties but to be something like Diem25.
|
On June 01 2018 03:54 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 03:01 Nebuchad wrote:On June 01 2018 02:30 sc-darkness wrote:On June 01 2018 02:14 TheDwf wrote:On June 01 2018 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On June 01 2018 01:10 RvB wrote:In this case Verhofstadt is almost certainly right. Long term economic growth and income is driven by productivity growth and Italy's has been dismal for more than 2 decades. Since the adoption of the euro Italy has lagged behind its peers in economic growth Italy's growth rate has been trending downwards way before the adoption of the euro and it's unenplyment rate has been trending upwards since way before it as well. Where it largely differs from the other countries is its productivity growth: Within this global trend, Italy stands out: productivity has been the main determinant of the
dismal GDP growth recorded in the last 20 years (Giordano et al., 2017). Italy’s negative productivity growth gap characterized both the pre-crisis (1995-2007) and the
crisis periods (2007-13). In the latter, the collapse of TFP growth in Italy (-0.9 per cent per year on
average) contrasts with the experience of the other European economies that managed to maintain a
constant level of TFP (Germany and Spain) or limit its decline (France) during the crisis. There are a large amount of reasons why Italy's productivity lags behind its peers (and many papers on it too of which I linked 1). I'm not going to delve too much into it but it's clear that Italy has a much larger problem than the euro. bruegel.orgwww.bancaditalia.it Populists dont get votes because they are correct, they are getting it because people want to believe the fairy-tale that the situation can be turned around in 1-2 years by simply doing X. They don't want to be told they have to make sacrifices to fix the mistakes of the past, no matter how true it might be. People who live in fairy tales are those who think that endless austerity and "structural adjustement" can be the only political horizon for another decade. Neoliberal populists like Macron just lie as much when they state that their holy combo of "lifting market rigidities" and "reducing public spending" + Show Spoiler +only for social spending of course; when it comes to military spending or tax cuts/exemptions for m/billionaires and multinationals, oddly enough there is always "magic money" will fix the situation, except they're not seen as such (demagogues) since they're ideologically, economically and politically the dominant power. This "we have to make sacrifices" rhetoric... Why should we pay for the banksters? (~30% of the French public debt is directly linked to the 2008 crisis.) Why should we pay for idiots who deregulated financial markets because the optimal allocation of capital + self-regulating markets blablabla? Why should we pay because billionaires looted us by hiding their money in fiscal heavens? Why should we pay to subsidize companies' profits, isn't the Holy Market supposed to be taking care of that? My generation was barely born when Maastricht was voted, why should we "make sacrifices" for the next X decades to honor a failed contract ("the eurozone will bring prosperity and growth") made by previous generations? I doubt a left wing person would understand, but austerity is a necessary evil when economy is messed up. It's very similar to being overweight and trying to lose weight. You have to cut your food (money) to reach your goal. It's difficult but there's no magical solution. The question is if cuts should be a lot at once or gradual over a long time. Not if there should be any. Behave like a responsible adult not like a spoiled kid. Of course, your better option is to vote for the better candidate who will bring better economy but sometimes people are too dumb and there's nothing you can do. In that case I'd like to see the people who argue for austerity because of its necessity also be in favor of tax increases, especially the progressive kind that will impact the rich more. Typically in the political sphere they will argue at the same time for spending cuts and tax cuts; that tells a different picture from the one you're offering. In your analogy, the guy is cutting his food because he's overweight, so he eats less, but at the same time he's also like "You know, I'm probably doing too much sports. I'm going to do less sports instead." some of us do argue for the tax increases and austerity. but you can't expect politicians to kill their careers for sound policy; when ti's ultimately up to the voters. Voters choose bad fiscal policy, so that's what we get. politicians present the arguments that people want to hear to justify their own wants. if you want people who's job is to come up with sensible, rigorous policy then you'll need something other than democracy that's not yet been developed.
Are you saying that they're in favor of doing it, but can't because the plebs is too dumb to see the logic in that and would vote them out of office? I find that to be extremely convenient: all of those things that could impact the rich, we can't do them; the things that impact the poor, we can do them no problem...?
That's far from the simplest explanation for this result: maybe they're just working for some rich people who want to pay less taxes and aren't really impacted when there are spending cuts thanks to their wealth, so they logically ask for the latter to obtain the former, under the guise of it being a necessity because there's a crisis.
I do appreciate how far we've gotten when compared with darkness' original assertions though, that is something.
|
On May 28 2018 06:34 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2018 06:28 VHbb wrote:
fuck
what is happening in Italy is disgusting
one would hope that most of the people would realize that voting for the 2 parties currently trying to form a (ridiculous attempt of) government was one of the biggest mistake, but the truth is that is we went to vote again now, the extreme right would get even more vote.. I don't approve the political line of the would-be M5S-Lega government, but blocking it the way the Italian president did will only make things worse. In case of new reelections, they will simply campaign on "democracy is conditional to the results that the establishment wants" and win even harder.
This was my first reaction, but has anything changed since that makes this not lead to a greater anti-establishment/anti-EU victory later?
|
On June 01 2018 04:08 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2018 03:40 TheDwf wrote:
@Nyxisto: I read that Wagenknecht plans to launch some movement? Do you have details? Yeah this has been talked about for a few months. Wagenknecht and her husband (who was an ex SPD member two decades ago) have been talking about a new left-wing movement as an alternative to the existing parties that's supposed to be open to all sorts of people on the left. Motivation for this isn't entirely clear, people who don't like it (also some within Die Linke) suggest that Wagenknecht is starting some sort of solo campaign because she's become alienated within the party (she's been vocal about criticising Merkel's refugee politics and has been talking about immigrants threatening German jobs etc..), some SPD old-timers voiced support given how weak the party is, Juso leader Kevin Kühnert who campaigned against the Groko said that he doesn't support it, which suprised me a little. So I guess we'll see what comes out of it. I don't think it's supposed to replace any of the parties but to be something like Diem25.
Thanks man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
