European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1155

On July 08 2018 04:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You don't really learn do you? Again, how much personal power are you assuming here. Theresa May is the PM of UK, but her power is such that she can't organise a piss-up at a brewery. How much power does he have in the national party? A more definite question would be what his political views are, and what he wishes politicians in power would acheive, which is a far simpler and more reality adhering question if you are genuinely interested in his poltical views.

On July 08 2018 04:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You don't really learn do you? Again, how much personal power are you assuming here. Theresa May is the PM of UK, but her power is such that she can't organise a piss-up at a brewery. How much power does he have in the national party? A more definite question would be what his political views are, and what he wishes politicians in power would acheive, which is a far simpler and more reality adhering question if you are genuinely interested in his poltical views.

On July 08 2018 00:40 SoSexy wrote:
I'll rephrase, since you like to play: Big J, if tomorrow you were the Chancellor of Austria, within the current system, with a large majority that would allow you to pass any law, what would your first actions be? Genuinly curious.

On July 08 2018 20:56 Big J wrote:
I would give the national statistics institute the order to create a map of Austrian land-value. Based on that map I would fade in land-value taxes and start to decrease income taxes. Additionally I completely fade out VAT and fade in a VAT-like CO2-tax on goods and services.

The Americans were blunt: If Ecuador refused to drop the resolution, Washington would unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid. The Ecuadorean government quickly acquiesced.

In the end, the Americans’ efforts were mostly unsuccessful. It was the Russians who ultimately stepped in to introduce the measure — and the Americans did not threaten them.

KATHY KELLY: Well, one person from the Wardak province, when I was last in Afghanistan, said—when I asked, “Well, how is your family? This is an area where the strikes are so heavy”. He said, “We can’t find space to bury the dead. There have been so many bombings.”

On July 09 2018 05:54 a_flayer wrote:
We should get Germany to use its surpluses to essentially fund a military build-up made up from people in Eastern European countries. We can use that military strength to give Ecuador options when the United States pulls shit like this:

I think there's probably plenty of Eastern Europeans who feel threatened by Russia and would gladly take a job in the military if it meant a proper income for their families in an increasingly unequal economy. Western Europe should fund them and replace all American troops and equipment to build an effective unified military force. Its long overdue that the American military departed from Europe.

Maybe we can get the US/NATO to stop this too:

On July 09 2018 05:29 Nyxisto wrote:


Given all the complaints about neoliberalism that's a very neoliberal tax plan

On July 09 2018 07:40 Big J wrote:


No, a neoliberal plan on housing prices would sound like this:
I would privatize the national statistics institute and then pay double the amount on the free market to a provider with no experience and quality assurance on such a job to get a map of Austrian land-value*. That map must be withheld from the public, because ordinary people are bad and envious and can't deal with information.
Based on that map I would then use some nationalist speech that "our country" is "way behind" in land-value and that leftist regulation politics have stifled growth of land-value and now future generations have to suffer**. To catch up I will make it easier for landlords to get rid of tenants and create a national trust that funds real estate projects.
Climate change is also a huge issue that I will tackle in the near future.



*land-value in this scenario is not based on the actual prices the buyers in a region are paying currently, but instead on some rating mechanism of private real estate traders. Credits can obviously be discounted from the value, because it makes total sense that the value of a thing differs if the money was acquired through a private market transaction with a bank or private market transactions without a bank like work.
** It goes without saying that more value is good for everyone! Why else would it say "more"? A rising tide lifts all boats!

On July 09 2018 07:19 a_flayer wrote:
I already said why Eastern Europe. You've got plenty of rough-edged nationalistic young people who would sign up for a chance to fight Russia, especially if they're being paid well to be prepared. Hopefully they will never have to, but you'd be hard-pressed to find those kinda people amongst us meek pansexual Westerners. They're certainly there, but far fewer.

Germany/Western Europe will be motivated from a desire to keep the EU together --- it's not just that, but also simply the fact they contribute the most financial thingiemagicks to the EU so anything that the European Union democratically decides to do will effectively be funded by the Germans/Western Europe.

I feel like I shouldn't have to explain this because it is so obvious considering the reality of the political systems we find ourselves in. So many words. We don't always have to put our fine-tuned sonic breathing on manual, do we?

My opinions on why we should ask them to leave vary from "because their young people are needed to build up their own nation" to an epic string of curse words and profanity.

SEOUL, South Korea—A top adviser to South Korea’s president says he would eventually like to see the U.S.–South Korea alliance end. In language that sounded almost Trump-like, Chung In Moon, a special adviser to President Moon Jae In for foreign affairs and national security, said in an interview that alliances in general are a “very unnatural state of international relations” and said that, “for me, the best thing is to really get rid of alliance.” In the meantime, he says, he “strongly” supports “the continued presence of American forces” in Korea, despite hoping for an arrangement that he thinks would better serve his nation’s interests.

On July 09 2018 07:40 Big J wrote:


No, a neoliberal plan on housing prices would sound like this:
I would privatize the national statistics institute and then pay double the amount on the free market to a provider with no experience and quality assurance on such a job to get a map of Austrian land-value*. That map must be withheld from the public, because ordinary people are bad and envious and can't deal with information.
Based on that map I would then use some nationalist speech that "our country" is "way behind" in land-value and that leftist regulation politics have stifled growth of land-value and now future generations have to suffer**. To catch up I will make it easier for landlords to get rid of tenants and create a national trust that funds real estate projects.
Climate change is also a huge issue that I will tackle in the near future.

On July 09 2018 09:36 Nyxisto wrote:



You should probably try to get into the habit of steelmanning rather than strawmanning an opposing position because this is a description in such bad faith that it isn't just not representative of liberal intellectuals or advocates but it doesn't even do liberal politicians in the actual world justice. Nobody is actually trying to privatize a statistics bureau randomly or preventing citizens from obtaining information.

On July 08 2018 04:12 sc-darkness wrote:


Yet, the president of the US can do so much more. I can see your point, but each country is sovereign, so examples don't help.

On July 08 2018 08:51 SoSexy wrote:


Maybe you need to learn...to read my post, because it is worded very clearly. In fact I didn't even mention the word 'power' in my post. Also, I don't think you can decide for me which are the best questions if I'm interested in his political view. But thanks for the attempt.

The United States is spending far more on NATO than any other Country. This is not fair, nor is it acceptable. While these countries have been increasing their contributions since I took office, they must do much more. Germany is at 1%, the U.S. is at 4%, and NATO benefits Europe far more than it does the U.S. By some accounts, the U.S. is paying for 90% of NATO, with many countries nowhere close to their 2% commitment. On top of this the European Union has a Trade Surplus of $151 Million with the U.S., with big Trade Barriers on U.S. goods. NO!