|
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. |
On October 29 2018 21:56 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2018 21:21 TheDwf wrote:
Extremes are getting closer: both Macron and Le Pen congratulated the fascist Bolsanoro for his victory. Isn't that just normal politics though? Or is there something different with Bolsanoro? I'm not familiar with the name.
Yes, I was making fun of the horrible horseshoe theory of medias which often draw false equivalences between the socialist left and the far-right by labeling them as "populist," or arbitrarily selecting two similarities and concluding "look, they're the same"
But on a more serious note, given Bolsanoro's profile Macron's message was really weak and bland
|
fairly surprised to see Merkel announce she's not going to run again and saying that she's giving up on the party leadership position. Or at least if the rumors are true. I don't think we have an official statement as of right now? But I do think it's going to turn out correct.
Merkel is, imo, not the reason the CDU is failing and people still like her to some degree:
(political opinion/ranking from +5 to -5, +5 being amazing, -5 being horrible)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/20aYVzQ.png)
source: de.statista.com
so I don't think this is going to help at all, much like all the SPD switching didn't help a bit either. But I find it a bit hilarious that she's going before Seehofer is. If that guy ends up seeing that as his victory, because for him it clearly was Merkel vs him, and as a result sticks around because Merkel already quit it's going to be a disaster for the CDU/CSU.
I still think that people don't even dislike her stance, or her parties stance on most things, it's just the neverending story of the GroKo that hurts both SPD and CDU immensely. It just sounds bad from the outside no matter what it is they're doing. They could be handing out presents on Christmas and would find a way to make it sound like everyone involved felt miserable.
So I don't think people necessarily disagree with where things are going aside from that. Take a look at who's the most popular up in that image above: Wolfgang Schäuble. Yes he's not a minister anymore but I don't think it's reasonable to strip him from his previous position of finance minister in our heads already.
Just you know... stop it with that miserable GroKo, still effectively do the exact same thing by putting the SPD into opposition and go for CDU+Greens/ CDU+Greens+FDP to get a change of scenery would have been my advice... for last election to not get into this mess.
That being said, it is very well possible that Merkel just doesn't realize that the GroKo itself is the issue and as a result a new party leader might change that due to the very fact that it's a different person. Not that GroKo would be viable next election anyways. Worst case scenario they're not going to change anything, get new partyleadership and that ends up being someone much less liked in Germany which will only make things worse.
|
She said that after finishing her duty as chancellor in 2021 she'll retire from politics.
German source
|
Honestly it was pretty much expected given her increasing difficulties, no?
|
a bit of a random input on that whole thing from a couple days ago on how people never voted on anything like more EU integration etc, from my ballot yesterday:
I can't find the letter anymore so I'll go with a wikipedia-quote, german:
Bekenntnis zur Europäischen Integration
Der Art. 64 HV, der bisher „Hessen ist ein Glied der deutschen Republik“ lautete, soll ersetzt werden durch: „Hessen ist ein Gliedstaat der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und als solcher Teil der Europäischen Union. Hessen bekennt sich zu einem geeinten Europa, das demokratischen, rechtsstaatlichen, sozialen und föderativen Grundsätzen sowie dem Grundsatz der Subsidiarität verpflichtet ist, die Eigenständigkeit der Regionen wahrt und deren Mitwirkung an europäischen Entscheidungen sichert.“
idk how much that actually matters since we also voted on getting rid of the death penalty, which noone even knew we still had in our constitution ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
Even before the last election it was clear, that this was Merkels last turn.
Imho the only real news here is, that she is stepping down from party leadership before her turn as chancellor ends. The rest is just a nice "okay, we are changing things as a reaction, even though that change was just happening anyway" move.
Also I don't agree with her not being the problem. This doesn't necessarily mean that I consider what she did as wrong. In fact I think she was a great chancellor all those years. But there is simply this cycle where different types of leaders are desired periodically.
Kinda like Schröder being the anti type to Merkel. Having 50 years of Merkel types in a row would not really do the country any well. Then again, the Schröder roller coaster might be a necessary intermission, but you certainly would not want this for 20 years straight.
|
On October 29 2018 23:15 Toadesstern wrote:
idk how much that actually matters since we also voted on getting rid of the death penalty, which noone even knew we still had in our constitution ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Uh? Not known?
We even had this in school (and not in Hessen...) and it is a really often told fun story.
At this point I'm kinda amused that they are changing the constitution for this after they were the target of jokes for 60 years and never cared.
|
I did not know that until it come up for election. Also did not know we're the butt of a joke like that 
|
Party spending for the last Austrian election has been published. 7 million euro is the maximum allowed.
Conservatives: 13 millions
Far-right: 10.7 millions
Socialdemocrats: 7.3 millions
(All other parties stayed far below)
Seems like 90% of our parliament should rot in a gas chamber for treason against democracy.
User was warned for this post
|
On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France.
You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big.
|
On October 30 2018 18:39 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France. You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big.
It's +0.5%, not +0.5 point (as in, from 9.5 to 10), so it's not really big. I have sources but it's in French, you still want them?
|
On October 30 2018 18:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 18:39 RvB wrote:On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France. You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big. It's +0.5%, not +0.5 point (as in, from 9.5 to 10), so it's not really big. I have sources but it's in French, you still want them?
+0.5%, as in from 9.5 to 9.5475? That seems more like it stayed the same, as that seems well within the statistical bounds for "well, they're the same". To show that, you'd need the daily/weekly data that the quarterly average is compiled from so you can do a t-test, but still, I'm quite confident in saying that the worst you can statistically say about that, is that unemployment didn't drop despite GDP growth. Which isn't too bad.
|
On October 30 2018 19:17 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 18:59 TheDwf wrote:On October 30 2018 18:39 RvB wrote:On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France. You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big. It's +0.5%, not +0.5 point (as in, from 9.5 to 10), so it's not really big. I have sources but it's in French, you still want them? +0.5%, as in from 9.5 to 9.5475? That seems more like it stayed the same, as that seems well within the statistical bounds for "well, they're the same". To show that, you'd need the daily/weekly data that the quarterly average is compiled from so you can do a t-test, but still, I'm quite confident in saying that the worst you can statistically say about that, is that unemployment didn't drop despite GDP growth. Which isn't too bad.
+0.5%, as in from 3 440 500 to 3 456 800 unemployed people
Sorry for the confusion but it's always presented like that by the institution itself and the press, not my fault!
|
On October 30 2018 19:22 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 19:17 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2018 18:59 TheDwf wrote:On October 30 2018 18:39 RvB wrote:On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France. You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big. It's +0.5%, not +0.5 point (as in, from 9.5 to 10), so it's not really big. I have sources but it's in French, you still want them? +0.5%, as in from 9.5 to 9.5475? That seems more like it stayed the same, as that seems well within the statistical bounds for "well, they're the same". To show that, you'd need the daily/weekly data that the quarterly average is compiled from so you can do a t-test, but still, I'm quite confident in saying that the worst you can statistically say about that, is that unemployment didn't drop despite GDP growth. Which isn't too bad. +0.5%, as in from 3 440 500 to 3 456 800 unemployed people Sorry for the confusion but it's always presented like that by the institution itself and the press, not my fault!
Of course, journalists are generally quite well known for (1) not understanding statistics and (2) trumping up stories. I don't really blame you for taking it up as a point against Macron, but it's worth correcting the record.
With a working age population of 40,942,100, that means unemployment in both quarters was: 8.40% and 8.44%, so a 0.04% increase 
And depending on the underlying data, you probably can't state with any confidence that that is an increase at all.
|
On October 30 2018 19:50 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2018 19:22 TheDwf wrote:On October 30 2018 19:17 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2018 18:59 TheDwf wrote:On October 30 2018 18:39 RvB wrote:On October 26 2018 03:03 TheDwf wrote:
Macronomics still failing: according to the Minister of Labour, unemployment rose by 0.5% in the third trimester in France. You have a source for this? All I see is GDP growth of 0.4% this quarter and a rise in unemployment of 0.5% in a quarter is rather big. It's +0.5%, not +0.5 point (as in, from 9.5 to 10), so it's not really big. I have sources but it's in French, you still want them? +0.5%, as in from 9.5 to 9.5475? That seems more like it stayed the same, as that seems well within the statistical bounds for "well, they're the same". To show that, you'd need the daily/weekly data that the quarterly average is compiled from so you can do a t-test, but still, I'm quite confident in saying that the worst you can statistically say about that, is that unemployment didn't drop despite GDP growth. Which isn't too bad. +0.5%, as in from 3 440 500 to 3 456 800 unemployed people Sorry for the confusion but it's always presented like that by the institution itself and the press, not my fault! Of course, journalists are generally quite well known for (1) not understanding statistics and (2) trumping up stories. I don't really blame you for taking it up as a point against Macron, but it's worth correcting the record. With a working age population of 40,942,100, that means unemployment in both quarters was: 8.40% and 8.44%, so a 0.04% increase And depending on the underlying data, you probably can't state with any confidence that that is an increase at all.
I don't think journalists are to be blamed for this, the institution itself uses the brute numbers, and not the unemployement rate that you calculated (which indeed is quasi-stagnant with +16 300 for a labour force of ~30 millions)
By the way the source is here (in French): https://dares.travail-emploi.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/di-t3-2018_w10cpp.pdf
From the curves on the first page, one can see that not much happened since Macron was elected (remember he's aiming at 7% unemployment rate!)
|
Nah, the problem is that a lot of people are bad at maths, and there is an ambiguity in the language between percent and percent points. Which a lot of people don't think about or don't really understand. Especially when talking about percentages of percentages, this becomes really confusing. (Like, the unemployment rate has increased by 5%, which can mean either from 8% unemployment rate to 13% (an increase of 5 percent points), or from 8% to 8.4% (an increase of 5%))
|
On October 30 2018 20:35 Simberto wrote:
Nah, the problem is that a lot of people are bad at maths, and there is an ambiguity in the language between percent and percent points. Which a lot of people don't think about or don't really understand. Especially when talking about percentages of percentages, this becomes really confusing. (Like, the unemployment rate has increased by 5%, which can mean either from 8% unemployment rate to 13% (an increase of 5 percent points), or from 8% to 8.4% (an increase of 5%))
Yes. But I should have clarified, most people are not French, so they don't know how our statistics work. There are two kind of figures:
(1) From the Labour minister, monthly and per trimester, based on the brute numbers of jobless people registered at Pôle emploi (our national agency for people seeking jobs). In that case +X% means +X% compared with the previous number of Y millions of jobless people.
(2) From the INSEE, per trimester, based on the unemployment rate (from memory, it should be the same method as the ILO). In that case +X% actually means +X point compared with the previous unemployment rate of Z% (following the ambiguity/mistake that you point out).
Generally the numbers used in the French political debate are from (1) since they're more detailed, with different categories of jobless people, part-timers, etc.
|
Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense to me now. Disappointing numbers either way for France.
|
Funny poll about where the power lies in France (source):
Who holds the power in France? [two answer possibles]
Financial markets: 54%
The president and the government: 49%
Big multinational companies: 49%
The European Commission: 28%
Medias: 13%
Citizens, voters: 8%
Who has too much power:
Financial markets: 78%
Big multinational companies: 74%
Medias: 52%
The European Commission: 50%
Who lacks power:
Citizens, voters: 85%
Who said that people are lacking lucidity? Our voting methods must suck given that those views are never translated into actual policies...
|
That also says that 60% of French citizens would prefer a more technocratic unelected government, and that 40% would support authoritarian governance. That's somewhat surprising
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
