|
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. |
Northern Ireland26036 Posts
On February 08 2020 18:11 Artisreal wrote:
That's simply to say we still have the last witnesses and even before everyone who lived to see it is dead we're already well on the way to marginalising it
I think in many ways it’s marginalised by how it’s framed as such a singular event, rather than something that happens periodically in various forms all throughout history.
We’re also a bit complacent generally because most tend to internally frame history as one where we’re constantly progressing to better ourselves and society and the gains we make are permanent.
The Nazis are almost so cartoonishly evil that people just can’t envisage something like that coming back.
|
|
|
It appears a fresh wave of a million + refugees could be about to hit Europe.Maybe time for an adult discussion on border control and how the EU has completely failed yet again.Lets just hope coronavirus has not spread to these camps by the time this potentially happens.
Https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-51707958?espv=1
The Turkish president has warned that "millions" of migrants and refugees will soon head towards Europe.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan was speaking after announcing Turkey could no longer enforce a 2016 deal with the EU to prevent migrants entering Europe.
Mr Erdogan said Turkey could not cope with a new wave of refugees after an escalation of the Syrian conflict.
|
On March 03 2020 21:29 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:It appears a fresh wave of a million + refugees could be about to hit Europe.Maybe time for an adult discussion on border control and how the EU has completely failed yet again.Lets just hope coronavirus has not spread to these camps by the time this potentially happens. Https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-51707958?espv=1The Turkish president has warned that "millions" of migrants and refugees will soon head towards Europe. Recep Tayyip Erdogan was speaking after announcing Turkey could no longer enforce a 2016 deal with the EU to prevent migrants entering Europe. Mr Erdogan said Turkey could not cope with a new wave of refugees after an escalation of the Syrian conflict.
Which part of the current border control measures are not to your liking?
|
On March 03 2020 22:16 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 21:29 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:It appears a fresh wave of a million + refugees could be about to hit Europe.Maybe time for an adult discussion on border control and how the EU has completely failed yet again.Lets just hope coronavirus has not spread to these camps by the time this potentially happens. Https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-51707958?espv=1The Turkish president has warned that "millions" of migrants and refugees will soon head towards Europe. Recep Tayyip Erdogan was speaking after announcing Turkey could no longer enforce a 2016 deal with the EU to prevent migrants entering Europe. Mr Erdogan said Turkey could not cope with a new wave of refugees after an escalation of the Syrian conflict. Which part of the current border control measures are not to your liking?
Apparently you're pretty fine with it.
|
Northern Ireland26036 Posts
On March 03 2020 22:16 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 21:29 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:It appears a fresh wave of a million + refugees could be about to hit Europe.Maybe time for an adult discussion on border control and how the EU has completely failed yet again.Lets just hope coronavirus has not spread to these camps by the time this potentially happens. Https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-51707958?espv=1The Turkish president has warned that "millions" of migrants and refugees will soon head towards Europe. Recep Tayyip Erdogan was speaking after announcing Turkey could no longer enforce a 2016 deal with the EU to prevent migrants entering Europe. Mr Erdogan said Turkey could not cope with a new wave of refugees after an escalation of the Syrian conflict. Which part of the current border control measures are not to your liking?
I’m not sure Nettles actually answers queries these days, pure pot stirring it is
|
He only gets paid for the shit stirring, answering quesitons is not part of the gig.
|
I find it funny because the EU's reaction is really harsh, something he'd appreciated as closing borders.
But that was a click too many, a thought too much. Sad.
|
On March 04 2020 23:53 Artisreal wrote:
I find it funny because the EU's reaction is really harsh, something he'd appreciated as closing borders.
But that was a click too many, a thought too much. Sad. Its the only real answer the EU has. Turkey has been threatening to swamp the EU in refugees for a while and their now turning it into action. The only answer is to close the border or let Turkey bully the EU around.
What I hope the EU does is actually take active measures against this bullying. Sanctions, limiting tourism, that sort of thing. A dictatorship on our border is trying to threaten us. The EU needs to be less afraid to bite back a bit.
|
Northern Ireland26036 Posts
On March 05 2020 00:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2020 23:53 Artisreal wrote:
I find it funny because the EU's reaction is really harsh, something he'd appreciated as closing borders.
But that was a click too many, a thought too much. Sad. Its the only real answer the EU has. Turkey has been threatening to swamp the EU in refugees for a while and their now turning it into action. The only answer is to close the border or let Turkey bully the EU around. What I hope the EU does is actually take active measures against this bullying. Sanctions, limiting tourism, that sort of thing. A dictatorship on our border is trying to threaten us. The EU needs to be less afraid to bite back a bit.
Erdogan definitely could do with being slapped about a bit for sure.
Hopefully the refugees aren’t the ones to suffer with all of this though.
|
|
|
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution.
|
Wow, In the case of Mayotte the low GDP per capita is mainly explained by demographic factors, since 42% of the population is less than 15 years old. Thought we had mostly gotten past that stage globally. I knew there were a few remaining but didn't expect France to have one.
|
On March 08 2020 00:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution.
Since they are 2018 numbers I wonder if they only cut the UK from the map or also recalculated and recolored based on the new average.
|
On March 08 2020 00:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution.
I find it surprising that Greece and Portugal have no red at all. Not even light red. Like they don't have "workhorse" regions that could pull their economies forward.
It's not that bad in Spain, so I shouldn't lump it together with the two. Madrid would probably be dark red without its surrounding areas.
|
On March 08 2020 00:48 Sent. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2020 00:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution. I find it surprising that Greece and Portugal have no red at all. Not even light red. Like they don't have "workhorse" regions that could pull their economies forward. It's not that bad in Spain, so I shouldn't lump it together with the two. Madrid would probably be dark red without its surrounding areas.
Well, your conclusion is just not true:
https://theatlas.com/charts/ByzcK_wK
Also I would say it is debateable if an above average capital city (or other economic centre) is actually contributing to the wealth of a country. I would argue that singular strong economic centres are actually a problem for the country, because they suck a lot of human capital into themselves, which bleeds out the rest of the country, while forcing the (young) people that (have to) go into the cities (for economic reasons) to give up their social networks and capital inheritance mechanisms.
These big power conglomerates usally exist in former communist countries where the state centralized power and in countries that have been trying to apply liberterian policies for extended period of time. They cut state expenses for road/rail/internet infrastructure or farmers, or direct subsidies for municipalities in favor of lower taxes or less state debt, which naturally means that people flee the provinces because their current standard of life cannot be upheld.
|
I was aware that Athens is 20% of Greek economy. I meant that I expected it to be wealthier, partially because of sucking all of that human capital into itself.
|
On March 08 2020 04:24 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2020 00:48 Sent. wrote:On March 08 2020 00:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution. I find it surprising that Greece and Portugal have no red at all. Not even light red. Like they don't have "workhorse" regions that could pull their economies forward. It's not that bad in Spain, so I shouldn't lump it together with the two. Madrid would probably be dark red without its surrounding areas. Well, your conclusion is just not true: https://theatlas.com/charts/ByzcK_wKAlso I would say it is debateable if an above average capital city (or other economic centre) is actually contributing to the wealth of a country. I would argue that singular strong economic centres are actually a problem for the country, because they suck a lot of human capital into themselves, which bleeds out the rest of the country, while forcing the (young) people that (have to) go into the cities (for economic reasons) to give up their social networks and capital inheritance mechanisms. These big power conglomerates usally exist in former communist countries where the state centralized power and in countries that have been trying to apply liberterian policies for extended period of time. They cut state expenses for road/rail/internet infrastructure or farmers, or direct subsidies for municipalities in favor of lower taxes or less state debt, which naturally means that people flee the provinces because their current standard of life cannot be upheld.
Agglomeration is a natural process in particular in knowledge economies which is where things are moving because people with skills and talent interacting in a dense space is how new ideas and productive activity is generated. It's true that just having one oversized capital might not necessarily be great because from a certain size on there is bad effects, but the rural, provincial small towns you find in many European countries are arguably too small to provide the necessary networks to be competitive.
Also, they're in many ways ecologically problematic because due to their low density they require much more infrastructure and the cost of everything from water, to streets, doctor coverage, schools and so on multiplies.
|
On March 08 2020 05:31 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2020 04:24 Big J wrote:On March 08 2020 00:48 Sent. wrote:On March 08 2020 00:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
That sad moment when you look at the map and UK is no longer included.
Why is it suprising? Looking at it, it seems that most regions of Spain and Portugal for instance has higher GDP per capita in PPS than most of "east Europe" that has a spot of red surrounded by a sea of light blue. So it's a matter of distribution. I find it surprising that Greece and Portugal have no red at all. Not even light red. Like they don't have "workhorse" regions that could pull their economies forward. It's not that bad in Spain, so I shouldn't lump it together with the two. Madrid would probably be dark red without its surrounding areas. Well, your conclusion is just not true: https://theatlas.com/charts/ByzcK_wKAlso I would say it is debateable if an above average capital city (or other economic centre) is actually contributing to the wealth of a country. I would argue that singular strong economic centres are actually a problem for the country, because they suck a lot of human capital into themselves, which bleeds out the rest of the country, while forcing the (young) people that (have to) go into the cities (for economic reasons) to give up their social networks and capital inheritance mechanisms. These big power conglomerates usally exist in former communist countries where the state centralized power and in countries that have been trying to apply liberterian policies for extended period of time. They cut state expenses for road/rail/internet infrastructure or farmers, or direct subsidies for municipalities in favor of lower taxes or less state debt, which naturally means that people flee the provinces because their current standard of life cannot be upheld. Agglomeration is a natural process in particular in knowledge economies which is where things are moving because people with skills and talent interacting in a dense space is how new ideas and productive activity is generated. It's true that just having one oversized capital might not necessarily be great because from a certain size on there is bad effects, but the rural, provincial small towns you find in many European countries are arguably too small to provide the necessary networks to be competitive. Also, they're in many ways ecologically problematic because due to their low density they require much more infrastructure and the cost of everything from water, to streets, doctor coverage, schools and so on multiplies.
I think it is pretty weird to use "natural" in this context.
I do not disagree with your sentiment, that having more people share less infrastructure and leaving more room for ecological spaces and agriculture would be optimal from the eye of a central planner.
But we do not have a system in place that encourages this sort of sentiment from an individuals perspective. I moved to Vienna for university, but just from a numbers perspective it is plainly stupid. After taxes I barely earn more with a university degree in Vienna than if I had started working in an industrial job with 15 (15 years experience) or 19 (11 years experience) with a technical school degree. But I had to pay rent (and more of it) and I lost another 6 years studying that I could have easily saved around 60+k euro and also I gave up social networks (like my parents and grandparents) which is a huge cost and career factor (in particular if you want to have kids).
So yes, for me personally it is fine that I went away, because I wanted scientific challenges and most of my friends also went to Vienna and I prefer the city lifestyle due to the dense education/entertainment options. But economically speaking for the average person it is not clever and unless you make deep changes in the system you won't be able to reach a more metropolitan lifestyle in a favorable way.
|
'Natural' in the sense of what people will do without coercion and some vaguely reasonable policies in place. Urbanisation is I think inevitable because of the network effects mentioned above and I think managed well it's also a good thing. I grew up in 2k pop village, moved to Duesseldorf for university, and then I moved abroad about two years ago and I don't miss it although I also had to leave family behind. That sucks but it's also part of making new experiences.
The biggest problem with cities these days is the cost of housing really. A lot of cities fail to supply enough housing (by whatever means private, public I don't really care) to accommodate people moving in. I don't really like excessive planning either, but thriving cities don't really need to be top-down planned, I think most people recognise this as a failure nowadays.
Also in rich countries in particular with the demographic changes, I just don't think small village life is sustainable. My parents are getting older and there is one (also extremely old) physician nearby, all the stores have closed, there is nothing recreational and so on. Denser living is not just good for young people going to study, it's also good for communal life for the older generations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
