EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1296
| 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. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7941 Posts
On March 02 2021 00:32 Silvanel wrote: Wasnt Chirac also convicted? This article mentions he got ocnvicted in 2011: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56237818 True, he did but it was "avec sursis", meaning he escaped jail. Sarkozy has one year "ferme". It will certainly be with an electronic bracelet or something but that is suuuuch a humiliation. That has just never happened before. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
When a high ranking government official, such as a president, chancellor, prime minister or minister is found guilty of corruption in their time of serving the people, they should be shot. Democracy cannot accept undemocratic representatives, or it is not a democracy to begin with. The threat to democracy from such behaviour is way to fundamental to let biological waste like Sarkozy live on (assuming that the allegations themselves have been found true). | ||
|
Oshuy
Netherlands529 Posts
On March 03 2021 19:22 Big J wrote: Any decision made on the base of personal gain is a fundamental violation of the democratic principle, that the will of the people has to be executed. When a high ranking government official, such as a president, chancellor, prime minister or minister is found guilty of corruption in their time of serving the people, they should be shot. Democracy cannot accept undemocratic representatives, or it is not a democracy to begin with. The threat to democracy from such behaviour is way to fundamental to let biological waste like Sarkozy live on (assuming that the allegations themselves have been found true). From a constitutional standpoint, the French president can never be tried for actions done as part of his presidential mandate and can only be tried for actions done during his presidency, but not relevant to his role as president, after he has left the presidency (either after destitution or after the end of his 5 years mandate). Death penalty is of course never an option. That being said, the corruption Sarkozy was found guilty of were acts committed in 2014. He was president 2007-2012 and had no representative position in 2014. Those corruption facts were linked to favors traded in exchange of inside information in another case (illegal financing of his 2007 presidential campaign by Liliane Bettencourt, owner of L'Oreal) and were discovered by tapping his phone as part of an investigation for yet another case (illegal financing of his 2007 presidential campaign by Lybia), case for which the trial is upcoming. Only facts during his presidency that I know of is a string of polls the presidency paid for without opening a tender to select the polling company, for a total amount of ~2.5 millions over 4 years. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
In Austria we also have ongoing investigations against multiple conservatives, in particular against financial minister Blümel, chancellor Kurz and former minister of justice Brandstätter as well as against other officials. Since the Greens are currently holding the ministry of justice the conservatives cannot stop the investigations internally. They are publically trying to put pressure on the justice system to stop looking into their people, but the Green Vice chancellor and his ministers are trying their best to prevent political interventions. Funny story prdouced through this: the prosecution was searching finance minister Blümels house, because there are traces that he has mediated donations for Kurz as trade of for political favors. He was allowed to make a call before they came. His wife took their laptop for a walk. The story is even funnier when you know, that the same minister claimed a year ago that he does not own a laptop. I don't get why such people are free. Either they are lying and are hindering the executive from doing their job, which is a crime. Or they are seriously psychologically impaired and actually have to be treated in a closed enviroment. If they actually keep up claims like taking a laptop for a walk to listen to music is normal, or not owning one when they do, then they should be forced to step down and go into psychiatric treatment. If they do it to cover up corruption, just shot them. No point in keeping them alive. However, nothing will come of this. The traces will eventually lead nowhere or eventually they will find a way to shut down the investigations. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4739 Posts
Italy blocks shipping 250k doses of AZ vaccine to Australia from factory in Italy due to AZ failing to fulfill its contract to EU. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7021 Posts
On March 05 2021 18:12 Silvanel wrote: So it is happening: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56279202 Italy blocks shipping 250k doses of AZ vaccine to Australia from factory in Italy due to AZ failing to fulfill its contract to EU. Italy did it but from what I heard it was a unisono EU decision | ||
|
Archeon
3261 Posts
On March 03 2021 19:22 Big J wrote: Any decision made on the base of personal gain is a fundamental violation of the democratic principle, that the will of the people has to be executed. When a high ranking government official, such as a president, chancellor, prime minister or minister is found guilty of corruption in their time of serving the people, they should be shot. Democracy cannot accept undemocratic representatives, or it is not a democracy to begin with. The threat to democracy from such behaviour is way to fundamental to let biological waste like Sarkozy live on (assuming that the allegations themselves have been found true). I think people are underestimating how much of a slippery slope these things are. Quite often what's in the interest of people or at least common democratic practice is corrupting. Like the company you're trying to get to build a factory in your area to provide jobs happens to fit the target profile of your party and just might throw in a bunch of deal sweeteners for amiable relationships. Or the guy you're helping in your party might just come in handy when you need party members to vote on a law you created. Or the lobbyists that are in favor of less taxes for companies over a certain size happen to come from successful companies and are highly educated and as such people who are likely to be specialists in their area and hopefully able to give valuable input when it comes to designing the laws for the sector. You have a bunch of great plans for the betterment of everyone but to implement them you need to get voted first. Naturally the law is the border where punishment is (supposed to be) dealt, but political business always entails corruption and that ignores that in some southern states you need to bribe most state servants for them to do their job even at the basic level. Good to see that Sarkozy is held responsible though. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9757 Posts
On March 05 2021 18:12 Silvanel wrote: So it is happening: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56279202 Italy blocks shipping 250k doses of AZ vaccine to Australia from factory in Italy due to AZ failing to fulfill its contract to EU. I remember being told by EU folk that this is a worldwide problem and being selfish with the vaccine was counterproductive. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11698 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9757 Posts
On March 05 2021 19:58 Simberto wrote: It is. This is a prisoners dilemma kind of situation. The best for everyone is if everyone shares. But if everyone else tries to grab the most for themselves, and you are the only person that shares, you get fucked over. Th be fair to the EU (I heard they were behind the decision) they are taking vaccine that Aussies don't really need as much, say, more populated and less rich countries do. Hopefully that figured into the decision making. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7021 Posts
On March 05 2021 19:58 Simberto wrote: It is. This is a prisoners dilemma kind of situation. The best for everyone is if everyone shares. But if everyone else tries to grab the most for themselves, and you are the only person that shares, you get fucked over. I don't know all the background but I thought this was more like AZ broke contract (promised doses to EU not delivered) | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4739 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On March 05 2021 19:16 Archeon wrote: I think people are underestimating how much of a slippery slope these things are. Quite often what's in the interest of people or at least common democratic practice is corrupting. Like the company you're trying to get to build a factory in your area to provide jobs happens to fit the target profile of your party and just might throw in a bunch of deal sweeteners for amiable relationships. Or the guy you're helping in your party might just come in handy when you need party members to vote on a law you created. Or the lobbyists that are in favor of less taxes for companies over a certain size happen to come from successful companies and are highly educated and as such people who are likely to be specialists in their area and hopefully able to give valuable input when it comes to designing the laws for the sector. You have a bunch of great plans for the betterment of everyone but to implement them you need to get voted first. Naturally the law is the border where punishment is (supposed to be) dealt, but political business always entails corruption and that ignores that in some southern states you need to bribe most state servants for them to do their job even at the basic level. Good to see that Sarkozy is held responsible though. I do not concur in your premise that political leadership (or any form of leadership) can reasonably contribute to personal satisfaction of needs. If we would be talking about base democracy this would be different, but an executing official such as a president cannot make a better decision where a factory should go then what a market provides. So no, corruption is not the solution to put leaders on the right path. It rather increases the problem of failing markets when on top of market decisions leaning towards inheritance/capital gains over production/consumption there is a political layer influenced by the same rich class. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7021 Posts
On March 05 2021 21:15 Silvanel wrote: Yeah, the issue here is that we (EU) have contract with AZ which they dont want to fulfill and instead are selling vaccines elsewhere. So it's not just a "who gets the vaccine" but also a bit of a middlefinger to AZ | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22015 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9757 Posts
On March 05 2021 22:48 Gorsameth wrote: its a bad situation and a serious danger to international relations but companies signing contracts and then failing to meet obligations is also a big issue. Its bad for the EU, no doubt. I have Brexiters over here constantly doing the 'Look at this, the EU is an evil empire, we always told you so' because of the EU's dreadful vaccine response and its getting harder and harder to argue against them. Macron's vengeful strategy of casting doubt on the efficacy of the Oxford/AZ vaccine, which seems to have done nothing but please anti-vaxxers, you have German newspapers doing a similar thing (misinterpreting data or just plain lying to make the UK vaccine look bad), and now they are struggling to get everyone vaccinated. Sure, PR shouldn't be the main concern right now, but the EU needs to be a little careful incase more leave movements start gaining support everywhere. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
Then everyone would be buzzing about how weak the EU is, that the nations should have cared for themselves instead of the EU handling it yadayada. And honestly I have seen way less critique from inside the EU about the treatment of AZ than by outsiders. Let's just face it: It is not the EUs job to make brexiteers happy, they are simply not the target group. So bringing them up is kinda pointless. And that the mixed reactions towards AZ are due to it being from the UK is some very special kind of opinion... | ||
|
Archeon
3261 Posts
On March 05 2021 21:24 Big J wrote: I do not concur in your premise that political leadership (or any form of leadership) can reasonably contribute to personal satisfaction of needs. If we would be talking about base democracy this would be different, but an executing official such as a president cannot make a better decision where a factory should go then what a market provides. So no, corruption is not the solution to put leaders on the right path. It rather increases the problem of failing markets when on top of market decisions leaning towards inheritance/capital gains over production/consumption there is a political layer influenced by the same rich class. So what is your solution if try to get voted for governor and your region has a high unemployment rate? Keynesian economics is pretty standard, it's tried and proven. I agree that it's problematic in terms of undermining competition, which is the fundamental driving force behind capitalism, but politicians are competing between who can give good conditions to companies, so not participating in that race just means your region isn't appealing and won't be a major production center. It's like with armies, the moment one nation has one every nation needs one. They are bad for humanity as a whole, but you can't really continue to exist without one. In my opinion the solution are strong anti-trust laws and more independent choices of lobbyists for political committees to guarantee that the laws are beneficial for small companies too. But in a world where Ireland would rather take 0.005% corporate tax from apple than get the 15 billion apple basically stole with their permission because of the other benefits apple provides and where Amazon has enough income to surpass most nation's gdp and over a million workers it's easy to see why politicians think that these might help solve major problems of their unemployment rate and production. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On March 05 2021 22:55 Jockmcplop wrote: Its bad for the EU, no doubt. I have Brexiters over here constantly doing the 'Look at this, the EU is an evil empire, we always told you so' because of the EU's dreadful vaccine response and its getting harder and harder to argue against them. Macron's vengeful strategy of casting doubt on the efficacy of the Oxford/AZ vaccine, which seems to have done nothing but please anti-vaxxers, you have German newspapers doing a similar thing (misinterpreting data or just plain lying to make the UK vaccine look bad), and now they are struggling to get everyone vaccinated. Sure, PR shouldn't be the main concern right now, but the EU needs to be a little careful incase more leave movements start gaining support everywhere. The EU outright cannot ever win in catering to the hardcore Brexiteer. I used to be of the opinion that the EU should do a better PR job to not give ammo, but it’s ultimately pointless really. On the other hand to people who aren’t innately Euro-skeptic then yeah give it a shot. Anyone who would cheer the UK government in a hypothetical where they clamped down hard on a vaccine producer for not meeting the terms of a contract, but uses it as evidence of the evil EU empire when they do it have their conclusions and they just cram in what evidence when they can. Where the EU has failed pretty miserably here is arguably at a time where the virtues of such an entity should be most useful, I.e in a coordinated pan-national response to a pan-national pandemic, it just hasn’t delivered. | ||
| ||
