|
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. |
Wow, that mess doesn't sound too far off the Australian party system and people's frustration around 2010, but certainly whoever gets in proposes the budget (policies of course have to be passed with approval from more than there are that oppose it).
Democratic process that results in a reasonable balance, combined with the kind of income offered to politicians in most countries, seems prone to blunt refusals and public frustration.
They kind of are just overpaid kids who sometimes get appointed to cabinet positions they don't really have the qualifications for.
With that much more on the right (thanks to the far-right SD), it seems hard to me for the left to form any sort of functional government with this system. It's a shame they can't just:
1 - have their (the chosen government's) budget approved
2 - go at it for a while, say a year, and then if there's too much disapproval and absolutely nothing is getting past the opposition, have a another election.
I don't understand how this left government is even "in power" if they have to use someone else's budget.
Use another's plan but be judged by their execution? Get blamed later for anything that hasn't worked out well for the country bad even when it may be entirely down to the budget measures that they didn't even want?
Oh also, note that that's eight parties. 3+4+1.  I understand you're probably inclined to forget about the Swedish "Democrats".
|
On December 04 2014 01:48 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:Wow, that mess doesn't sound too far off the Australian party system and people's frustration around 2010, but certainly whoever gets in proposes the budget (policies of course have to be passed with approval from more than there are that oppose it). Democratic process that results in a reasonable balance, combined with the kind of income offered to politicians in most countries, seems prone to blunt refusals and public frustration. They kind of are just overpaid kids who sometimes get appointed to cabinet positions they don't really have the qualifications for. With that much more on the right (thanks to the far-right SD), it seems hard to me for the left to form any sort of functional government with this system. It's a shame they can't just: 1 - have their (the chosen government's) budget approved 2 - go at it for a while, say a year, and then if there's too much disapproval and absolutely nothing is getting past the opposition, have a another election. I don't understand how this left government is even "in power" if they have to use someone else's budget. Use another's plan but be judged by their execution? Get blamed later for anything that hasn't worked out well for the country bad even when it may be entirely down to the budget measures that they didn't even want? Oh also, note that that's eight parties. 3+4+1. I understand you're probably inclined to forget about the Swedish "Democrats".
Haha yeah there's 8 parties. I always forget SD.
Anyway the left (S+V+MP) were the largest block and both sides front runners had said that they would let the largest block go ahead and form a government. Together these 3 parties had 43,7 % of the vote while the opposition got 39,3 %.
So the right basically dropped their votes and since there wasn't a majority against the vote went through and they could form the government.
The thing is that no other party is even talking to the Swedish democrats so the right can't govern either.
Anyway once the rights budget went through the PM had 3 choices.
1) stay and govern with the other sides budget. But he had already said that wasn't an option for him.
2) resign and let parliament have another go at forming a stable government. Most likely this would have been the opposition with 39,3 %.
3) use his elected power and call for a re-election.
He choose 3, I would have too.
Anyway he left the door open for compromise as long as the opposition starts the talks since he tried before the crisis.
We got into this situation because two big blocks were formed pre-election and the rhetoric was incredibly sharp in the election cycle. None of the parties left any room for compromise with the other side after election which is of course really bad when you have a wildcard with 13 % of the vote in the middle of everything. (Edit: Note that they are the third biggest party right now).
Traditionally Swedish politicians have been really good at broad agreements and most people are really pissed of that there were no talks between the parties about this so what I expect to see is that they tone down their rhetoric from US levels and leave themselves a lot more open to compromise.
Most notably the Alliance (the right parties) need to leave the door open for talks with the socialists which are really a mid party and/or the greens.
Swedish democrats likely to stay in place in the middle or increase slightly. Other % will change a bit but no one will get a clear majority.
I think most of our politicians realize however that if this happens again people will not just be "meh" about it, heads WILL roll.
Edit: One more thing.
It may sound strange but Swedish political tradition dictates that the largest block gets to both form their government in peace and that you only vote for your own budget proposal. SD had their own which got obliterated in the first round against the opposition budget and then they broke praxis by voting for the rights budget. Of course the right knew this was going to happen and did nothing to stop it.
SD argues that there is no law against doing this (it's being considered now though) and they have to do something since people refuse to speak to them.
Anyway the point is that government formation + budget used to be holy to maintain stability, then it's open season any other type of proposal until the next election or the government decides enough is enough and resigns.
|
How come so many Swedes are voting for the far right?
And is Sweden another country that is falling into that trend where the right and the left govern as a grand coalition while the fringe element grows stronger?
|
Read my post about switzerland. The basics are the same.
|
While far right is still commonly used for the Swedish democrats most political commentators have stopped using that definition. Their economic policies are right in the middle. They are extremely anti-immigration and very socially conservative however. The party has roots in some really murky waters but right now they have a 0-tolerance for racism and frequently throw out people caught seeing stupid things.
SD is increasing a lot, the left party (former communist party) actually tanked in this election. Possibly because a brand new feminist party got 3 % and took a lot of their voters, almost getting into parliament.
And both sides in the middle aren't talking right now so no grand coalition yet. But it could happen.
As to why Swedes are voting for SD? Massive immigration zero integration and no other party wants to talk about it basically.
|
On December 04 2014 03:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
While far right is still commonly used for the Swedish democrats most political commentators have stopped using that definition. Their economic policies are right in the middle. They are extremely anti-immigration and very socially conservative however. The party has roots in some really murky waters but right now they have a 0-tolerance for racism and frequently throw out people caught seeing stupid things.
SD is increasing a lot, the left party (former communist party) actually tanked in this election. Possibly because a brand new feminist party got 3 % and took a lot of their voters, almost getting into parliament.
And both sides in the middle aren't talking right now so no grand coalition yet. But it could happen.
As to why Swedes are voting for SD? Massive immigration zero integration and no other party wants to talk about it basically.
It seems to me that Swedes need more immigration policies in place. In the US there are tons of immigration procedures set up to process people: Ellis Island, job-placement programs, government welfare systems for those in need, integration into the public school system, scholarships for smart people to go to college, businesses hiring immigrants. Admittedly people still hate immigrants in some places regardless, for example in the city of Phoenix, Hispanics take jobs blue-collar people want so they hate them. And the US still doesn't allow in enough H1-B's, as my dad has pointed out. I don't know, maybe they already have a lot of immigration systems in Sweden but they just don't work that well.
|
On December 04 2014 03:05 Velr wrote:
Read my post about switzerland. The basics are the same.
link for the lazy.
@aether
is that your twitch.tv channel in your sig?
is your description for real?
are you clinically insane?
|
From Velr's post
The rise of the SVP is basically the total failure of the more moderate parties at responding properly to their populism and also truely not dealing or even talking about issues that have risen during the 00 years, our immigration numbers are actually and in reality probably too BIG and our public transportation is approaching its limits quickly
This comes up a lot here, too. But what are moderate parties actually supposed to do? "foreigners are stealing our jerbs and our social security" actually is just bullshit. It's factually wrong.If your public transportation can't handle the amount of people you need more trains, not less immigrants. The established politicians can't do anything besides repeat that statement. Overaging populations like the ones in Northern Europe actually need hordes of immigrants, there is no way around it.
|
On December 04 2014 01:08 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No one has really asked about it but Sweden is as of now in a political crisis.
Long story short our political system is fairly stable and designed to allow coalition and minority governments. One side of this is that crucial decisions doesn't need over 50 % of the vote, they just need to not have 50 % of the vote against them.
There are 7 parties, in 3 blocks. The left (socialists, the far left party, the greens) narrowly won the election but didn't get a majority. The right (4 parties) were in opposition and still presented their own budget. And the Swedish democrats, an anti immigration and social conservative party which got 13 % in the last election. Everyone told SD to go fuck themselves.
Now, what happened is that the left formed a government and got the prime minister spot. But when the budgets were presented the Swedish democrats decided that they would vote for the opposition budget instead. Despite calls to discuss this among all other parties they couldn't agree on anything and today the rights budget was passed under a leftist government.
Naturally this won't work so the prime minister called for a re-election (100 % guaranteed the opposition was betting he'd just resign and hand them the torch but I guess he was pissed off that they refused to even talk to him).
So in 3 months we have a new election, everyone things our politicians behave like 7 year olds and all the parties are busy trying to put the blame on each other for making the government blow up.
I predicted that this would happen when the results of the election was finalized. All politicians knew it would happen, but they acted dumb to save face. This whole thing is mainly making the current leftist government look like idiots.
MP and V are the natural enemies of SD, so there was no way that they would enable a government with either of those parties in it. 4 years ago, we were in a similar situation, but then it was the reverse, with the right having the upper hand, that's why SD didn't do anything then, because the alternative would have been a government with MP and/or V.
It's funny how S and MP made up this insane budget that seems like a tailored attempt at destroying jobs and decreasing our options to choose, and then pleads to the small parties on the right to support them. They needed this support from the right, but that budget, which is extremely left-biased makes their attempts at swaying them over seem very insincere. I don't really know what they were thinking, because they must have known that this would happen. Maybe they were aiming for a re-election from the get go, and hope that the media will help paint them out as victims so that they can pass 50%.
We'll just have to wait and see, but either way it looks like no matter what, the budget that the right made will stick, so I'm pleased about that. It makes the next 4 years look a bit brighter for this country.
And to clarify some things: SD is not a far-right party. KD and M are the farthest right among the main political parties. They are the greatest opposers towards taxes, regulations, state-interference, and overall "big government". FP, SD and C are mostly right, but in some areas more closer to the center. SD being against immigration doesn't make them far-right. Nazi Germany being far-right is a misconception anyway. They were more centrists. The true far-right is libertarianism.
|
On December 04 2014 04:19 Nyxisto wrote:From Velr's post Show nested quote + The rise of the SVP is basically the total failure of the more moderate parties at responding properly to their populism and also truely not dealing or even talking about issues that have risen during the 00 years, our immigration numbers are actually and in reality probably too BIG and our public transportation is approaching its limits quickly This comes up a lot here, too. But what are moderate parties actually supposed to do? "foreigners are stealing our jerbs and our social security" actually is just bullshit. It's factually wrong. The established politicians can't do anything besides repeat that statement. Overaging populations like the ones in Northern Europe actually need hordes of immigrants.
The following paragraph is a bit off topic.
No they don't. I know the rationale behind that argument but it doesn't account for robotics. Unemployment even among young well educated Swedes is rising and everytime people are told "when the next generation retires we need this many jobs". Guess what, the people born in the 40's were supposed to put the entire country in a crisis of labor shortage. They have all retired, but unemployment went up.
The reason is simple, in Sweden laws don't allow you to fire people easily but increased automation is making more and more jobs redundant faster and faster and the way this is handled in Sweden is you let people retire and you don't hire new people.
I know economics tells us we need lots of people working so we can tax them so we can pay pensions. It's not going to work because regardless of what you do at this point you won't get those jobs.
Anyway no one is accusing our immigrants of stealing our jerbs. They are mostly from the middle east and africa. Even the racists are happy when they find work.
|
On December 04 2014 04:12 nunez wrote:
@aether
is that your twitch.tv channel in your sig?
is your description for real?
nunez, i'll explain since you asked, although this is technically a TL economics thread.. other people might find it interesting locally.
"Se Rippuu Tilanteesta" means, "It depends on the situation" in Finnish. That was a catchphrase I used to say all the time when I lived in Finland for my 'gap year' break from Biomed Engineering studies. Another one I used to say a lot at Rautatientori was "Semmosta Se On," which means, 'So it is.'
I used to commentate/blog on Twitch when I regularly played about an hour of SC2 per night on Battle.Net as Subutai. Made a gadget app, SC2Tactics, & everything. 'Twas pretty fun, i love to play competitive video games at home. I'm not pro player status like Dragon/Destiny/NesTea/InControl/Avilo, or even Hartgar, though. The Twitch stream is mostly a pastiche of things in my head that I like, attached to basic SC2 tutorials that nobody reads. Attached are quotes from the Terminator, Neo, the Alien Vs. Predator conflict, Diablo III battle video game, Starcraft, Batman, Key & Peele comedy, Thor, Cary Grant, & Sean Connery, lines from books I thought were awesome like 'Armor' by John Steakley & 'Elvenbane', Worktimer. Mostly inside jokes & references to guy stuff, which not everyone likes. Lord knows there's plenty of that sort of thing in the Blogosphere, domestically & abroad.
I guess I don't understand why you're upset, nunez. Did I pee in your cheerios in a past life or something?
e: Getting a bit off-topic here.. trying to make a point relevant to a European economy thread on TL:
On December 04 2014 04:27 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No they don't. I know the rationale behind that argument but it doesn't account for robotics. Unemployment even among young well educated Swedes is rising and everytime people are told "when the next generation retires we need this many jobs". Guess what, the people born in the 40's were supposed to put the entire country in a crisis of labor shortage. They have all retired, but unemployment went up.
The reason is simple, in Sweden laws don't allow you to fire people easily but increased automation is making more and more jobs redundant faster and faster and the way this is handled in Sweden is you let people retire and you don't hire new people.
I know economics tells us we need lots of people working so we can tax them so we can pay pensions. It's not going to work because regardless of what you do at this point you won't get those jobs.
CuddlyCuteKitten, I accept what you're saying but I have a divergent opinion: The solution here is people need to make more viable businesses. It's unfair to say, but "Old Guard" companies like Skanska, like 3M or Medtronic in the states, just aren't sufficient to provide all of the workforce with employment in Sweden. They need to branch off more, like NSN successfully did a few years back. I read in Forbes that stockbroker Divesh Makan recently left Goldman Sachs & founded new headquarters Iconiq Capital in Silicon Valley with clients & LinkedIn connections he had built up over time in his career. A risky, crazy (and nerve-wracking) move, certainly, but needed so that there are workplaces that rookie college grads can join. ACON & Fornum have made the news doing this in Finland, so, come on, they should be able to do that domestically in Sweden (Although Swedish H&M does have a store in Kamppi mall and in Mall of America, but that is neither here nor there). Chicks love entrepreneurial guys
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomon/2014/12/01/the-spider-of-silicon-valley-inside-zuck-friends-secret-billionaire-fund/
These efforts are often government-supported in the US & in Finland, and I think that Sweden really needs to join them outside & make programs like these, sort of like UPS already has in offices in Europe & the states. This is the best thing to do to revamp their economy with all these new immigrants. Basic college Microeconomics 101. My cousin at Movenium would say, you don't have to be a prophet to understand that.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the left typically has a huge blindspot over the need for enterpreneur initiative in renewing the economy. need more schumpeter
|
On December 04 2014 14:07 oneofthem wrote:
the left typically has a huge blindspot over the need for enterpreneur initiative in renewing the economy. need more schumpeter
as true as that may be in a vaccum/perfect world, try using schumpeter during election season as your basis of argument. as left/right, whatever. I dare thee
|
|
|
On December 04 2014 04:03 A3th3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2014 03:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
While far right is still commonly used for the Swedish democrats most political commentators have stopped using that definition. Their economic policies are right in the middle. They are extremely anti-immigration and very socially conservative however. The party has roots in some really murky waters but right now they have a 0-tolerance for racism and frequently throw out people caught seeing stupid things.
SD is increasing a lot, the left party (former communist party) actually tanked in this election. Possibly because a brand new feminist party got 3 % and took a lot of their voters, almost getting into parliament.
And both sides in the middle aren't talking right now so no grand coalition yet. But it could happen.
As to why Swedes are voting for SD? Massive immigration zero integration and no other party wants to talk about it basically. It seems to me that Swedes need more immigration policies in place. In the US there are tons of immigration procedures set up to process people: Ellis Island, job-placement programs, government welfare systems for those in need, integration into the public school system, scholarships for smart people to go to college, businesses hiring immigrants. Admittedly people still hate immigrants in some places regardless, for example in the city of Phoenix, Hispanics take jobs blue-collar people want so they hate them. And the US still doesn't allow in enough H1-B's, as my dad has pointed out. I don't know, maybe they already have a lot of immigration systems in Sweden but they just don't work that well.
The systems in place are probably quite superior to those of US in terms of services provided. Especially welfare and education systems are most likely on much higher level. The problems of integration are unfortunately not easily solved by those systems. There are societal and geographical differences between US and Europe in general that I think cause the integration problems, not the systems put in place. Issue also might be more difficult way to become a citizen in Europe.
|
If any sort of meaningful discussion about Sweden is to be had there needs to be a very clear distinction between immigrants and refugees.
Integrating refugees is often a great deal harder than immigrants and it looks like Sweden are currently having huge issues due to that. The Danish media at one point had a story saying that parts of Malmö are effectively under Sharia-law and that the police is not willing to enter parts of the city - I am a little sceptical about how much truth there is to it, but if it is even remotely true then it is quite concerning.
|
Sweden Democrats are hardly far right. They would be barely center-left in any country south of Scandinavia. When you look at the state of media in Sweden its no wonder people are voting SD as a protest vote if nothing else. I remember after the election there was a front page of a popular Swedish newspaper all in black (yesterday, 781,120 Swedes voted for -SD symbol-):
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4GgfSEr.png)
It's disgusting, there were even tv channels broadcasting some guy saying how he is scare to go out in public knowing 1 in 9 people voted SD, is the person standing next to him racist? Do some of his friends hate freedom? Sweden needs witch-hunts because people don't agree with me!
edit: It literally got that bad.
|
On December 04 2014 22:16 Ghostcom wrote:
If any sort of meaningful discussion about Sweden is to be had there needs to be a very clear distinction between immigrants and refugees.
Integrating refugees is often a great deal harder than immigrants and it looks like Sweden are currently having huge issues due to that. The Danish media at one point had a story saying that parts of Malmö are effectively under Sharia-law and that the police is not willing to enter parts of the city - I am a little sceptical about how much truth there is to it, but if it is even remotely true then it is quite concerning.
I lived in Malmö for a year and the neighboring city for two, and I'd say it's a complete exaggeration. The biggest problems are due to unemployment, which hits immigrant youth the hardest leading to some areas having more crime, but compared to say Paris or London, Malmö is incredibly safe. It's definitely not under sharia-law. 
The biggest issues Sweden faces with immigration is the large amounts of refugees arriving in a short time; there's definitely money available to receive them, and long-term they can have a beneficial impact on the economy, but housing shortage is severe and there's a big communication problem between government and county in how to handle the situation. I believe the estimate was that around 100k people from Syria would be arriving in Sweden the next few years, and even if the housing situation can be solved, refugees from a warzone may be in need of medical treatment and psychotherapy as well as language classes, and I have no idea if we have enough qualified people to handle that efficiently.
The parties are afraid of talking immigration since SD is making it nothing but a yes/no situation, preventing meaningful discussion about how to solve the issues when people arrive instead.
|
The problem with north african immigrants in Europe (i.e. those most easily radicalised) is their lack of education and integration. It's also partly cultural. Warning: I will paint with a really broad brush here.
North African countries, unlike Europe, the United States and south-east asia have a market culture: starting up your own business is in a way more important than actually getting education. The businesses they do start tend to cater mainly to their own community, and are relatively unambitious. I'm talking about your typical kebap place, night shops, tea houses, butcheries, bakeries etc. Getting wealthier is seemingly not their primary goal. Family ties are extremely important in those societies, and family structure tends to be rather conservative or even downright archaic.
This is a stark contrast with so-called Western culture, in which education is of primary importance, and in which your social standing is in many ways dependent on the education you received, and the subsequent job you managed to find, or business you found. A high level of ambition is expected: you must either want to grow within the company, or gain ever bigger markets with your business. This mentality seems to resonate with often pragmatic east-asians.
This former group has little reason to learn the language of the country they reside in. After all, their social life takes place inside their own community. As a consequence, they are distrusted by the 'original' people of the country they reside in: they speak a language no-one but them understands, their refuse to adapt to the country they migrated to because they have very little incentive to, etc. There is apparently a disparity between refugees and people who've lived here for multiple generations, but most people don't make this distinction.
East Asians, on the whole, tend to be more ambitious: their business networks tend to be rather extensive, and they are very ambitious. Traditionally, education plays a very important part in their lives, so learning the language of the country to reside in is a de facto requirement.
The whole anti-migration sentiment in Europe is mainly aimed at north africans or people from the near east, because they are regarded as people that will cost society without any prospect of repaying those 'debts'.
|
A terrorist attack happened today at the edge of Europe in Grozny.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/04/police-killed-as-gun-battle-erupts-in-chechnyas-capital
According Russia’s anti-terrorist committee, three cars carrying militants drove into Grozny overnight, killing three traffic police officers who tried to stop them.
The committee said militants then occupied Grozny’s Press House, which was later destroyed, killing six of the gunmen.
The gunmen later holed themselves up in a school, though no students or teachers were present at the time, RIA Novosti quoted its vice principal as saying. Russian state television showed video footage of security officers firing automatic weapons and grenade launchers at the three-story building.
The operation against the gunmen left 10 security officers dead in total and injured 28, the anti-terrorist committee said in a statement quoted by Russian news agencies.
Video showing the location and some fighting;
http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=2174405#
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
