|
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 September 28 2021 03:00 Mohdoo wrote:
Would anyone from Germany be willing to give a somewhat approachable summary of what has changed? What will be different between the current Merkel govt and whatever is coming next? What kind of coalition is going to happen? I'm pretty ignorant of German politics other than Merkel being supreme.
Something along the lines of:
"Previously: ____
And now: _____"
Would be really helpful and appreciated, if anyone feels like it.
What changed? Basically the entire situation of (probably) 3 parties having to agree on a coalition to form a government is new on a federal level. We might continue with a grand coalition though, but that would take the CDU (aka Merkels party) swallowing an amount of pride they might not comfortable with.
Difference between Merkel and whats coming next? For foreign and EU politics, probably not too much. For most other stuff, it depends on the coalition. There are like 3 possible coalitions (SPD/CDU; SPD/greens/FDP; CDU/greens/FDP), each of which will do stuff differently.
Which coalition is going to happen? Personally, I'd give each of these 3 coalitions a >20% chance of happening, and I dont think even the most experienced german analysts would be comfortable betting on which of them is going to happen. There isnt much talk of a grand coalition (SPD/CDU), but from my memory it's often (on federal and state level) the initially least dicussed option, yet somehow in the end it tends to happen quite often.
It may see odd for people used to other voting systems, but this uncertainty after an election is not unusual in germany at all, however this time it's a little more unpredictable than "normally".
|
What kind of coalition is going to happen is not certain at this point, there are multiple possibilities, but it will probably be one of either social democrats, greens and liberals or conservatives, greens and liberals. I think conservatives and social democrats is also possible, which is what we have had for a while now, but i don't think anyone is really enthusiastic about that.
The next chancellor will almost certainly be either Olaf Scholz (social democrat) or Armin Laschet (conservatives).
Internationally, there will not be a lot of major change. None of them are crazy Trump-like people who would randomly blow up international treaties for no apparent reason, and I doubt that there will be any major upheavals from any of the possible coalitions.
Internally, the most likely coaliton will also be lead by the CDU (Merkels party), so there will not be any major change here either, especially not to the degree that it would be interesting for people on the outside. Because the greens will likely be involved in governing, i would expect some additional climate change stuff, but i would also be very surprised if the CDU didn't manage to push some stuff for the car lobby through.
On the off-chance of a SPD-Greens-FDP coalition, there would be a bit more change, especially towards being more social, but the FDP is mostly the party of the rich, so they would block anything too strong in this direction.
Basically, don't expect any major upheavals after this election.
|
I would agree, as long as a government is formed, foreign policy, eu policy, all that stuff will not noticeably change. CDU and SPD would probably do the same things, especially as they just did those things together. FDP and Grüne might create some headlines and controversies in the one direction or the other, but i doubt that they would have the power to move any government too much, so that the world would notice.
|
By far the least likely coalition is CDU/greens/FDP:
- it would be political suicide for the greens. All of their voters want a coalition with SPD and many of them do not like the CDU at all. It will be impossible for the greens to explain to their voters a decision to go for a CDU coalition rather than a SPD one especially since the SPD got more seats than the CDU this time around.
- FDP voters prefer CDU much more than SPD, but with SPD having more seats than CDU and the greens having more than FDP, they are in no position to force a coalition with CDU. And if they decline to enter any coalition, they can reasonably expect to be punished by their voters like they were in the past: in 2009 they declined a coalition with CDU+greens which led to another CDU+SPD coalition. Because of this, in 2013 they lost two thirds of their previous votes (from 14.6% down to 4.7%) and did not even manage to enter the parliament. They cannot risk another disaster like this.
SPD+CDU coalition also seems unlikely. Neither SPD nor CDU are too keen on another such coalition and more importantly both greens as well as FDP voters expect them to enter the government, so them choosing to stay in the opposition may cost them too many votes in the future.
Basically, I would be extremely surprised if it would not end up being SPD/greens/FDP forming a coalition.
That being said, I doubt that much will change in terms of politics. Nothing will change in foreign policy. Internally, maybe some new token climate policies will be enacted, maybe even some miniscule tax reforms but nothing that would have much of an impact on anyone or anything.
|
you guys also voted on some type of rent control in/for Berlin; an expropriation of sorts of real-estate/condos owners.
what happened to that?.
|
On September 28 2021 09:02 xM(Z wrote:
you guys also voted on some type of rent control in/for Berlin; an expropriation of sorts of real-estate/condos owners.
what happened to that?.
I'm not from Berlin myself so I wasn't really too familiar with the details on that. But from german google I get that it's basicly a non-binding vote on wether or not people like the idea itself.
The vote ended up with roughly 60% in favor, 40% against.
Because it wasn't an actual law that was voted on but just the idea it is non-binding, it will however be a topic for the future since politicians are expected to do something I guess.
The TL;dr: on the proposed idea is that apartments that belong to (for profit?) companies with 3k+ apartments under their belt each, which works out to roughly 240k apartments, should get expropriated, to then get turned into affordable/social housing instead. The companies owning those apartments would then get compensated somehow. I'm saying somehow because like I said, it doesn't seem like a vote on an actual law so it's all a bit nebulous.
Maybe someone from Berlin knows a bit more
what I found about it, in german: https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/volksentscheid-berlin-deutsche-wohnen-enteignen-ergebnis-karte-bezirke/
|
|
|
Russia has been using gas as weapon since the start but now conflicts on gas contracts with other states such as Ukraine in the early 2000s will not impact western Europe again.
The exposure to Russian pressure is the same but it circumvents third party conflicts with Russia now.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
They owe $400-700 million in back debt (depending on which late fees get forgiven and which don't) and want gas at less than half the market rate (and well below market rate during even normal times). Sucks that their longer-term contract expired just in the nick of time to be in the middle of a historic energy crisis, but even if you consider this to be a pure business deal the result wouldn't be any different than exactly what just happened. Seems more like Moldova wants favorable treatment when there's no reason it should expect to receive it.
Wouldn't worry about Poland or Germany like this - Poland is going to stick to coal as usual and Germany would pay its bills. It's good to see that there's no more contagion to uninvolved states like there was back when the Ukraine started gas disputes back before 2010.
|
On October 27 2021 16:14 Silvanel wrote:For those claiming that "Russia wont use gas a weapon" : https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59048894They are doing just that, against Moldova so nobody cares, but in 16 years, when coal is off that will be Germany or Poland.
This in a vacuum is grossly misleading.
Their contract ran out, and they're not willing to renew it at the terms given by Gazprom. Energy is more expensive now, if you instead want it cheaper than before - good luck.
This isn't "evul russia" (albeit i certainly do think Putin wouldn't hesitate to weaponize anything) - this is capitalism, and supply and demand. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.
|
It is not misleading. This is precisly how Russia uses gas as a weapon, this is what they did to Ukraine once - which made most of Europe outrgaed. This what they did to Poland long ago. When in target country government changes to one "not so pro-Russia", they immediately rise prices if able or if they are bound by long term contract they start to experience "technical diffculties" lowering supply. No such problems with negotiating new contract would happen if new Moldovan government would be fine with licking russian boots.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
So there's neither political nor economic incentives to provide Moldova with a significantly below market price for gas... why exactly should they end up receiving such a thing?
I'm sure that they could get significant sums of non-Russian gas if they're willing to outbid China for LNG, since they already got a bunch of gas shipped from Poland. Maybe get it financed and have a debt on file that they owe to their gas provider. But that wouldn't be any different than the situation they're already in, would it?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
All's well that ends well - Moldova signs a deal with Gazprom for 5 years!
MOSCOW, Oct 29 (Reuters) - Russia's gas giant Gazprom and the Moldovan government said on Friday they had signed a new five-year contract for Russian gas supplies.
"Gazprom and MoldovaGaz have extended a contract for Russian gas supplies for five years, starting from Nov. 1, 2021 on mutually beneficial terms," Gazprom said in a statement.
A breakthrough at the talks came after the previous gas contract expired at the end of September and the European Union accused Russia of using gas to bully the former Soviet republic.
One of the key questions was Moldova's debt for previous gas supplies, estimated by Russia at around $709 million.
The Moldovan government and Gazprom have agreed to audit the debt and to negotiate a payment schedule, the Moldovan infrastructure ministry said in a statement on its Facebook page.
The price formula for the new contract was proposed by the Moldovan side, the ministry said.
www.reuters.com
Rumor has it the price is about double Moldova's old ($200-300 / m3) price - an increase, but a fair discount relative to current market prices. A real solid deal for all involved.
|
For a number of reasons, I'm looking to leave the US permanently next year. The two cities I'm looking to relocate to are either Amsterdam or Brussels. I've looked into what their respective governments are like and they seem far better than what I deal with as a trans person in Texas. Is there important political and economic things I should know about relocating to the EU as an American with no citizenship or residency ties to the EU?
|
On November 09 2021 14:56 plasmidghost wrote:
For a number of reasons, I'm looking to leave the US permanently next year. The two cities I'm looking to relocate to are either Amsterdam or Brussels. I've looked into what their respective governments are like and they seem far better than what I deal with as a trans person in Texas. Is there important political and economic things I should know about relocating to the EU as an American with no citizenship or residency ties to the EU?
Maybe you could look at this? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.expatfocus.com/netherlands/living/living-in-the-netherlands-as-a-transgender-expat-5006/?amp
I think you can probably find some work but depending on your skill level, it might be hard as English teaching (the typical non skill immigration profession from Anglo Saxon countries) is not as in demand. Also as noted in the article above, the countries are far just being welcoming to LBGT. Not sure about the situation in Texas but physical attacks against trans people are sadly common especially from very religious muslim immigrants communities which both have a large presence in Amsterdam and Brussels.
|
So do you have any ways to get a European Blue Card?
I've just checked the requirements, and especially the salary requirements are quite significant. (depending on your skills...)
Because without one, even as a US citizen, permanently immigrating to the EU is not entirely trivial.
|
United States41995 Posts
If you can get into any EU nation you can get into all of them. Greece will give you admission if you buy 400k in Greek bonds. That’d get you into the Netherlands.
|
On November 09 2021 14:56 plasmidghost wrote:
For a number of reasons, I'm looking to leave the US permanently next year. The two cities I'm looking to relocate to are either Amsterdam or Brussels. I've looked into what their respective governments are like and they seem far better than what I deal with as a trans person in Texas. Is there important political and economic things I should know about relocating to the EU as an American with no citizenship or residency ties to the EU?
I think any western European big city will be a good place to be for a trans person.
I think immigration paperwork and job opportunities should be your main concerns. Every country is slightly different to enter as an American. Spain has a huge demand for English teachers, but a draconian immigration policy, for example.
|
If You can find job before moving it should be much easier. I work with many Russians/Ukrainians who first got a permit to work in Poland and after a few years of working here they got pernament residency/citizenship. Dunno if this is a thing in Western Europe though.
I also second the opinion that You should primarily think about Your financial well being. Europe can be expansive to live in.
|
Hm, I disagree with quite a few posts above me. But first let me agree with silvanel, Slydie and mahrgell that your primary concern should be the requirements for migration, which are FAR from trivial. That said, I know nothing about your professional background, if you have a degree and/or work experience in STEM, there is a big demand all over Europe, and you should be able to get a job and the other requirements fall into place fairly easy once you have a job. Medicine is another big area that a lot of countries are searching for skilled workers (especially nurses in the Netherlands).
In general, the Netherlands right now has an overheated job market with lots of vacancies and not enough people to fill them, so it's a good time to be looking.
Now for the bit where I contradict. Lets start with Yuljan who paints a rather scary picture of Amsterdam. I don't know anything about Brussels so maybe he's right about that city (I seriously doubt it tho), but Amsterdam in particular is very safe, and very liberal compared to many other places. Sure, it could be better, and transgenders are not fully accepted, but what Yuljan says is flatout scaremongering unless you walk around Bos & Lommer or the Bijlmer at night yelling to everybody that you're transgender or something. "Random" violence toward LBTQ people occurs, yes, but it is rare enough to be newspaper-worthy news when it happens.
As for Kwark, he is technically right, but misses a rather important nuance, which is that while with a residency permit in Greece you are allowed to travel to the Netherlands (or Belgium), you are not allowed to live there. To convert your national residency permit to a different country is a complicated process that is almost as strict in its requirements as applying from scratch. And without that change, you can obviously rent a flat and nobody will stop you, but you will not legally be able to work, and you will need to pay for healthcare out-of-pocket. Issues will possibly also arise with renewing your residency permit in the place where you supposedly live, depending on the type of residency permit you received. For instance, a work permit in Spain requires you to have a job in Spain for at least 6 months per year for the first few years. This doesn't really mean much, as the way they check that is by seeing that somebody is paying social security for you and there are companies that are happy to put you on the books as long as you pay them for it (plus a fee, of course), but it's an extra hassle in addition to the ones above. I highly suggest finding a way to legally move to the country of your choosing rather than trying to get into "Europe" and then moving, which sounds easy, but has all kinds of awkward hooks, some of which I am probably not even imagining as a cis white male.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
