|
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 March 25 2023 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2023 23:35 Nebuchad wrote:On March 23 2023 19:21 Gorsameth wrote:On March 23 2023 19:17 Taelshin wrote:Shocked we haven't seen any post's from our euro folks about the uprest in Frace as stereotypical as it may be. + Show Spoiler +https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230323-french-unions-dig-in-after-defiant-macron-defends-pension-overhaul news link. + Show Spoiler +https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/europe/france-pension-reform-intl/index.html CNN link. its the French, what is there to talk about. They are always protesting. And the notion that they are angry about the retirement age going up when they are among the lowest in Europe means no one feels sorry for them. If the rest of us protested a little more maybe our retirement ages wouldn't be as high ^^' I appreciate that they don't just let Macron fuck them over at least. There's a beauty in that. The problem is pensions are essentially a ponzi scheme. While you are working your not paying for your future retirement, your paying for the people currently retired. And since there are more and more retirees and less and less new workers (due to smaller modern families) the entire system is simply not sustainable. You could propose just fucking over all the old people and shredding their pension, but old people actually vote so gl with that.
Your three options in order to influence the cost of the retirement system are:
- Working longer
- Lowering pensions
- Increasing the rate of the dues (I'm really sorry I've never talked about this in english this might not be the right wording).
Those three options impact different people, the 1st impacts the worker, the 2nd impacts the retiree, and the 3rd impacts the bosses.
Macron categorically refuses to change anything when it comes to the 2nd and 3rd options. Based on that, we see that this is not just an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum: it's an effort to make the system sustainable that contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not.
I think it's fair to feel fucked over based on this set of facts, especially with the added campaign lies and denial of democracy.
|
I am kind of baffled by this discussion around what is happening in France.
First, why do people think that french retirement is the lowest in the world ? Accordind to OCDE data, mean age of retirement in France is 64.5, a little ahead of the mean of 64.3 for OCDE countries.
The way the system works before the new reform is the following : to get a full pension, people need to work 43 years uninterrupted and be at least 62 years old which means that to retire with a full pension, you need to work continuously from 19 to 62. Obviously a lot of people do not start working at 19. A master degree student who start at 23 will retire at 66. As young people study longer, the retirement age will automatically rise above 65 in theext decades i believe.
Second, one might ask why all the fuss around the 62 year mark if for most people it doesnt change anything.
French people don't agree that to safeguard the pension system, only the poorest in the society will be impacted. A factory worker who start at 18 already has to work 44 years to meet the 62 mark, and now will need 46 years before retirement. No contribution from the wealthiest workers and no contribution from the wealthy old people already retired.
Thirdly, the way this reform has been conducted by Macron is totally outrageous. It is not even a standalone text, it is an amendement of the budget of the social security system which has special measure to shorten the length of the debate at the Parlement because the budget is a time-sensitive issue. The pension system reform is not a time-sensitive issue and should have been debated for more than 2 months but this has not been the case because of the trick of including it in the budget. This is already playing with the words of the constitution and not following its spirit.
Finally, the text has not even been voted by the Parlement. The governement used the 49.3 article which bypassed the Parlement. There was a "motion de censure" by the Parlement and the governement almost got removed from office by a margin of close to 5 parliamentaries (for a total of approximately 500 parliamentaries).
I am sorry if i sound vindicative but this is a big issue in France and a lot of people believe that for the sake of democracy this reform can not pass.
|
On March 25 2023 00:54 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2023 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On March 24 2023 23:35 Nebuchad wrote:On March 23 2023 19:21 Gorsameth wrote:On March 23 2023 19:17 Taelshin wrote:Shocked we haven't seen any post's from our euro folks about the uprest in Frace as stereotypical as it may be. + Show Spoiler +https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230323-french-unions-dig-in-after-defiant-macron-defends-pension-overhaul news link. + Show Spoiler +https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/europe/france-pension-reform-intl/index.html CNN link. its the French, what is there to talk about. They are always protesting. And the notion that they are angry about the retirement age going up when they are among the lowest in Europe means no one feels sorry for them. If the rest of us protested a little more maybe our retirement ages wouldn't be as high ^^' I appreciate that they don't just let Macron fuck them over at least. There's a beauty in that. The problem is pensions are essentially a ponzi scheme. While you are working your not paying for your future retirement, your paying for the people currently retired. And since there are more and more retirees and less and less new workers (due to smaller modern families) the entire system is simply not sustainable. You could propose just fucking over all the old people and shredding their pension, but old people actually vote so gl with that. Your three options in order to influence the cost of the retirement system are: - Working longer - Lowering pensions - Increasing the rate of the dues (I'm really sorry I've never talked about this in english this might not be the right wording). Those three options impact different people, the 1st impacts the worker, the 2nd impacts the retiree, and the 3rd impacts the bosses. Macron categorically refuses to change anything when it comes to the 2nd and 3rd options. Based on that, we see that this is not just an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum: it's an effort to make the system sustainable that contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not. I think it's fair to feel fucked over based on this set of facts, especially with the added campaign lies and denial of democracy.
Increasing the pension premium will be paid for by workers. There can be a difference between the one on who the tax is imposed and who ultimately bears the burden of paying the tax. For the employer a pension premium is a wage cost like any other and because of that they will always take it into account when offering you a wage. So one of a couple of things will happen: the employer offers the employee a lower wage to compensate for the higher pension premium, the employer will offer lower wage increases, or they will hire less workers.
|
On March 25 2023 00:54 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2023 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On March 24 2023 23:35 Nebuchad wrote:On March 23 2023 19:21 Gorsameth wrote:On March 23 2023 19:17 Taelshin wrote:Shocked we haven't seen any post's from our euro folks about the uprest in Frace as stereotypical as it may be. + Show Spoiler +https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230323-french-unions-dig-in-after-defiant-macron-defends-pension-overhaul news link. + Show Spoiler +https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/europe/france-pension-reform-intl/index.html CNN link. its the French, what is there to talk about. They are always protesting. And the notion that they are angry about the retirement age going up when they are among the lowest in Europe means no one feels sorry for them. If the rest of us protested a little more maybe our retirement ages wouldn't be as high ^^' I appreciate that they don't just let Macron fuck them over at least. There's a beauty in that. The problem is pensions are essentially a ponzi scheme. While you are working your not paying for your future retirement, your paying for the people currently retired. And since there are more and more retirees and less and less new workers (due to smaller modern families) the entire system is simply not sustainable. You could propose just fucking over all the old people and shredding their pension, but old people actually vote so gl with that. Your three options in order to influence the cost of the retirement system are: - Working longer - Lowering pensions - Increasing the rate of the dues (I'm really sorry I've never talked about this in english this might not be the right wording). Those three options impact different people, the 1st impacts the worker, the 2nd impacts the retiree, and the 3rd impacts the bosses. Macron categorically refuses to change anything when it comes to the 2nd and 3rd options. Based on that, we see that this is not just an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum: it's an effort to make the system sustainable that contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not. I think it's fair to feel fucked over based on this set of facts, especially with the added campaign lies and denial of democracy.
That would have been true if the average life expectancy in France hadn't gone up from around 71 in 1970 to around 82 today. That means that the average time you live as a pensioner has become around twice as long and so twice as expensive. That also means that the parameters you outlined have by default shifted toward shafting the "bosses" (a strange synecdoche for the taxpayers by the way) and the "retirees".
|
On March 28 2023 15:26 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2023 00:54 Nebuchad wrote:On March 25 2023 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On March 24 2023 23:35 Nebuchad wrote:On March 23 2023 19:21 Gorsameth wrote:On March 23 2023 19:17 Taelshin wrote:Shocked we haven't seen any post's from our euro folks about the uprest in Frace as stereotypical as it may be. + Show Spoiler +https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230323-french-unions-dig-in-after-defiant-macron-defends-pension-overhaul news link. + Show Spoiler +https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/europe/france-pension-reform-intl/index.html CNN link. its the French, what is there to talk about. They are always protesting. And the notion that they are angry about the retirement age going up when they are among the lowest in Europe means no one feels sorry for them. If the rest of us protested a little more maybe our retirement ages wouldn't be as high ^^' I appreciate that they don't just let Macron fuck them over at least. There's a beauty in that. The problem is pensions are essentially a ponzi scheme. While you are working your not paying for your future retirement, your paying for the people currently retired. And since there are more and more retirees and less and less new workers (due to smaller modern families) the entire system is simply not sustainable. You could propose just fucking over all the old people and shredding their pension, but old people actually vote so gl with that. Your three options in order to influence the cost of the retirement system are: - Working longer - Lowering pensions - Increasing the rate of the dues (I'm really sorry I've never talked about this in english this might not be the right wording). Those three options impact different people, the 1st impacts the worker, the 2nd impacts the retiree, and the 3rd impacts the bosses. Macron categorically refuses to change anything when it comes to the 2nd and 3rd options. Based on that, we see that this is not just an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum: it's an effort to make the system sustainable that contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not. I think it's fair to feel fucked over based on this set of facts, especially with the added campaign lies and denial of democracy. Increasing the pension premium will be paid for by workers. There can be a difference between the one on who the tax is imposed and who ultimately bears the burden of paying the tax. For the employer a pension premium is a wage cost like any other and because of that they will always take it into account when offering you a wage. So one of a couple of things will happen: the employer offers the employee a lower wage to compensate for the higher pension premium, the employer will offer lower wage increases, or they will hire less workers.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that this is not an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum, it contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not. You're just saying either that it's justified that the people who get fucked over do get fucked over, or that there's no way around it happening. That kind of discourse certainly wouldn't keep me off the street.
In terms of it being unavoidable, well, this is how the class war works isn't it. The capitalists do what they can to limit their costs and pay the workers as little as possible. "As little as possible" is defined by when you fight back, and here they're fighting back. I'm comfortable with all of that, everything is impossible until it isn't.
On March 28 2023 16:47 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2023 00:54 Nebuchad wrote:On March 25 2023 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On March 24 2023 23:35 Nebuchad wrote:On March 23 2023 19:21 Gorsameth wrote:On March 23 2023 19:17 Taelshin wrote:Shocked we haven't seen any post's from our euro folks about the uprest in Frace as stereotypical as it may be. + Show Spoiler +https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230323-french-unions-dig-in-after-defiant-macron-defends-pension-overhaul news link. + Show Spoiler +https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/17/europe/france-pension-reform-intl/index.html CNN link. its the French, what is there to talk about. They are always protesting. And the notion that they are angry about the retirement age going up when they are among the lowest in Europe means no one feels sorry for them. If the rest of us protested a little more maybe our retirement ages wouldn't be as high ^^' I appreciate that they don't just let Macron fuck them over at least. There's a beauty in that. The problem is pensions are essentially a ponzi scheme. While you are working your not paying for your future retirement, your paying for the people currently retired. And since there are more and more retirees and less and less new workers (due to smaller modern families) the entire system is simply not sustainable. You could propose just fucking over all the old people and shredding their pension, but old people actually vote so gl with that. Your three options in order to influence the cost of the retirement system are: - Working longer - Lowering pensions - Increasing the rate of the dues (I'm really sorry I've never talked about this in english this might not be the right wording). Those three options impact different people, the 1st impacts the worker, the 2nd impacts the retiree, and the 3rd impacts the bosses. Macron categorically refuses to change anything when it comes to the 2nd and 3rd options. Based on that, we see that this is not just an effort to make the system sustainable in a vacuum: it's an effort to make the system sustainable that contains an ideological stance about who must be impacted by the change and who must not. I think it's fair to feel fucked over based on this set of facts, especially with the added campaign lies and denial of democracy. That would have been true if the average life expectancy in France hadn't gone up from around 71 in 1970 to around 82 today. That means that the average time you live as a pensioner has become around twice as long and so twice as expensive. That also means that the parameters you outlined have by default shifted toward shafting the "bosses" (a strange synecdoche for the taxpayers by the way) and the "retirees".
As Chompy helpfully pointed out, this reform impacts people who start working at 21 years old or less, so we're talking mostly blue collar workers. The life expectancy of blue collar workers specifically is around 77 in France, while white collar workers' life expectancy did shoot up to the 85s, but those people's retirements are, as I understand it, mostly unchanged.
|
That doesn't change anything. The blue collar workers retire earlier and die younger than others; the time they spend in retirement is still twice as long as it was 40 years ago. If you don't adjust the age when people retire you'll have to lower the pensions and/or tax the people who work more.
|
On March 28 2023 20:55 Elroi wrote:
That doesn't change anything. The blue collar workers retire earlier and die younger than others; the time they spend in retirement is still twice as long as it was 40 years ago. If you don't adjust the age when people retire you'll have to lower the pensions and/or tax the people who work more.
Good thing then we as a society don't just live longer, but supposedly also produce more so we can spare more for the retirement of the workers.
|
On March 28 2023 20:55 Elroi wrote:
That doesn't change anything. The blue collar workers retire earlier and die younger than others; the time they spend in retirement is still twice as long as it was 40 years ago. If you don't adjust the age when people retire you'll have to lower the pensions and/or tax the people who work more.
How could it possibly not change anything? You're introducing life expectancy as an important factor in the discussion on pensions, but the fact that the reform primarily targets the group that has the lower life expectancy doesn't change anything?
|
On March 28 2023 21:00 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2023 20:55 Elroi wrote:
That doesn't change anything. The blue collar workers retire earlier and die younger than others; the time they spend in retirement is still twice as long as it was 40 years ago. If you don't adjust the age when people retire you'll have to lower the pensions and/or tax the people who work more. How could it possibly not change anything? You're introducing life expectancy as an important factor in the discussion on pensions, but the fact that the reform primarily targets the group that has the lower life expectancy doesn't change anything?
Life expectancy in general is irrelevant anyway. You need to compare life expectancy among 62-year-olds, not "everybody", and also not blue collar workers in general. The OECD researched this: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/pension_glance-2011-5-en.pdf?expires=1680011661&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=909D3A629D6F0E3931C0060B60CEC858
Basically, life expectance at pension age (they take 60 and 65 as baselines, and then look explicitly at life expectancy at pensionable age over time in a bunch of countries). Basically "life beyond pension has been going up steadily for a long time now. And in France in particular, it shot up in the 1980s when they lowered the pensionable age from 65 to 60.
Whether or not raising it is justified, I do agree that Macron forcing it through is going to harm the democratic insitutions of France, further empower the far right and just cause an all-around clusterfuck.
|
Anyone's got a good summary of Macron's recent speeches/interviews on Taiwan etc.? There's been a lot of controversy surrounding them. I was wondering how much of it is just the media stirring shit.
From the way it's been reported, my impressions can be summed up as:
- We need more strategic autonomy...
- Yes!
- ...to do the wrong thing.
- ;o
|
On April 12 2023 03:25 maybenexttime wrote:
Anyone's got a good summary of Macron's recent speeches/interviews on Taiwan etc.? There's been a lot of controversy surrounding them. I was wondering how much of it is just the media stirring shit.
From the way it's been reported, my impressions can be summed up as:
- We need more strategic autonomy...
- Yes!
- ...to do the wrong thing.
- ;o
Eh, It seems like a lot of chafing under the weight of American hegemony. They're still mad over the AUKUS sub deal but in general you can understand Europe not wanting the US to dictate policy to them. The US would welcome a more equal security partnership but its hard to not see how hard the US is flexing in its ability to ship modern tanks to capture new markets in Europe and the world by encouraging the existing leopards to be shipped first to Ukraine. the F-35 becoming the only real option for top line aircraft, Javelins becoming a deified piece of equipment on the modern battlefield, and the reality of needing to lean on American logistics for any conflict.
Macron has been taking a lot of L's recently and needs something to tide over the rioting masses. Appealing to nationalism, Europium, or whatever is an easy way to rally support.
|
On April 12 2023 03:25 maybenexttime wrote:
Anyone's got a good summary of Macron's recent speeches/interviews on Taiwan etc.? There's been a lot of controversy surrounding them. I was wondering how much of it is just the media stirring shit.
From the way it's been reported, my impressions can be summed up as:
- We need more strategic autonomy...
- Yes!
- ...to do the wrong thing.
- ;o
This is the quote from www.politico.eu that is generating so much controversy:
The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction,
Seems to me like he's calling for Europe to develop its own strategy (strategic autonomy) and to try to keep a cool head to prevent the Taiwan crisis from escalating. He is also calling out Chinese overreaction for a reason. Personally, the controversy feels like an overreaction. The mistake that he made is doing it while on a trip to China which plays into China's hands since China is clearly trying to drive a wedge between the US and EU.
|
On April 12 2023 15:42 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2023 03:25 maybenexttime wrote:
Anyone's got a good summary of Macron's recent speeches/interviews on Taiwan etc.? There's been a lot of controversy surrounding them. I was wondering how much of it is just the media stirring shit.
From the way it's been reported, my impressions can be summed up as:
- We need more strategic autonomy...
- Yes!
- ...to do the wrong thing.
- ;o This is the quote from www.politico.eu that is generating so much controversy: Show nested quote +The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction, Seems to me like he's calling for Europe to develop its own strategy (strategic autonomy) and to try to keep a cool head to prevent the Taiwan crisis from escalating. He is also calling out Chinese overreaction for a reason. Personally, the controversy feels like an overreaction. The mistake that he made is doing it while on a trip to China which plays into China's hands since China is clearly trying to drive a wedge between the US and EU. And his statements will naturally be taken in the context of his previous comments about leaving Russia a road to claim a win in Ukraine to move towards peace.
A leader currently known for trying to appease Russia talking about not being to hasty in Taiwan on a trip to China makes it very easy to assume he is talking about letting China have its way.
Either Macron is being completely tone death and ignoring all the advise around him or he needs to get rid of whoever is telling him these moves are good ideas because he is walking from blunder to blunder.
|
But I've read on Reddit that Politico made up/twisted some of this stuff. Allegedly, the interview was attended by journalists from other organisations, who do not corroborate Politico's claims.
At the same time, Macron recently said (was that during his speech in the Hague?) that, in the context of Taiwan, the EU needs to choose its own allies and not do the US's bidding. I find that really puzzling because we are allied with the democratic countries against a semi-coherent bloc of autocratic countries. Who are we supposed to side with in this confrontation if not the former?
|
He more or less said Europe should have their own policy regarding Taiwan instead of following America's lead. It was less about finding new allies and more about distancing from allegedly inflammatory actions of the US.
The context makes it very easy to make it look like he wants to continue developing relations with China and ignore its wrongdoings as long as they don't harm European interests directly.
|
On April 12 2023 17:36 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2023 15:42 RvB wrote:On April 12 2023 03:25 maybenexttime wrote:
Anyone's got a good summary of Macron's recent speeches/interviews on Taiwan etc.? There's been a lot of controversy surrounding them. I was wondering how much of it is just the media stirring shit.
From the way it's been reported, my impressions can be summed up as:
- We need more strategic autonomy...
- Yes!
- ...to do the wrong thing.
- ;o This is the quote from www.politico.eu that is generating so much controversy: The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction, Seems to me like he's calling for Europe to develop its own strategy (strategic autonomy) and to try to keep a cool head to prevent the Taiwan crisis from escalating. He is also calling out Chinese overreaction for a reason. Personally, the controversy feels like an overreaction. The mistake that he made is doing it while on a trip to China which plays into China's hands since China is clearly trying to drive a wedge between the US and EU. And his statements will naturally be taken in the context of his previous comments about leaving Russia a road to claim a win in Ukraine to move towards peace. A leader currently known for trying to appease Russia talking about not being to hasty in Taiwan on a trip to China makes it very easy to assume he is talking about letting China have its way. Either Macron is being completely tone death and ignoring all the advise around him or he needs to get rid of whoever is telling him these moves are good ideas because he is walking from blunder to blunder.
Cherry picking one quote is not the same as providing context. Not humuliating is also not the same as giving Russia a win. In the context of Taiwan France is one of the few countries with freedom of navigation missions in the south china sea and Taiwan strait, cooperate with the US for their free and open indo-pacific strategy, and sells arms to Taiwan. I do not agree with the framing that Macron (or France) is an appeaser to authoritarian states.
edit: In practise the military role Europe will play in any potential China - Taiwan conflict will be limited anyway. We cannot even provide sufficient support to Ukraine let alone project force into the pacific.
|
Looks like we're stuck with "soft" dictatorship in NATO and Sweden out of NATO. Turkey, I am dissapoint.
Erdogan wins election - Supreme Election CouncilRecep Tayyip Erdogan has won the presidential run-off and has been re-elected as Turkish president, according to the head of Turkey's Supreme Election Council (YSK). YSK Chairman Ahmet Yener officially announced the election results, stating that Erdogan was elected as the new president with 52.14% of the votes. "Even if all of the results that have not been entered into the system yet go to a presidential candidate, the results will not change." https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-65686238
|
I cannot comprehend how a majority of Turks still vote for him. You would think that trashing the economy makes him unpopular but apparently not.
|
It's not just the economy. Tens of thousands of people died in the earthquake because his cronies wanted to line their pockets by ignoring the anti-earthquake safety regulations.
|
But he controls the press. So a lot of information a lot of turks get is only exactly what Erdogan wants them to hear.
As it turns out, fair elections are not enough for a real democracy. Without fair information, the democracy is still a sham even if no ballots are stuffed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
