|
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 Ireland27206 Posts
On November 27 2023 22:46 RvB wrote:
Even more anti Islam than usual. For the rest it's standard far right. Out of EU, no euro, climate change is not important, etc. The mistake of the other parties is that the election was too much about immigration. E.g. many parties pointed to the immigration as a big cause of the housing crisis. That's a subject you're never winning since less immigration has been their primary stand point since the founding of the PVV.
I think centre parties are forever losing on that issue because they’ll indulge in the rhetoric, but never actually tackle immigration levels because well, it’s not a good idea.
Least in the UK our health service to pick one sector is hugely reliant on immigrants, if one was to actually tackle immigration numbers you’ll add more problems to the health service, which is hardly going to be popular either.
The right wing parties have the bona fides on this issue with the demographics that it appeals to, it feels a fool’s errand to take them on on their strongest ground. To (unfortunately) paraphrase Jean Marie le Pen on this exact thing, ‘People always go for the original’.
I’m unsure of the Dutch situation re housing and how that’s structured, can immigration be fairly labelled the main cause of problems in that sector? In the U.K. I’d consider it quite far down a list, below some much more structural problems, as well as consistent failures in government policies over the decades.
|
On November 28 2023 06:00 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2023 22:46 RvB wrote:
Even more anti Islam than usual. For the rest it's standard far right. Out of EU, no euro, climate change is not important, etc. The mistake of the other parties is that the election was too much about immigration. E.g. many parties pointed to the immigration as a big cause of the housing crisis. That's a subject you're never winning since less immigration has been their primary stand point since the founding of the PVV. I think centre parties are forever losing on that issue because they’ll indulge in the rhetoric, but never actually tackle immigration levels because well, it’s not a good idea. Least in the UK our health service to pick one sector is hugely reliant on immigrants, if one was to actually tackle immigration numbers you’ll add more problems to the health service, which is hardly going to be popular either. The right wing parties have the bona fides on this issue with the demographics that it appeals to, it feels a fool’s errand to take them on on their strongest ground. To (unfortunately) paraphrase Jean Marie le Pen on this exact thing, ‘People always go for the original’. I’m unsure of the Dutch situation re housing and how that’s structured, can immigration be fairly labelled the main cause of problems in that sector? In the U.K. I’d consider it quite far down a list, below some much more structural problems, as well as consistent failures in government policies over the decades. We are a tiny tiny country, Everything is either already build up, farm land or protected nature. Just finding a place where you can actually build is a major problem for basically every city and town. Add to that a paralyzing nitrogen crisis (to much nitrogen output from industry + livestock threatening protected nature areas (see way to small country where everything is near everything else) means we need to actually budget nitrogen output from construction works) has seriously halted housing construction.
And as many first world countries the Netherlands barely has a positive natural growth or even a negative growth in recent years.
In 2022, international migration (immigration minus emigration) accounted for 223,798 more inhabitants, while natural growth (births minus deaths) accounted for -2,608.
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/visualisations/dashboard-population/population-dynamics/population-growth
So the biggest need for more housing comes from immigration, not births. As young adults try to enter a housing market with prohibitively high prices (The average purchase price of residential property was 89k in 1995 and its now 423k in 2023)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/593642/average-purchase-price-of-dwellings-in-the-netherlands/
Its easy to point to immigrants taking houses that 'should' have gone to native citizens instead.
|
On November 28 2023 06:00 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2023 22:46 RvB wrote:
Even more anti Islam than usual. For the rest it's standard far right. Out of EU, no euro, climate change is not important, etc. The mistake of the other parties is that the election was too much about immigration. E.g. many parties pointed to the immigration as a big cause of the housing crisis. That's a subject you're never winning since less immigration has been their primary stand point since the founding of the PVV. I think centre parties are forever losing on that issue because they’ll indulge in the rhetoric, but never actually tackle immigration levels because well, it’s not a good idea. Least in the UK our health service to pick one sector is hugely reliant on immigrants, if one was to actually tackle immigration numbers you’ll add more problems to the health service, which is hardly going to be popular either. The right wing parties have the bona fides on this issue with the demographics that it appeals to, it feels a fool’s errand to take them on on their strongest ground. To (unfortunately) paraphrase Jean Marie le Pen on this exact thing, ‘People always go for the original’. I’m unsure of the Dutch situation re housing and how that’s structured, can immigration be fairly labelled the main cause of problems in that sector? In the U.K. I’d consider it quite far down a list, below some much more structural problems, as well as consistent failures in government policies over the decades.
PVV doesn't actually have any policies to solve the issue either. Yeah, they want to close the borders, but they also want to enact economic policies to create a lot more jobs, in a country with effectively no unemployment. So on the one hand, they don't want people entering legally. On the other, they create all the economic conditions for companies to really want to hire foreigners and foreigners to really come and get those jobs. It's basically the 1970s all over again.
|
On November 29 2023 03:52 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2023 06:00 WombaT wrote:On November 27 2023 22:46 RvB wrote:
Even more anti Islam than usual. For the rest it's standard far right. Out of EU, no euro, climate change is not important, etc. The mistake of the other parties is that the election was too much about immigration. E.g. many parties pointed to the immigration as a big cause of the housing crisis. That's a subject you're never winning since less immigration has been their primary stand point since the founding of the PVV. I think centre parties are forever losing on that issue because they’ll indulge in the rhetoric, but never actually tackle immigration levels because well, it’s not a good idea. Least in the UK our health service to pick one sector is hugely reliant on immigrants, if one was to actually tackle immigration numbers you’ll add more problems to the health service, which is hardly going to be popular either. The right wing parties have the bona fides on this issue with the demographics that it appeals to, it feels a fool’s errand to take them on on their strongest ground. To (unfortunately) paraphrase Jean Marie le Pen on this exact thing, ‘People always go for the original’. I’m unsure of the Dutch situation re housing and how that’s structured, can immigration be fairly labelled the main cause of problems in that sector? In the U.K. I’d consider it quite far down a list, below some much more structural problems, as well as consistent failures in government policies over the decades. PVV doesn't actually have any policies to solve the issue either. Yeah, they want to close the borders, but they also want to enact economic policies to create a lot more jobs, in a country with effectively no unemployment. So on the one hand, they don't want people entering legally. On the other, they create all the economic conditions for companies to really want to hire foreigners and foreigners to really come and get those jobs. It's basically the 1970s all over again.
That's the trick. Rightwingers don't need solutions. They just need to say "immigrants bad, send all of them away, shoot them, mine the border". That none of that is reasonable, solves any problems, lawful, or is even going to happen i utterly irrelevant.
|
Exactly, the people who vote for populists aren't checking what detailed solutions the party offers, or how viable those solutions are and their long term impacts. They just want to hear their problems will magically go away.
|
On November 29 2023 04:46 Gorsameth wrote:
Exactly, the people who vote for populists aren't checking what detailed solutions the party offers, or how viable those solutions are and their long term impacts. They just want to hear their problems will magically go away.
I don't think it's quite that easy.
Back when there were real debates (pre 90's at least) most parties would agree on what was a problem, or at least entertain the notion that something could be a problem. Then there would be some kind of consensus on how to measure that problem. THEN there would be a debate on which solution (usually radically different like lower taxes/more social spending) would best solve it.
These days it seems that most parties have realised it's much easier to just frame the problem the way they like, with the measurements they want. Sometimes they can't even agree that it is a problem, and if they can never on how big it is.
This way they can just talk past each other at all times. While it would seem easier for voters when the viewpoints are extremely far apart is actually very divisive and difficult since the general debate gets so muddled.
You then get the problem with issue "ownership" when one party has consistently been saying something is a problem for ages (probably longer than it actually was a problem but who cares we framed it that way). And other parties initially didn't even concede it was a problem and are now trying to frame it their way and offer solutions.
It's already set in peoples minds, and if they were "right" about the problem surely they must be right about the solution too?
If there had been a proper debate taking every topic seriously from the start and pushing for consensus on how to frame and measure it I don't think we would have the problems with populism that we see today.
|
Northern Ireland27206 Posts
On November 29 2023 05:17 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2023 04:46 Gorsameth wrote:
Exactly, the people who vote for populists aren't checking what detailed solutions the party offers, or how viable those solutions are and their long term impacts. They just want to hear their problems will magically go away. I don't think it's quite that easy. Back when there were real debates (pre 90's at least) most parties would agree on what was a problem, or at least entertain the notion that something could be a problem. Then there would be some kind of consensus on how to measure that problem. THEN there would be a debate on which solution (usually radically different like lower taxes/more social spending) would best solve it. These days it seems that most parties have realised it's much easier to just frame the problem the way they like, with the measurements they want. Sometimes they can't even agree that it is a problem, and if they can never on how big it is. This way they can just talk past each other at all times. While it would seem easier for voters when the viewpoints are extremely far apart is actually very divisive and difficult since the general debate gets so muddled. You then get the problem with issue "ownership" when one party has consistently been saying something is a problem for ages (probably longer than it actually was a problem but who cares we framed it that way). And other parties initially didn't even concede it was a problem and are now trying to frame it their way and offer solutions. It's already set in peoples minds, and if they were "right" about the problem surely they must be right about the solution too? If there had been a proper debate taking every topic seriously from the start and pushing for consensus on how to frame and measure it I don't think we would have the problems with populism that we see today.
That tracks, I wonder if it’s as simple to the thorough changing of the media landscape in the last few decades.
Housing would be a great example of something that’s clearly been an issue, and a big one for quite some time, but very rarely are proper debates between parties, or real detailed party policy prescriptions occurring around the issue. The right tend to use it as a pivot to go straight to the immigration topic, and the left pay some lip service but IMO aren’t as forceful as they could be. Least in the UK anyway.
Down in Dublin housing prices are fast past crippling too and there seems that similar inertia there too, although I’m not as familiar with it
|
I have a question for posters living in countries where gendered languages are used. Do your languages have feminine forms for words like "minister" or "president"? Are they used in normal convesations?
Asking because lots of people started using the feminine form of the word "minister" ("ministra") in Poland after the recent government change and I'm curious if it's more like a norm or exception in gendered languages.
|
On February 02 2024 01:52 Sent. wrote:
I have a question for posters living in countries where gendered languages are used. Do your languages have feminine forms for words like "minister" or "president"? Are they used in normal convesations?
Asking because lots of people started using the feminine form of the word "minister" ("ministra") in Poland after the recent government change and I'm curious if it's more like a norm or exception in gendered languages.
French can feminize president and minister. French actually has the opposite problem, where there are some random words that don't feminize, like "member" and "clown", but most people aren't aware that they don't. In obituaries there's often "membre active" for a woman who was an active member of whatever society, so we change it to "membre actif", and sometimes we get angry mail after publication because people think we made a mistake ^o^
|
On February 02 2024 01:52 Sent. wrote:
I have a question for posters living in countries where gendered languages are used. Do your languages have feminine forms for words like "minister" or "president"? Are they used in normal convesations?
Asking because lots of people started using the feminine form of the word "minister" ("ministra") in Poland after the recent government change and I'm curious if it's more like a norm or exception in gendered languages.
German has feminine forms for basically everything. You just need to add "-in" to the word, and it usualyl works. "Ministerin" and "Präsidentin" definitively exist, and i would use them when talking about a female minister or president. I think for some rare positions the female form may not be used, but i cannot come up with an example off the top of my head.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
Funny enough, Clown is probably also one that can't be feminine in German  Clownin? I don't think so.
|
On February 02 2024 01:52 Sent. wrote:
I have a question for posters living in countries where gendered languages are used. Do your languages have feminine forms for words like "minister" or "president"? Are they used in normal convesations?
Asking because lots of people started using the feminine form of the word "minister" ("ministra") in Poland after the recent government change and I'm curious if it's more like a norm or exception in gendered languages.
In portuguese some words do and some words don't, usually depending on what the last letter is. For example, "minister" does (ministro/ministra), "boss" doesn't (chefe) and some traditionally don't get gendered but are gendered as a political point like "president" (presidente/presidenta).
|
On February 02 2024 01:52 Sent. wrote:
I have a question for posters living in countries where gendered languages are used. Do your languages have feminine forms for words like "minister" or "president"? Are they used in normal convesations?
Asking because lots of people started using the feminine form of the word "minister" ("ministra") in Poland after the recent government change and I'm curious if it's more like a norm or exception in gendered languages.
"Ministra" is so weird and unnatural. Doesn't sound like a word from the Polish language. It should be "ministerka" if anything. I hope this abomination dies a swift death.
|
I mean, minister is a borrowed word in the first place in any non-latin language. It's normal it won't behave properly if declinating.
Spanish is much the same as Portuguese and French. Most professions are very naturally extended for gender. That includes clown, btw. Payasa sounds weird to me, but according to the RAE it is the correct female version for payaso. A lot comes down to usage. Clown is not a word I use very often, and the gender neutral term is usually to just use the male word. So overall the only times I'd use payasa is if explicitly referring to a female clown... which I haven't done enough for the word to sound familiar. Give it time and practice. Pretty sure the same will go for ministra in Polish!
|
I don't want to go into detailed linquistic discussion, especially with someone not familiar with Polish... But You need to understand that we are talking about different languages. Polish has different traditions and rules.
1. There are very few worlds that end with -ra in Polish.
2. Most femele professions names are created by adding -ka at the end, not -a.
3. It sounds foreign and unnatural (becuase its a direct copy from latin)
4. Its lazy. Female denominator will sound exactly the same as male genitive.
5. Its one thing when word is borrowed from other lnaguge by linquistic practice, but when You create new world concisely You should localize it (at least thats a rule in Polish).
The proper feminative from minister should be minister-ka. As I mentioned above. Don't pollute polish with direct copies from latin. Its not middle ages.
|
The fierce resistance to introducing this awkward word to Polish was one of the reasons why I got curious about the term's evolution in other languages. I'm not a fan of how "ministra" sounds but I think I can get used to it.
|
Won't people just start using ministerka if it's more natural?
|
It might make more sense linguistically but to me it sounds like something you'd use to describe a little girl trying to act like a real minister.
|
Well. I don't have that feeling. It is a fine word for me. But perhaps thats due to the fact that I am an aspiring writer and already given some thought to various feminatives and their use in Polish.
@Nebuchad
I am convinced that given time "ministerka" will win. Unless of course "ministra" is written into law and used in official documents. The whole afair started because one of our female ministers refered to herself as ministra. Pehaps due to the same resentment as Sent iindicated. She might feel inclined to force the issue.
|
The German Bundestag ratified the first draft of the CanG with a 407 to 226 vote today, which will decriminalize possession of cannabis, to grow your own and to found clubs for community growing under certain conditions. It's supposed to come into effect on April 1st this year.
Solid majority, surprisingly uncapitalistic, just wow. Just read the reasoning and a couple of paragraphs. It's 183 pages of bureaucracy and nothing has been finalized yet.
Timeline is pretty unrealistic, because we don't know how the countries of the federation will handle it. Federal council can block but not prevent. I'm keeping my feet still until they change the method of testing for your drivers license, but it's a great start and i'm pretty optimistic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
