|
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 July 19 2015 00:31 lord_nibbler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Nobody could argue that from a graph. I'm arguing the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire and in opposition with the south desire - as reflected in the graphs. But even that is a stretch form your side! The poll did not ask about desires but about the satisfaction with democracy at home and abroad. Therefore people commented only on their feeling on democracy, the rest is your personal addition. They 'say' they did not like the decision making in politics because it was seen as less democratic than before. They say nothing about the decisions themselves or Germany or domination for that matter...
Datas always need interpretation, of course it's a stretch. You still can't deny the fact that there is a decrease in satisfaction in the south that is not there in the north : there must be a difference right ? Simply saying it's the crisis is pretty insufficient - if it was, then why Syriza's rise in Greece ? It is not merely the crisis, but the response to the crisis proposed by the parties in power.
There is also a problem with "domination" : in my mind, it's simply the fact that germany is ahead, has more power in europe than other countries. Seems like most of you guys sees "domination" as the idea that Germany is simply imposing everything on other european countries, which is just false. Most of our modern problems in europe also comes from the southern nations inability to produce a government that actually defend and respect the will of its people too. When such government appear (Syriza) it is just too small to do anything.
But look at Hollande, he was elected for a change of position in regard to Europe, partly, and after two month he changed his course.
|
On July 19 2015 00:33 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:31 lord_nibbler wrote:On July 19 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:
Nobody could argue that from a graph. I'm arguing the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire and in opposition with the south desire - as reflected in the graphs. But even that is a stretch form your side! The poll did not ask about desires but about the satisfaction with democracy at home and abroad. Therefore people commented only on their feeling on democracy, the rest is your personal addition. They 'say' they did not like the decision making in politics because it was seen as less democratic than before. They say nothing about the decisions themselves or Germany or domination for that matter... Datas always need interpretation, of course it's a stretch. Why 'of course'? You can interpret stuff without stretching anything. You are not forced to see every new data through the lens of your personal conviction, you know?
You still can't deny the fact that there is a decrease in satisfaction in the south that is not there in the north : there must be a difference right? I never denied anything of the sort, don't put word in my mouth when I stated with my first sentence the opposite!
|
On July 19 2015 00:33 WhiteDog wrote:
There is also a problem with "domination" : in my mind, it's simply the fact that germany is ahead, has more power in europe than other countries. Seems like most of you guys sees "domination" as the idea that Germany is simply imposing everything on other european countries, which is just false. Most of our modern problems in europe also comes from the southern nations inability to produce a government that actually defend and respect the will of its people too. When such government appear (Syriza) it is just too small to do anything.
But look at Hollande, he was elected for a change of position in regard to Europe, partly, and after two month he changed his course.
Because it is not only Germany pushing a certain style of politics on Europe, it's pretty much the majority of countries. With the exception of Schäuble's pretty tough negotiations over the last bailout Germany isn't even remotely the staunchest defender of austerity politics. Pretty much the whole East and North are taking a much more radical position. Also Hollande was pretty much forced to change his political course in France because whatever he was doing in the beginning, it clearly wasn't working. He's not the most unpopular president in France because the French people are watching too much German television.
|
On July 19 2015 00:47 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:33 WhiteDog wrote:
There is also a problem with "domination" : in my mind, it's simply the fact that germany is ahead, has more power in europe than other countries. Seems like most of you guys sees "domination" as the idea that Germany is simply imposing everything on other european countries, which is just false. Most of our modern problems in europe also comes from the southern nations inability to produce a government that actually defend and respect the will of its people too. When such government appear (Syriza) it is just too small to do anything.
But look at Hollande, he was elected for a change of position in regard to Europe, partly, and after two month he changed his course. Because it is not only Germany pushing a certain style of politics on Europe, it's pretty much the majority of countries. With the exception of Schäuble's pretty tough negotiations over the last bailout Germany isn't even remotely the staunchest defender of austerity politics. Pretty much the whole East and North are taking a much more radical position. Also Hollande was pretty much forced to change his political course in France because whatever he was doing in the beginning, it clearly wasn't working. He's not the most unpopular president in France because the French people are watching too much German television.
You're conflating governments and people. And you don't know much about Hollande's program. He hasn't done what he was elected for, that's the point (change in regard to europe, change in taxation, all those where not even started). He is the most unpopular french president because he is a liberal, we never watch german television (for real I don't know the name of the german channel, while I know about BBC and the likes).
|
On July 19 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +he's arguing that the fact that the countries that are supposedly dominated by germany and end up being less happy about their democracy shows that Germany has taken them over when really it could just be that they're less happy Untrue ? Nobody could argue that from a graph. I'm arguing the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire and in opposition with the south desire - as reflected in the graphs.
See, and the graph clearly shows that that interpretation of yours in incorrect.
If the reason for the drop was that stuff was more in accordance with the north, it should have gone up for the north in comparison to before, when it wasn't as much in accordance with the north.
Answer me this simple questin without dodging for once: If the drop in rating is related to wether the north got a bigger say than they should have, especially in 2009 like you argue, why does the north not like that? It dropped from almost 60% satisfaction with the EU to below 50% in the north in 2009.
I simply argue that the drop in general is related to being in a crisis that sucks for many people. Nothing else. It sucked less for the people in the north, thus the drop isn't as bad.
Edit: You COULD argue that it's a combination of both. The south gets both negative effects and those add up, thus having the steeper drop than the north which only had one of the two effects I guess.
|
On July 19 2015 00:59 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:he's arguing that the fact that the countries that are supposedly dominated by germany and end up being less happy about their democracy shows that Germany has taken them over when really it could just be that they're less happy Untrue ? Nobody could argue that from a graph. I'm arguing the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire and in opposition with the south desire - as reflected in the graphs. See, and the graph clearly shows that that interpretation of yours in incorrect. If the reason for the drop was that stuff was more in accordance with the north, it should have gone up for the north in comparison to before, when it wasn't as much in accordance with the north. Answer me this simple questin without dodging for once: If the drop in rating is related to wether the north got a bigger say than they should have, especially in 2009 like you argue, why does the north not like that? It dropped from almost 60% satisfaction with the EU to below 50% in the north in 2009. I simply argue that the drop in general is related to being in a crisis that sucks for many people. Nothing else. It sucked less for the people in the north, thus the drop isn't as bad. Edit: You COULD argue that it's a combination of both. The south gets both negative effects and those add up, thus having the steeper drop than the north which only had one of the two effects I guess.
The north has been growing since the crisis, why should it have negative effect ? How do you see a drop ? I see a slight increase for trust in national government.
Secondary, the north could feel distrust toward european institutions for various reasons : for exemple some german people could be lucid enough to see that the current situation is highly detrimental for Germany's future relation with european nations - as Habermas latest interview in the guardian suggest - or some might just resent europe for not doing "what should be done to finish the greek crisis" while it in fact did everything they wished for (as is oftentime suggested about greece in this topic).
Do I dodge questions because I am not answering like you want me to ? And can you stop actually misinterpreting my points and putting words in my mouth ? I never said germany had "more say" now than before in europe.
Also, if your point was somehow true, then satisfaction in Greece should not increase (crisis has worsen) - meanwhile what we see is that since syriza appeared, there is a decrease in abstention at elections (that suggest an increase in satisfaction ?). So it's clearly not the problem of the crisis, but rather the respond to the crisis by national government and parties that is in question.
|
On July 19 2015 00:59 WhiteDog wrote:
You're conflating governments and people. And you don't know much about Hollande's program. He hasn't done what he was elected for, that's the point (change in regard to europe, change in taxation, all those where not even started). He is the most unpopular french president because he is a liberal, we never watch german television (for real I don't know the name of the german channel, while I know about BBC and the likes).
But isn't it pretty likely that UMP is going to win the next election again? I haven't followed a lot of French polls but it doesn't seem like the French citizens are very sympathetic to the Greek course.
|
On July 19 2015 01:20 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:59 WhiteDog wrote:
You're conflating governments and people. And you don't know much about Hollande's program. He hasn't done what he was elected for, that's the point (change in regard to europe, change in taxation, all those where not even started). He is the most unpopular french president because he is a liberal, we never watch german television (for real I don't know the name of the german channel, while I know about BBC and the likes). But isn't it pretty likely that UMP is going to win the next election again? I haven't followed a lot of French polls but it doesn't seem like the French citizens are very sympathetic to the Greek course.
People voted PS because they resented UMP (before Hollande, Sarkozy was the most hated president), now they will vote UMP because they resent PS. No other party should be able to win, so they just don't vote for them - or maybe the FN, but too many people refuse themselves from voting FN for obvious reasons.
The FN has a way of explaining this simply : UMPS, the UMP (now the Republicans) and the PS propose the same thing.
Also, France is very diverse, but regarding Greece there are clearly two camp : one pro Greece, Tsipras / Varoufakis, and the other against, as all the poll suggest. The left has overall a very positive view on Greece - hence why Mélanchon invited Tsipras many times, and why Montebourg now invited Varoufakis in his diner "of the rose". Hollande support for Greece is also a way of reassuring the left part of France (which will not succeed because he is just hated by everybody at this point).
If you read french, a nice set of polls about french view on Tsipras :
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On July 19 2015 00:27 pretender58 wrote:Here is the source of said graphs. Following part is pretty interesting: Show nested quote +Note: groups are constructed as averages weighted by population. North=AT; BE; DE; Fi; NL; Centre=FR; IT; South=ES; GR; IE; PT meaning that Ireland (IE) is part of "south" (lol) and the lines for "north" are skewed since Germany's population is relatively big compared to the others in the same group.
So. basically the division is Germany vs Fr/It vs Spain, because if the waiting is done proportional to population, the other countries are largely drowned out. This is also roughly along lines of "not hit hard by the banking crisis", "hit moderately by banking crisis" and "almost/did have their economy toppled by the banking crisis". So gorsameth's analysis was pretty much spot on: unhappy people are unhappy. Amazing.
Whitedog trying to interpret pretty much everything, including this hackneyed graph through his ideology is pretty entertaining though. Please continue
|
On July 19 2015 01:17 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 00:59 Toadesstern wrote:On July 19 2015 00:20 WhiteDog wrote:he's arguing that the fact that the countries that are supposedly dominated by germany and end up being less happy about their democracy shows that Germany has taken them over when really it could just be that they're less happy Untrue ? Nobody could argue that from a graph. I'm arguing the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire and in opposition with the south desire - as reflected in the graphs. See, and the graph clearly shows that that interpretation of yours in incorrect. If the reason for the drop was that stuff was more in accordance with the north, it should have gone up for the north in comparison to before, when it wasn't as much in accordance with the north. Answer me this simple questin without dodging for once: If the drop in rating is related to wether the north got a bigger say than they should have, especially in 2009 like you argue, why does the north not like that? It dropped from almost 60% satisfaction with the EU to below 50% in the north in 2009. I simply argue that the drop in general is related to being in a crisis that sucks for many people. Nothing else. It sucked less for the people in the north, thus the drop isn't as bad. Edit: You COULD argue that it's a combination of both. The south gets both negative effects and those add up, thus having the steeper drop than the north which only had one of the two effects I guess. The north has been growing since the crisis, why should it have negative effect ? How do you see a drop ? I see a slight increase for trust in national government. Secondary, the north could feel distrust toward european institutions for various reasons : for exemple some german people could be lucid enough to see that the current situation is highly detrimental for Germany's future relation with european nations - as Habermas latest interview in the guardian suggest - or some might just resent europe for not doing "what should be done to finish the greek crisis" while it in fact did everything they wished for (as is oftentime suggested about greece in this topic). Do I dodge questions because I am not answering like you want me to ? And can you stop actually misinterpreting my points and putting words in my mouth ? I never said germany had "more say" now than before in europe. Also, if your point was somehow true, then satisfaction in Greece should not increase (crisis has worsen) - meanwhile what we see is that since syriza appeared, there is a decrease in abstention at elections (that suggest an increase in satisfaction ?). So it's clearly not the problem of the crisis, but rather the respond to the crisis by national government and parties that is in question.
about the drop: EU ratings have dropped:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PnMMups.png)
green+light grey: the decline from 2009 to 2014, which is being nice because 2014 is the year it went up for everyone
black+dark grey: the decline in 2009, the year you argue to be the most important
You have been arguing that the reason for the the drop in ratings is that, and I quote the decisions national government and european government made since 2007 and 2009 were in accordance with the north desire
if that's the case it should go up.
So why is the decrease in rating for the south "because they don't like that the EU has been more in accordance with the north!" and the reason for the decrease in rating in the north is "meh.. idk, it should have gone up but it didn't... strange maybe it's something else but it's totally true for the south!"
About greece: syriza has had the best approval ratings since forever in greece if you take out the last week and I'm not sure the picture is that up to date if it only includes 2014...
|
North EU rating are at 50 % in 2002 and 50 % in 2014 = no change. If you take 2009 it has dropped by 5% : not really substantial.
South at 55 in 2002, 30 % in 2014 = substantial change.
By the way, why should it go up ? If they did what was wanted, and if it overall always did what was wanted, it should not change : the same people are still satisfied (maybe they are more satisfied, but there is no degree in there).
About greece: syriza has had the best approval ratings since forever in greece if you take out the last week and I'm not sure the picture is that up to date if it only includes 2014...
Can you actually stick to what is being said ? Words have meaning ? I didn't talk about Syriza's approval rating but about abstention, that clearly went down since Syriza became a powerful force : it shows that people actually participate in the democratic game (and I suppose trust) not because of the economic situation (since it is not better in Greece now than in 2013 or 2012) but because of what parties propose.
|
On July 18 2015 23:21 WhiteDog wrote:
Funny interpretation. Why not ? Better blinding yourself than accepting reality (which is that in 2007 - and then 2009 for Europe - (exactly since the crisis) people are overall way less happy with their democracy - and that has a lot to do with the way both nations (in 2007) and the europe (in 2009) faced the crisis).
why are you talking about the trend from 2002 up to 2014 if 2002 up to either 2007 or 2009 are irrelevant for your intepretation of the issue and it only started in respectively 2007 or 2009?
about the syriza thing, I apologize for that. Misread that part in your innitial post.
|
On July 19 2015 01:50 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2015 23:21 WhiteDog wrote:
Funny interpretation. Why not ? Better blinding yourself than accepting reality (which is that in 2007 - and then 2009 for Europe - (exactly since the crisis) people are overall way less happy with their democracy - and that has a lot to do with the way both nations (in 2007) and the europe (in 2009) faced the crisis). why are you talking about the trend from 2002 up to 2014 if 2002 up to either 2007 or 2009 are irrelevant for your intepretation of the issue and it only started in respectively 2007 or 2009?
Is it a real question ?
Seems obvious to me : You know that 2007 and 2009 are important dates by comparing the trend before and after 2007 and 2009 - so from 2002 and 2014 here. From 2002 and 2007 it's stable, then it's down in the south from 2007 to 2014 but not really for the north. Since the drop in 2007 in the north only put them back to "long term" satisfaction (50%) it's just background noise. No event happened that greatly changed the vision of the north about democracy in europe.
|
but I just showed you that it does go down for the north.
|
On July 19 2015 01:56 Toadesstern wrote:
but I just showed you that it does go down for the north.
From 55 % to 50 % ? How is that relevant when the drop only put back at the average level that we see in the long run ?
By the way, how is your question actually relevant ? Seems like you're just trying to question me to no end about minor detail just because you disagree with my point. You have nothing to actually prove I'm wrong : I'm basically stating that people have less satisfaction with their democracy when they become less democratic and don't do what they want. The rise of anti european parties in all southern countries can be another proof of my point, I don't even need the graph.
|
On July 19 2015 01:57 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 01:56 Toadesstern wrote:
but I just showed you that it does go down for the north. From 55 % to 50 % ? How is that relevant when the drop only put back at the average level that we see in the long run ? By the way, how is your question actually relevant ? Seems like you're just trying to question me to no end about minor detail just because you disagree with my point. You have nothing to actually prove I'm wrong : I'm basically stating that people have less satisfaction with their democracy when they become less democratic and don't do what they want. The rise of anti european parties in all southern countries can be another proof of my point.
it's a lot more relevant if in the previous years it wasn't stable but actually increasing. So you suddenly get from an increase of rating from 2002 up to 2009 to a decrease from 2009 up to 2013.
And like I said, the north wasn't hit as hard as the south so it's only natural that the results aren't as drastic when we've had it quite good the last couple years.
It is relevant because you say:
You see in 2009 X (decrease of rating) happened in the south of europe. This is because Y (northern politics)
X (decrease in ratings) also happened in the northern part of europe but Y (northern politics) can't be the reason for it because we're IN northern europe. So it's because of something else.
Your explanation is only possible for southern europe and the line northern europe has disagrees with your explanation. You go on to say that's because of other factors you can't explain.
|
And like I said, the north wasn't hit as hard as the south so it's only natural that the results aren't as drastic when we've had it quite good the last couple years.
Has the north been hit at all ? Increase in unemployment ? recession ? None of that since 2009. It's actually the opposite.
If your explanation was somehow true (that it's the economy that dictate the satisfaction) the satisfaction should have gone up (huge decrease in unemployment for the last ten years). So why do you bother me ?
|
well, satisfaction with the own government IS in fact going up and has been going up.
|
On July 19 2015 02:02 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +And like I said, the north wasn't hit as hard as the south so it's only natural that the results aren't as drastic when we've had it quite good the last couple years. Has the north been hit at all ? Increase in unemployment ? recession ? None of that since 2009. It's actually the opposite. If your explanation was somehow true (that it's the economy that dictate the satisfaction) the satisfaction should have gone up (huge decrease in unemployment for the last ten years). So why do you bother me ?
Since qhen is the north the same as Germany? The Netherlands went trough a pretty big recession.
The rise of populist/ anti european parties is also a trend pretty mich everywhere. I.e. PVV, UKIP, AfD.
|
On July 19 2015 02:19 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2015 02:02 WhiteDog wrote:And like I said, the north wasn't hit as hard as the south so it's only natural that the results aren't as drastic when we've had it quite good the last couple years. Has the north been hit at all ? Increase in unemployment ? recession ? None of that since 2009. It's actually the opposite. If your explanation was somehow true (that it's the economy that dictate the satisfaction) the satisfaction should have gone up (huge decrease in unemployment for the last ten years). So why do you bother me ? Since qhen is the north the same as Germany? The Netherlands went trough a pretty big recession. The rise of populist/ anti european parties is also a trend pretty mich everywhere. I.e. PVV, UKIP, AfD.
AfF is very far from UKIP, Syriza of the FN. And the results are ponderated by the population.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.leparisien.fr/images/2015/07/04/4920421_sondage-alexis-tsipras-web-01-new.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/germany-unemployment-rate.png?s=gruepr&d1=20050101&d2=20151231)
