EPTNo, only when they vote for pro refugee, non extremist leftists in a FPTP system.
European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 416
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
dismiss
United Kingdom3341 Posts
No, only when they vote for pro refugee, non extremist leftists in a FPTP system. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On February 03 2016 07:14 Nyxisto wrote: Seriously though, the whole right-wing movement is a pretty huge sausage fest, which is ironic given that young men seem to be their primary concern at the moment Women voting for the national front are rising quite fast, and marine, while quite manly, is still a woman. | ||
|
dismiss
United Kingdom3341 Posts
On February 03 2016 07:14 Nyxisto wrote: Seriously though, the whole right-wing movement is a pretty huge sausage fest, which is ironic given that young men seem to be their primary concern at the moment I can't tell which of the 2 conservative parties in Germany led by women you mean. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
there is a fair number of people among the nonsensical share of leftists and liberals that follow the idea of "everyone is equal" instead of the more reasonable "everyone is born equal". but well, reality is not for everyone. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10937 Posts
| ||
|
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
| ||
|
Reivax
Sweden214 Posts
A caveat with these statistics is that they are A) preliminary and B) 2014 apparently had an outlier regarding the rapes. PDF for the Swedish-speaking: http://bra.se/webdav/files/statistik/pdf/Sammanfattning_anmalda_prel_helar_2015.pdf Other notable numbers: Crimes reported in total is up 4%. Crimes versus individuals are practically unchanged (battery is an outlier here, +2% increase total, with battery of children 15-17 being +19% and 0-14 +6%). The bulk of the increase is defacement of public areas and computer fraud. Thefts are slightly down overall (-2%). All numbers are raw numbers, comparing 2014 to 2015 and not weighted by population increase, which was +1,04%. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6305 Posts
The head of the European Council, Donald Tusk, unveiled on Tuesday a draft reform package to help keep Britain in the EU following meetings between Prime Minister David Cameron and top EU officials. The following are key points of the proposal that will be discussed by EU envoys on Friday and which could form the basis of a deal with Britain at a summit on Feb 18-19. STARTING POINT The proposal is just the starting point for negotiations, which top officials expect will last until the very last minute. In anticipation of difficulties, no time limit has been set for the talks on the second day of the EU summit on Feb. 19. Nothing is agreed until everything is. A deal, needing all 28 national leaders' assent, could pave the way for a referendum as early as June. An impasse would probably spell more talks. The EU sees its proposals as legally watertight, safe from challenges in court and not requiring amendments to treaties now - something hard to pull off quickly across all 28 EU states. On some issues, Tusk has raised the possibility of the treaties being amended later to incorporate the substance, if not the exact language, of the proposals unveiled on Tuesday. MIGRATION Cameron wants to discourage other Europeans from coming to Britain by excluding them from the tax credits, child allowances and other non-contributory social benefits attached to low-paid British jobs for at least four years. Without changing EU treaties guaranteeing free movement of labour and barring national discrimination, the EU proposed an "emergency brake", limiting those fundamental rights where vital national interests or economic stability are at risk. Legislation to be drawn up by the European Commission is to give any state the right to curb in-work benefits for up to four years. This would hinge on the consent of a qualified majority of other European governments if there is an exceptional inflow of workers from elsewhere in the EU. Allowances for children that EU migrant workers send back to their home countries are to be indexed with purchasing power parity. This would effectively make payouts for children smaller in poorer member states such as Poland. EURO ZONE Cameron wants more legal safeguards for Britain's sterling-based economy and big financial industry from a risk of the euro zone countries writing EU rules to suit them. The EU said on Tuesday that no British company or citizen would face discrimination because they use the pound as a currency -- a safeguard for the City of London that it will not be left outside any EU financial projects because Britain is not, and does not plan to become, a member of the euro zone. The EU is also offering Britain a way to slow down euro zone legislation that it does not like, although it is careful not to offer London any veto rights on euro zone decision-making. NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY Cameron wants assurances that Britain need not hand more power to Brussels and to enhance the say of nation states within the EU. The Tusk package explicitly states: "It is recognised that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the Treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union." The EU also offers to allow a simple majority of national parliaments - each of which has two votes, regardless of size - to stop legislative proposals from the Commission. COMPETITIVENESS The least contentious area of Cameron's four reform "baskets", calling for less red tape and more economic dynamism has broad backing so a set of declarations will echo EU policy, but with elements to show Britain that Brussels is listening. The Tusk package endorses all that. uk.reuters.com | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On February 03 2016 15:59 hfglgg wrote: the reasons why feminists try to ignore cologne as much as possible is because it doesnt fit into their worldview. there is a fair number of people among the nonsensical share of leftists and liberals that follow the idea of "everyone is equal" instead of the more reasonable "everyone is born equal". but well, reality is not for everyone. I believe everyone is equal, it does not mean that people are not different, and that some society does not view equality as a value. | ||
|
rotta
5634 Posts
On February 03 2016 20:25 WhiteDog wrote: I believe everyone is equal, it does not mean that people are not different, and that some society does not view equality as a value. Do you believe all beliefs are equal? | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
What do you mean by equal ? Morally equal ? Equally valuable ? My beliefs are superior, to me. There's no objectivity in judging beliefs, but shared beliefs in a society is what makes our society, and for that they should be defended, as it is the society that is defended through them. If any belief defended by islam or any other faith contredict the values on which our society is built upon, then they should be fought against (and either eradicated or reformed), it's as simple as that. I have no objective way to state that the cast system in india, as a set of values that acknowledge hierarchy and spirituality as guidance for the daily life, is necessarily inferior to the democratic values of equality, individualism and freedom. It does not mean that I wish to live in a society ruled by anything similar to a cast system nor that I find their values equal to mine. | ||
|
trulojucreathrma.com
United States327 Posts
Really? If all people inferior to me would lose the right to vote, there wouldn't be many left. The point is that certain leftist pro democracy intellectuals fervently defend the rights of the stupid and the ignorant. How are they ever going to be enlightened when we put them in 'stupid camps'? Yet right-wing icon and klepto-Fascist (argued for, and defended the use of chemical weapons against civilians, to deliberately try to kill as many as possible) Churchill would tell you that the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. You need just 5 seconds with someone of the likes of Churchill to know you are better off putting the next idiot on the street in power. As long as all the other idiots can vote him/her away in 4 years. In the end, you get the leader you deserve. When US elects Trump, they get what they deserve. When a clone of Gaddafi and Idi Amin gets into power in China and destroys all economic progress made the last two decades and regress even more on human rights, the Chinese are fucked but they didn't get what they deserved. And it doesn't end in four years. It can go on for 4 times 4 generations, or longer. They are going to put their kid in power and dictator kids are always worse than their fathers (mothers?). It is going to happen. Lot's of crazy rich kids completely out of whack now growing up in China. One of them is going to become the next dictator. Give that person either really low, or worse, really high IQ, a personality disorder, a mean streak and some bad rolls of the dice, and it is going to be a disaster. Imagine what is happening in Syria now but then on the scale of China. Or worse, people just accept it mindlessly and it will be one big North Korea. Then let's hear all those benevolent dictator supporters.Citizens can't trade away their human rights for economic progress. It will always fail. People are equal. Yet opinions can be inferior. Just as many extreme left intellectuals would admit people 2000 years ago in the west of 4000 km to the east today have inferior world views. Doesn't mean people aren't equal People have the right to be wrong. If they don't have the right to be wrong, how can they ever be right? If there is an objective standard or if it is all opinion, there you can have a nice philosophical debate. I can have that one with WhiteDog, as we seem to disagree there. Having it with most people here on TL would be pointless though. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
There is a system of preselection, before any kind of democratic process and the state is not a pure mean of coordination, it is an institution that is supposed to coordinate the action of people in a democracy, but that has its own will and that needs to be throughfully reformed and watched to prevent the creation of a political class, affiliated with the dominant, and that defend the dominant - something we obviously failed to do. Trump is more an exemple of people rejecting the "normal" way our democratic institutions function rather than what people want and deserve. | ||
|
trulojucreathrma.com
United States327 Posts
That's exactly why we need more pure democracy, so people get more what they deserve and the argument actually works. Just to contrast it with dictatorships. Peoples getting what they deserve, even if it is bad, is what we want. Only then the good can come out, if we are worthy of it. But at least people in the US can go into the streets and they won't get shot or killed (or will they). But they don't. So even if it is just too bothersome to get what they deserve, they kind of can, but won't. To have a perfect system handed to you on a silver plate, and to just apathetically sit there and have it stay the perfectly pure democracy, that's also not how it works. And that is also why we have the rights we have. Because our ancestors weren't apathetic. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
On February 03 2016 15:59 hfglgg wrote: that follow the idea of "everyone is equal" instead of the more reasonable "everyone is born equal". but well, reality is not for everyone. QFT. | ||
|
lord_nibbler
Germany591 Posts
On February 03 2016 15:59 hfglgg wrote: the reasons why feminists try to ignore cologne as much as possible is because it doesnt fit into their worldview. there is a fair number of people among the nonsensical share of leftists and liberals that follow the idea of "everyone is equal" instead of the more reasonable "everyone is born equal". but well, reality is not for everyone. Because I hear these claims a lot from you and others, I would like you to give me a concrete proof of them. Where does 'the left' and feminist in particular ignore cologne? There has not been a day in the last 4 weeks were there was not an article about cologne in the papers and online. I can not think of any recent event, that was as long and as much discussed in recent history. Almost everybody has commented on it. How can you claim that anybody is ignoring this topic? Also, the second claim seems very questionable as well. I in my life have never met a single person that believed that "everyone is equal". Not even the most hard-core communists have ever claimed that. But maybe I was just unlucky, so please give me at least one quote from some known 'lefty'. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
On February 03 2016 23:57 trulojucreathrma.com wrote: Sure, all democracies, or so-called democracies, are flawed. So it's not really true. But at least the trend is there. That's exactly why we need more pure democracy, so people get more what they deserve and the argument actually works. Just to contrast it with dictatorships. Peoples getting what they deserve, even if it is bad, is what we want. Only then the good can come out, if we are worthy of it. But at least people in the US can go into the streets and they won't get shot or killed (or will they). But they don't. So even if it is just too bothersome to get what they deserve, they kind of can, but won't. To have a perfect system handed to you on a silver plate, and to just apathetically sit there and have it stay the perfectly pure democracy, that's also not how it works. And that is also why we have the rights we have. Because our ancestors weren't apathetic. The problem with pure democracy is that people get what they deserve, and the average citizen deserves a life that is nasty, brutish, and short....The French didn't "deserve" Napleon's enlightened despotism, they "deserved" the mob rule of the terror. Fortunately they figured out that they did not want to get what they "deserved" so they limited their democracy. Pure democracy is a bad idea, it is actually worse than some other forms of government such as limited democracy... which is not as terrible as any other form of government. Now some limited democracies may need more democracy, some need less, but pure democracies are a very very bad idea. | ||
| ||
