|
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. |
he has no points.
when he says: market participants have different amounts of power over the market. this unbalance leads to unfavourable market outcomes for the parties with less power. this wouldnt be so bad if it did not also lead to a less aggregated output of the market. which means that an unsupervised market with power differentials across the participants is less effective (!) than a market with controls. i read: we came to the east, made you hate/fear the russians via propaganda(i'm not saying we loved them before, it's quite the opposite in some cases) then watched you get fucked on gas prices while we didn't because we were to important and had weight/power to still get good deals. we now use the predicament we put you in to try and squeeze Russia of more gas.
whoaaa, point taken!.
in my world he doesn't even know what a point is.
|
i did not write any of the things you said but just to give us a good laugh:
how about you summarize what i have written so far in your own words in a few sentences. i am sure its super entertaining.
and just for the record: i highly believe that you have no understanding of basic economy whatsoever, so unless you somehow show that this is not the case, you may just want to shut the fuck up about this matter.
|
sure
well the problem is you dont have external control over the global market so you need to do the next best thing, which is evening the odds. this leads to an aggregated market output that is higher than before.
well the problem for you is that you're irrelevant, have no control over anything(not even your own country) so you need to shut the fuck up and take it. this will lead to you being exploited and used as a sacrificial pawn while we play chess with the russians.
if you dont want to do it in this case, then get the fuck out of the eu because you are about to shoot yourself in the foot. we dont like guys who shoot themselves in the foot.
yes i would, if i could, i surely would ... but then i look at Greece, a country with people without feet, crawling on their elbows trying to make it through the day while you're there, watching over them and loading their guns for another round.
i don't know about you but that's a deal breaker for me. fear works, who would've thought!. (then again, look at UK; no fucks given).
also, this is politics; you talked about economics alone while i threw in a couple market related but general bashing remarks. i mocked your precious so you started a jihad. kudos.
|
|
|
ich liebe dich mein fuhrer.
User was warned for this post
|
And thus you deliver an utter historical failure.
While i can't date the timeframe of that map exactly, the large amount of Kingdoms, Dukedoms, etc... dates it far before the Nazi time. Probably before a united Germany, too. Obviously after 1692, as that date is mentioned on the map. The distinct lack of Prussia on that map would place it somewhere in the 1700s in my rough guess.
Turns out Germany has more history than just 1933-1945.
Edit: I have no idea why we are talking about this though.
|
that was symbolism dude and i have no idea either.
Edit: + Show Spoiler +he showed me his greatness and i surrendered
|
yeah it should be a map around 1700.
why i posted it is because germany at that point was a completely powerless mess of a bazillion of small states that were all utterly unimportant. they were underdeveloped, poor and of no importance whatsoever. only after they united in 1871 they started to matter historically.
its what the eu is today. none of the small states in europe has any chance of getting favourable deals with vastly superior countries because their individual power is just not enough to deal with anything. that you have to give up your independence for a better negotiation position is just part of the process. but because small players always get screwed over by bigger players all outcomes of that integration are better than the alternative of remaining by yourself when dealing with 3rd parties.
|
So apparantly greek farmers are having a strike and are blocking all trucks and sometimes cars at the Greece - Bulgaria borders. The strike is going for 2 weeks and very few trucks have gone through. Today the bulgarian truckers made counter-strike and blocked some of the Bulgaria - Greece border points lol. They are not letting any cars into Greece. Bulgarain Post stopped accepting letters for Greece :D
Maybe someone from Greece can explain why this is going on for so long and why the farmers are protesting. This is at the border:
![[image loading]](http://www.dnevnik.bg/shimg/zx450y250_2706588.jpg)
|
On February 18 2016 03:46 hfglgg wrote:
yeah it should be a map around 1700.
why i posted it is because germany at that point was a completely powerless mess of a bazillion of small states that were all utterly unimportant. they were underdeveloped, poor and of no importance whatsoever. only after they united in 1871 they started to matter historically.
its what the eu is today. none of the small states in europe has any chance of getting favourable deals with vastly superior countries because their individual power is just not enough to deal with anything. that you have to give up your independence for a better negotiation position is just part of the process. but because small players always get screwed over by bigger players all outcomes of that integration are better than the alternative of remaining by yourself when dealing with 3rd parties.
The EU as an economic union has use and potential. When they tried to become more then that it fell apart.
First Greece and then the Immigration crisis showed that the EU is utterly unable to deal with problems. And if it cannot deal with these problems then why should we keep it around?
|
because there is no other option.
going back to single, small nations will just leave the whole region weak.
there is no such thing as getting a "good deal". unless someone fucks up you always get your share according to the power you have in a negotiation and when you are small, you dont really have any power.
if you want to stay on top, you better make sure you are among the biggest and strongest players.
edit:
an economic integration also always means some level of social/cultural/political integration. it goes hand in hand and cant really be seperated.
|
There's a theory that a country cannot have have free trade, national sovereignty and democracy at the same time. Of course that's probably a load of rubbish.
|
i dont think you can have free trade (as in lowest cost for trade) and national sovereignty at the same time. not sure how democracy fits in there.
|
On February 18 2016 04:02 mdb wrote:So apparantly greek farmers are having a strike and are blocking all trucks and sometimes cars at the Greece - Bulgaria borders. The strike is going for 2 weeks and very few trucks have gone through. Today the bulgarian truckers made counter-strike and blocked some of the Bulgaria - Greece border points lol. They are not letting any cars into Greece. Bulgarain Post stopped accepting letters for Greece :D Maybe someone from Greece can explain why this is going on for so long and why the farmers are protesting. This is at the border:
from what i read last week the greek PM is trying to change the deal he negotiated with Greek lenders by replacing/scrapping a pension cut deal with a 3x tax increase on farmers proposal.
Greece debtors were letting him hang last time i read, giving him no replay on his counter proposal.
|
On February 18 2016 05:06 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2016 04:02 mdb wrote:So apparantly greek farmers are having a strike and are blocking all trucks and sometimes cars at the Greece - Bulgaria borders. The strike is going for 2 weeks and very few trucks have gone through. Today the bulgarian truckers made counter-strike and blocked some of the Bulgaria - Greece border points lol. They are not letting any cars into Greece. Bulgarain Post stopped accepting letters for Greece :D Maybe someone from Greece can explain why this is going on for so long and why the farmers are protesting. This is at the border: from what i read last week the greek PM is trying to change the deal he negotiated with Greek lenders by replacing/scrapping a pension cut deal with a 3x tax increase on farmers proposal. Greece debtors were letting him hang last time i read, giving him no replay on his counter proposal.
lol is he trying to re-negotiate again? That worked so well last time ><
|
something like http://www.brecorder.com/world/europe/278506-greek-pm-says-differences-between-lenders-delaying-bailout-review-paper.html ATHENS: Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said on Saturday that differences between the country's international lenders over its pension reform plans are delaying the first review of its latest financial bailout.
Reforming Greece's ailing pension system is a prerequisite for the conclusion of the review, which is expected to open the way for debt relief talks.
"There are differences among the lenders on Greece's pension reform that are delaying the whole process," Tsipras said without elaborating, in an interview in the newspaper "Sunday's Avgi" released on Saturday.
...
Greece is being asked to cut pension spending by 1 percent of gross domestic product this year. Athens has refused to cut pensions as part of its bailout, and says it will increase social security contributions instead.
"We have presented our proposals on the pension reform, and informed the institutions (lenders) at the beginning of January. So far we don't have their official position," Tsipras said.
|
On February 18 2016 05:20 xM(Z wrote:something like http://www.brecorder.com/world/europe/278506-greek-pm-says-differences-between-lenders-delaying-bailout-review-paper.html Show nested quote +ATHENS: Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said on Saturday that differences between the country's international lenders over its pension reform plans are delaying the first review of its latest financial bailout.
Reforming Greece's ailing pension system is a prerequisite for the conclusion of the review, which is expected to open the way for debt relief talks.
"There are differences among the lenders on Greece's pension reform that are delaying the whole process," Tsipras said without elaborating, in an interview in the newspaper "Sunday's Avgi" released on Saturday.
...
Greece is being asked to cut pension spending by 1 percent of gross domestic product this year. Athens has refused to cut pensions as part of its bailout, and says it will increase social security contributions instead.
"We have presented our proposals on the pension reform, and informed the institutions (lenders) at the beginning of January. So far we don't have their official position," Tsipras said.
facepalm.
Increasing pension contributions when large portions of your population are unemployed does not help deal with a bloated pension system.
Same shit from the same guy. How am I not surprised
|
On February 17 2016 18:24 hfglgg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2016 18:18 WhiteDog wrote:thats exactly what russia tries to do by selling their resources at different prices. they sell for below market prices, wait until the economy is depended on those prices or the infrastructure doesnt allow for third party sellers and then they can use that dependency to force their will upon the countries. see ukraine where they did exactly that. That is just untrue : Russia sell below market price for political reasons, and increase price for political reasons. Ukraine just happened to make a move that was not in Russian's interest, that's all. It's like a soccer team that gives shoes for its players. If a player switch team, it's normal that the team takes back the pair of shoes... same mechanism. you sell for a below market price because you want to get something out of it which benefits you and only you. in a free market you do that because it gives you higher earnings in the long run. on a politics level it can be something different but you sell something at a loss to gain something else in the future. selling at a loss is just something not everyone can do, so it needs to be dealt with.
In your first post you made it seem like Russia was having a "bad" behavior. Russia is in its role, it plays its game, like any other nation in the world, and it is not in its interests to have Ukraine in the NATO or in Europe, that's it.
if someone wants to sell below market price the idea behind it is that the short term losses can be dealt with. by harmonizing prices within a whole group of buyers (or products or whatever) the seller has to spent a fuck ton more to achieve the same dominant position and hopefully just goes bankrupt while doing so.
the market prevails and everyone is happy. it has nothing to do with politics but with economics and is done every day by every institutional market supervision everywhere in the world and if they dont do that your free market goes to shit quickly.
Your whole argument is based on the idea that economic and politics are two different things when they're not. Russia play both the economical and political game with no distinction, in the holist tradition (it is not an individualist society, which is one of the main reason most occidental are always kinda surprised by Russian behaviors). Put down the occidental google a little, in reality free market societies are dominant societies.
Everything is not about cost and benefit, some things are gift and counter gift - you give and force the other to give back (with no necessary equivalency, unlike the market) at one point. Break this cycle and it's war. The free market, through monetisation, is a way to pacify exchanges, by depersonnification : I buy to no one in particular (the offer in the pure and perfect competitive market has a multitude of offer, so much that I cannot know who is actually producing the goods), with money that has "no master". Refusing the free market is a way to refuse this depersonification, to abolish the economy as you view it ("disembedded" from the politics) and reaffirm the prevalency of politics (which was one of the main goal of communism).
On February 18 2016 04:38 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
There's a theory that a country cannot have have free trade, national sovereignty and democracy at the same time. Of course that's probably a load of rubbish.
You can't have a stable foreign exchange rate, free capital movement (absence of capital controls) and an independent monetary policy.
It's not rubbish, it's Mundell's impossibile trinity.
![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Impossible_trinity_diagram.svg/350px-Impossible_trinity_diagram.svg.png)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_trinity
|
What? Wow. Thanks, I didn't realise I said X but actually meant Y. You read my mind. What number am I thinking of right now? (Sarcasm)
|
On February 18 2016 06:56 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
What? Wow. Thanks, I didn't realise I said X but actually meant Y. You read my mind. What number am I thinking of right now? (Sarcasm)
Ok but... stable foreign exchange rate (so that money stays nothing but a veil, and does not impact on exchange) and free capital movement (absence of capital controls) = free market in its purest form ; and an independent monetary policy = political sovereignty / democracy.
I wasn't really trying to be insulting to you (sorry if I did) but one can indeed believe free market (in its entirety) is not compatible with democracy (which needs popular sovereignty).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.pantel-web.de/bw_mirror/maps/d1789.jpg)
