|
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. |
U.S. authorities have asked the German carmaker Volkswagen to produce electric vehicles in the United States as a way of making up for its rigging of emission tests, the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag reported.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently in talks with Volkswagen with the aim of agreeing on a fix for nearly 600,000 diesel vehicles that emit up to 40 times legal pollution limits.
The paper, which gave no source for its report, said the EPA was asking VW to produce electric vehicles at its plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and to help build a network of charging stations for electric vehicles in the United States.
Some of Volkswagen's cars already feature electric or hybrid motors. It was not clear from Welt am Sonntag's report whether the EPA was asking VW to produce new models or existing ones.
Five months after the emissions scandal broke in the United States, Europe's leading carmaker has yet to come up with a technical fix for almost 600,000 diesel cars, and is facing a growing number of legal claims.
"Talks with the EPA are ongoing and we are not commenting on the contents and state of the negotiations," a VW spokesman said. EPA declined to comment.
Meanwhile, weekly tabloid Bild am Sonntag said Hans Dieter Poetsch, the chairman of Volkswagen's supervisory board, was summoned by German transport minister Alexander Dobrindt on Feb. 16 to give an update on the carmaker's progress in tackling the crisis.
According to the article, Poetsch pledged Volkswagen would do everything to solve the crisis, regardless of how that might impact individuals and positions at the company.
Source
|
Zurich15365 Posts
That electric car deal would be amazing for VW frankly. Instead of having to pay huge sums in damages and sink money into a technology that is - at least in the US - dead they would be "forced" to invest into EV which they have to anyway.
|
depends a little on if it's really "instead of having to pay huge sums" or if they still have to do that anyways (just less). It's obviously going to be the second but to what degree can have an finluence here. The US market just isn't that good for them to begin with so they might very well be afraid of wasting even more money.
But I guess that might open the doors a little for them to lobby in the US as well and not just in Germany/EU
|
On February 22 2016 05:36 zatic wrote:
That electric car deal would be amazing for VW frankly. Instead of having to pay huge sums in damages and sink money into a technology that is - at least in the US - dead they would be "forced" to invest into EV which they have to anyway.
VW is such a huge company that no country is seriously going to cripple them because they'll be shooting themselves in the foot. I don't expect a much different result here either.
|
On February 22 2016 06:54 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2016 05:36 zatic wrote:
That electric car deal would be amazing for VW frankly. Instead of having to pay huge sums in damages and sink money into a technology that is - at least in the US - dead they would be "forced" to invest into EV which they have to anyway. VW is such a huge company that no country is seriously going to cripple them because they'll be shooting themselves in the foot. I don't expect a much different result here either.
yay for to big to fail!
|
On February 22 2016 06:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2016 06:54 Nyxisto wrote:On February 22 2016 05:36 zatic wrote:
That electric car deal would be amazing for VW frankly. Instead of having to pay huge sums in damages and sink money into a technology that is - at least in the US - dead they would be "forced" to invest into EV which they have to anyway. VW is such a huge company that no country is seriously going to cripple them because they'll be shooting themselves in the foot. I don't expect a much different result here either. yay for to big to fail!
I was about to suggest that "too big to cripple" just doesn't have the same ring to it 
|
I mean it's not that easy. If you're going to ask the average guy on the street "do you want VW to be severely punished?" they'll say yes, but if you ask the same guy if he likes buying cheap cars and working at a huge stable company for a good salary and pension he's also going to say yes. There's some degree of hypocrisy involved. If the government would crack down on VW you'd have the unions on the street as soon as the wages are being cut.
|
On February 22 2016 07:05 Nyxisto wrote:
I mean it's not that easy. If you're going to ask the average guy on the street "do you want VW to be severely punished?" they'll say yes, but if you ask the same guy if he likes buying cheap cars and working at a huge stable company for a good salary and pension he's also going to say yes. There's some degree of hypocrisy involved. If the government would crack down on VW you'd have the unions on the street as soon as the wages are being cut.
Yes, which is why harsh prison sentences for the management that made the decision to cheat on these tests are a much better solution then punishing the company itself.
A CEO isn't going to suggest this when he knows he will spend 20y in prison if it is caught.
|
On February 21 2016 09:42 Yoav wrote:
So there are a bunch of friends hanging out at a bar. They haven't always been on the best of terms; there's been drama, and some heartbreak. But it's been pretty good for a while, so all that's a little under the surface.
But then they start getting drunk. The leader of the group stays mostly sober (she had a bad drug habit back in the day), but she was never really the brightest bulb in the box. They start wasting money, trying to hit on chicks who are obviously bad news (like the girl from the gas company who likes making them cold just to get a power trip), and generally proceed to fuck things up.
This leaves one friend in a weird situation. He was never super close to this group of friends, but came out because they all live on his block. He's a basically good guy and doesn't want to abandon the others (they're in a bad place without someone with a brain looking out for them), but they're just kinda embarrassing themselves, and he's really starting to consider getting the fuck out of this mess and going home to hang out with his large family, who have their problems (particularly the one fighting the assault charges) but at least they're family.
That might be one of the worst misrepresentations of the UK i've ever seen.
The UK isn't "a good guy", although i do understand why that comes from an american, since the UK tries to "cuddle up" so much to them. Brits describe it differently, which includes the president and sucking stuff.
As a sidenote, the UK isn't the one "with the brain". They voted for spreading democracy and freedom in the middle east. No one with "a brain" would do that. And describing the UK as "family" is dumb as well, considering that they just barely kept scotland in the union. There's no family. In wales, there's no sense of "family" or "union" either.
It literally is "the EU", just worse because England has alot more power over wales than the EU over the UK.
|
wow, so the VW deal was Germany's consolation prize.
frencies, well this one in particular, is being sore loser http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/europe/laurent-fabius-obama-syria-war.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
PARIS — In case anyone missed it, Laurent Fabius, who was the French foreign minister as recently as two weeks ago, accused President Obama of letting down not just Syria but the whole world in 2013.
Mr. Fabius said as much as he was leaving office in early February, when he alluded to the dangerous “ambiguities” on the part of the “principal pilot” in the Western alliance.
He returned to the theme in a radio interview on Europe 1 last Tuesday, with broader strokes and in greater detail, criticizing the United States’ decision not to launch airstrikes in August 2013 after it was determined that the Syrian government had crossed Mr. Obama’s “red line” by using chemical weapons.
It was, Mr. Fabius said, “a turning point, not only for the crisis in the Middle East, but also for Ukraine, Crimea and the world.”
that turning point was when Obama found out about the EU+Turkey&co play in the middle east and then he fucked both of them.
it seems that every time Germany tries to fuck with the russians they always lose; EU wanted to get gas from the middle east then give russians the finger whilst playing US too.
well ... at least you got a prize for your efforts.
|
A vote to leave the EU in June’s referendum will threaten the UK’s strong credit score, potentially pushing up the cost of government borrowing, the ratings agency Moody’s has warned.
On Monday the pound tumbled on growing fears of a Brexit, hitting a seven-year low against the US dollar and also weakened against other big currencies as investors pulled money out of UK assets. Currency experts said London mayor Boris Johnson coming out for the leave campaign intensified pressure on sterling.
Moody’s, which assigns scores to governments’ creditworthiness, said a new EU deal reached by prime minister David Cameron would help to alleviate some uncertainty around Brexit but that the outcome of the 23 June referendum “remains too close to call”.
In the event of a vote to leave the EU, the economic costs would outweigh the benefits, Moody’s said. Exports would likely suffer, as would investment, and policymakers would get tied up in lengthy renegotiations of the UK’s trade relations.
“We consider it positive that the referendum will take place as soon as June, as a lengthy period of uncertainty on the part of firms and investors would damage the UK’s economic growth prospects. That said, the outcome of the referendum remains wide open. In our view, a decision to leave the EU would be credit negative for the UK economy,” said Kathrin Muehlbronner at Moody’s.
Moody’s currently rates the UK Aa1, one notch below the top triple-A score. The agency said that if the public vote to leave the EU, it would consider assigning a “negative outlook” to that rating, compared with a “stable” outlook now. Such an outlook would imply a greater chance of a downgrade to the Aa1 rating in the future.
Source
|
On February 22 2016 22:41 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2016 09:42 Yoav wrote:
So there are a bunch of friends hanging out at a bar. They haven't always been on the best of terms; there's been drama, and some heartbreak. But it's been pretty good for a while, so all that's a little under the surface.
But then they start getting drunk. The leader of the group stays mostly sober (she had a bad drug habit back in the day), but she was never really the brightest bulb in the box. They start wasting money, trying to hit on chicks who are obviously bad news (like the girl from the gas company who likes making them cold just to get a power trip), and generally proceed to fuck things up.
This leaves one friend in a weird situation. He was never super close to this group of friends, but came out because they all live on his block. He's a basically good guy and doesn't want to abandon the others (they're in a bad place without someone with a brain looking out for them), but they're just kinda embarrassing themselves, and he's really starting to consider getting the fuck out of this mess and going home to hang out with his large family, who have their problems (particularly the one fighting the assault charges) but at least they're family. That might be one of the worst misrepresentations of the UK i've ever seen. The UK isn't "a good guy", although i do understand why that comes from an american, since the UK tries to "cuddle up" so much to them. Brits describe it differently, which includes the president and sucking stuff. As a sidenote, the UK isn't the one "with the brain". They voted for spreading democracy and freedom in the middle east. No one with "a brain" would do that. And describing the UK as "family" is dumb as well, considering that they just barely kept scotland in the union. There's no family. In wales, there's no sense of "family" or "union" either. It literally is "the EU", just worse because England has alot more power over wales than the EU over the UK.
I'm being tongue in cheek, but to take my silliness seriously for a second:
I'm not sure the UK is a good guy. People like me want to think so, but honestly I think Europe might just be screwed. He is in fact better with his friends there, but may just be too tired of their shit to put up with it for much longer.
The UK's brain comes in understanding how economics and Russia work. The EU has no unified foreign policy as regards stuff like Iraq. It does need to stand up to the gas company. (It also needs to figure out the refugee crisis, but it's harder to find a smart guy there. I guess Germany, but their failure to get the rest of Europe to participate doesn't make it look super competent.)
And the UK's "family" are basically culturally similar countries around the world. Western culture former colonies largely, like US, CA, AUS, NZ, etc. When the UK retreats from Europe, it tends to try to get closer to those places. And yes, the US is the one fighting assault charges. (Look, Iraq did make it in the analogy!)
As for Scotland... honestly, you could tell the same story with them as the smart guy. Except in that case the drunk guys are getting increasingly racist and he's trying to get them to be decent human beings but may just be tired of that shit.
|
The average Briton's opinion was delightfully summed up in an interview on BBC one today:
"So, are you in, out or undecided?"
"Well, I'd say undecided as I don't really understand the issue, but I'll be voting out."
On another note, Corbyn hit the nail on the head with his speech:
We welcome the fact that it is now in the hands of the people of this country to decide that issue. The Labour party and the trade union movement are overwhelmingly for staying in because we believe that the European Union has brought investment, jobs and protection for workers, consumers and environment and we are convinced that a vote to remain is in the best interests of the people ...
In the 21st Century as a country and as a continent and indeed as a human race we face some challenging issues - how to tackle climate change, how to address the power of global corporations, how to ensure they pay fair taxes, how to tackle cyber crime and terrorism, how we trade fairly and protect jobs and pay in an era of globalisation, how we address the causes of the huge refugee movements across the world, how we adapt to a world where people of all countries move more frequently to live, work and retire.
All of these issues are serious, pressing and self evidently can only be solved by international cooperation.
The European Union will be a vital part of how we as a country meet those challenges, therefore it’s more than disappointing that the prime minister’s deal has failed to address a single one of those issues.
The reality is that this entire negotiation has not been about the challenges facing our continent, neither has it been about the issues facing the people of Britain, indeed it’s been a theatrical sideshow about trying to appease, or failing to appease, half of the prime minister’s own Conservative party.
|
On February 22 2016 07:10 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2016 07:05 Nyxisto wrote:
I mean it's not that easy. If you're going to ask the average guy on the street "do you want VW to be severely punished?" they'll say yes, but if you ask the same guy if he likes buying cheap cars and working at a huge stable company for a good salary and pension he's also going to say yes. There's some degree of hypocrisy involved. If the government would crack down on VW you'd have the unions on the street as soon as the wages are being cut. Yes, which is why harsh prison sentences for the management that made the decision to cheat on these tests are a much better solution then punishing the company itself. A CEO isn't going to suggest this when he knows he will spend 20y in prison if it is caught.
Yes, a fine mostly has consequences for the shareholders who see less profits and less so for higher management who will get their salaries anyway.
|
Sorry if I derail this thread in any way (or if this was answered previously), but I have to ask, what is the general feeling towards Bernie Sanders and his policy plans across the pond? I keep trying to find definitive answers online, but it's hard to weed out the truth from the political spin on a lot of the news. Are people actually happy with the policies they have in their own countries that he wants to incorporate, or is he leaving out important points that we need to consider? I know that the politico-economic climate is pretty unstable over there right now (which in turn makes it hard to decipher what works and what doesn't), but on balance, what do people think?
|
Its going to depend on who you ask. Some of his policies are good. His opposition to free trade agreements is outright terrible.
|
On February 23 2016 05:59 strongwind wrote:
Sorry if I derail this thread in any way (or if this was answered previously), but I have to ask, what is the general feeling towards Bernie Sanders and his policy plans across the pond? I keep trying to find definitive answers online, but it's hard to weed out the truth from the political spin on a lot of the news. Are people actually happy with the policies they have in their own countries that he wants to incorporate, or is he leaving out important points that we need to consider? I know that the politico-economic climate is pretty unstable over there right now (which in turn makes it hard to decipher what works and what doesn't), but on balance, what do people think?
His social policies would only work if he actually build the trump wall.
|
Prime Minister David Cameron has said a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union will be held on June 23.
Below are the key details of how the vote will work:
WHO CAN VOTE?
Like with a parliamentary election, British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens aged over 18 who live in Britain, and British nationals who have lived overseas for less than 15 years will be allowed to vote in the EU referendum.
In addition, members of parliament's upper house and citizens of Gibraltar who are eligible to vote in European Parliamentary elections will also be able to vote. Citizens of EU countries living in Britain, other than those from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, will not get a say.
WHAT IS THE QUESTION?
The question on the ballot paper will be: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?".
Voters will then choose one of two answers: "Remain a member of the European Union" or "Leave the European Union".
HOW LONG WILL THE CAMPAIGN LAST?
The EU referendum law requires a campaign period of at least 10 weeks before the vote takes place.
Before that official campaign period can begin, legislation will need to pass through parliament setting out the details of the vote, including the date. The government expects that process to take about 6 weeks.
HOW MUCH CAN THE CAMPAIGNS SPEND?
For the official campaign period, Britain's electoral watchdog can designate a lead group on each side of the debate. The lead group can spend up to 7 million pounds ($10 million), receives a public grant of up to 600,000 pounds, gets campaign broadcasts and one free mail distribution to voters.
All other groups can spend up to 700,000 pounds each. Anyone intending to spend more than 10,000 pounds must register with the electoral watchdog, and all groups must declare any donations of more than 7,500 pounds received after Feb. 1.
The spending limit for political parties is dictated by the percentage of vote they won in last year's national election.
Cameron's Conservatives can spend up to 7 million pounds, the Labour Party can spend 5.5 million pounds, the anti-EU UK Independence Party can spend 4 million pounds, the Liberal Democrats 3 million pounds and all other parties 700,000 pounds.
The Conservative Party has said it will remain neutral however, with no party funds, personnel or facilities to be used by either side of the campaign.
HOW WILL THE GOVERNMENT CAMPAIGN?
Cameron has said he will campaign with all his "heart and soul" to persuade Britons to vote to remain in the EU, warning leaving the bloc would be a "leap in the dark".
While the official government position is to back staying in, six of Cameron's team of top ministers have said they will rebel and campaign to leave the bloc. Influential London Mayor Boris Johnson has also thrown his weight behind the 'out' campaign.
The government will be subject to a period of 'purdah', barring it from publishing anything in the 28 days before the referendum that could influence the outcome of the vote.
WHAT HAPPENS ON THE DAY?
Polls will be open from 0700 GMT to 2200 GMT. Counting will begin as soon as polls close and will carry on overnight.
There will be 12 centers across Britain where counts are collated, and the final result will be declared in Manchester in northern England.
uk.reuters.com
|
On February 23 2016 05:59 strongwind wrote:
Sorry if I derail this thread in any way (or if this was answered previously), but I have to ask, what is the general feeling towards Bernie Sanders and his policy plans across the pond? I keep trying to find definitive answers online, but it's hard to weed out the truth from the political spin on a lot of the news. Are people actually happy with the policies they have in their own countries that he wants to incorporate, or is he leaving out important points that we need to consider? I know that the politico-economic climate is pretty unstable over there right now (which in turn makes it hard to decipher what works and what doesn't), but on balance, what do people think?
Yes, people here are on the whole happy with social policies in health care or education for example. In fact, these things are so much taken for granted there are a total non-issue here most of the time. Even the most free-market 'small state' parties would never dare to propose ending them (because they would become 'un-electable').
But like with any government program, criticism on details are almost constant. The public, the press, the opposition, they all complain all the time.
In a way that is the biggest difference between for example privatized and public health care. When 'the market' is screwing people, it gets little negative press. You can have millions without insurance, forced into bankruptcy or worse in case they get sick, and it will be seen as unfortunate but ultimately as a fact of life. But try to set up are universal system and politically define rules of how much care can be offered for everyone and one half of the public will go ape shit 'they are installing death panels'-style. The US public will have to change and accept imperfect solutions (like sometimes wasteful spending) for something intangible like 'the greater good'.
This is the biggest doubt I have with Sanders. Sure he might pass some new laws, initiate some programs, but I do not know how much he can really change people's attitudes. And that is what counts in the long run.
PS: I do not know what people see in Clinton, that makes her the front runner. I mean, with Obama it was obvious, hope and change and all that, but Hillary?
|
NATO allies have agreed to a plan for their ships in the Aegean Sea to help Turkey and Greece counter criminal networks smuggling refugees into Europe, NATO's chief said on Thursday, overcoming territorial sensitivities between Greece and Turkey.
After late night talks in Brussels, NATO envoys set out how ships sent to the Aegean in early February can work with Turkish and Greek coastguards and the European Union border agency Frontex to rescue refugees at sea and return them to Turkey.
"Greek and Turkish forces will not operate in each other's territorial waters and airspace," NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement following.
Relations between Greece and Turkey have traditionally been tense and since the Feb. 11 deal by NATO defence ministers to deploy ships to the Aegean, Greece's defence minister has accused Turkey of trying to undermine the deal.
NATO diplomats said one of the issues was where Greek and Turkish ships should patrol and whether that would set a precedent for claims over disputed territorial waters.
Stoltenberg said other NATO vessels will be able to sail in the territorial waters of Greece and Turkey.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu sought the NATO mission to help tackle Europe's worst migration crisis since World War Two. More than a million asylum-seekers arrived last year.
The European Union is relying on Turkey to help stem the flows of Syrians fleeing civil war, giving Ankara 3 billion euros to set up camps and help take in more refugees, although progress in implementing the deal has been slow.
Germany hopes that unlike the EU's mission off the Italian coast, which brings rescued migrants to Europe's shores, NATO will return migrants to Turkey even if they are picked up in Greek waters, effectively sealing the border.
"In case of rescue of persons coming via Turkey, they will be taken back to Turkey," Stoltenberg said.
uk.reuters.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
