European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 707

Prev 1 705 706 707 708 709 1398 Next

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.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

March 13 2017 01:25 GMT

#14121

On March 13 2017 09:01 warding wrote:
So you have a problem with the economic systems of the western world in general... against the EU you have a problem to the extent that you feel it is exacerbating that problem. Fine, but then I don't think this really is a discussion about the EU.

It's not really possible to address everything you're talking about without going into 1000 different directions, so I'll pick on one in particular. I wonder what you compare the taxation on capital and company income to in order to declare it 'heavily undertaxed'. If you own 100% of a business in Germany in end the year with 100k profit, that'll be taxed under corporate tax at a rate of 29.72% (according to deloitte), leaving you with 70,28% which will then be taxed at 30.5% (capital gains tax), leaving you with 48.8k. So that's a 51.2% tax rate on the profit you generated on a company. What basis is there to call this heavily undertaxed?

But you forgot that you still have to pay your head office in Dublin for that one service. What was the sum? Oh yeah, 100k. So sadly, there was no profit in Germany this year. Well, good thing that the Irish company helps you out now and pays for that firm car that you really needed. Luckily they were left with 85k profit after taxes this year. And it's totally a car for production purposes, private use is only optional.

I am not against the Western system. But we have to
a) harmonize taxes, if we have free capital flow
b) stop protecting the business models of companies with laws
c) disincentive economical fraud with harsh laws
d) start recycling wealth. if you become rich that's great. but after you die a part of your achievments has to be spread amongst the many again.

The EU at the moment prevents much of that from being applicable for single states.

Yurie

11679 Posts

March 13 2017 02:43 GMT

#14122

On March 13 2017 10:25 Big J wrote:

Show nested quote +

The problem with harmonising taxes is that you also need to harmonise other stuff for it to work. Say country 1 wants government run universal healthcare and country 2 wants the companies to pay for their employees health care. Both have the same tax rates. Meaning country 1 is more attractive for a company than country 2, while country 2 might be able to afford better schools and a bigger military (or something).

lastpuritan

United States540 Posts

March 13 2017 05:01 GMT

#14123

It's nothing but normal that you guys have your own minds about Turkish-Kurdish conflict, you may be thinking the idea of giving the Kurds an independent state within Turkey is the best suitable, democratic thing to do for middle-east, it's always open-debate, however you can't undo PKK's committing terrorist attacks on Turkish citizens again and again, not less horrible than ISIS ones.

From Turkish point of view, they say, "oh hey, these armed struggle separatists run their campaigns freely in the streets of Europe, but we can't. We don't explode ourselves in a Nato ally country for X cause, we pose no threat compared those female kurdish militas or possible recruits. Why aren't we allowed? This is where Erdogan hops in, he says Germany and X states do that because they want to keep an upper hand against Turkey. Because no other explanation would sound logical. In a sense of partnership/friendship you would choose a Turkish yells ERDOGAN!!! with Turkish flag on his hands than a Kurdish yells the name of the of the terrorists organization PKK's leader, OCALAN! As it's obvious, it was never a safety issue.

3- It was a political stance against Turkey, let's be clear, not Erdogan. Because at this point, when we observe Western complaints over Turkey, they're mostly focused on free speech, kurdish conflict and jailed journalists. Aside from free speech and Erdoganist non-secular conservative views, whole Turkey is united against the PKK and some of the journalists inside. (Gulenist journalists and pkk propaganda tools)

It puts you in position where you stand against 70 millions of turkish citizens and support 6 millions of kurdish separatists. Why or worth? Erdogan hops in again, he remarks how you ban his rallies and turkish press in Netherlands, whilst the same West lectures him about his crackdown on kurdish journos when they -without a doubt- advocated PKK crimes in their newspapers.

"AKP ON TARGET"

+ Show Spoiler +

"YOU CAN NOT STOP THE SPRING COMING" "after heavy pkk ambush"

+ Show Spoiler +

Or he addresses police brutality in Netherlands with 0 media coverage on global media, whom was super fast to criticize his policemen when they do the same to the rock or molotovs throwing, unrest causing groups on their similar, repetitive, boring headlines like, "IS TURKEY BECOMING MORE AND MORE DICTATORSHIP? BLABLA URGES AND RAISES CONCERNS"... I grew tired of reading how Turkey is so fuktap, and who urges it next. Is Turkey the new sexy after Baath? Will it continue until we completely believe that we're enemies and one side should be destroyed, or we continue to tease each other forever, because it sells... It really sells.. Dutch government stole right wing votes from Wilders, Erdogan got his share. Somehow Dutch ambassador to Turkey was on vacation before such important-expected events. Felt like it all staged.

When I saw this, I found myself happy that the Kurdish separatists did not claim rights on land in the Netherlands. Because if Dutch police could do this, who would know what they would do to those who sympathize with a terrorist organization? Erdogan had allowed the Kurds to rally in every city of Turkey for years, until they decided to dig up the trenches with municipal vehicles.

+ Show Spoiler +

I also add these questions while waiting for answers that I wrote before, if it's not holding the upper hand, why do you think the west embraces the PKK like this? Why the liberation of al Bab from the Islamic State has not brought as much sound as the PKK to save a small village from them? Why do you think that no NATO ally has ever attacked the PKK in any way when Turkey loses soldiers for his fight against ISIS on regular basis?

LegalLord

United Kingdom13775 Posts

March 13 2017 05:11 GMT

#14124

On March 12 2017 19:26 Biff The Understudy wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 12 2017 03:13 LegalLord wrote:

On March 11 2017 09:00 Biff The Understudy wrote:

On March 11 2017 08:41 LegalLord wrote:
I'm sure a lot of the internal mechanics of the FN are the same. It also sends a bad message to keep both the name FN and run a Le Pen. But the party apparatus does outwardly appear to be different and perhaps that may be meaningful. Though perhaps not. It sucks when your main voter base is heavily populated by racists because you can't really run away from that.

Problem is, though, a lot of terms like "racist" and "fascist" are overused into meaninglessness. And few can say that those terms weren't misused in a "boy who cried wolf" manner in the past. Simply because being perceived as racist is so bad that you want other people to believe any opponent is actually racist.

In my experience the really big problems are not the voters, but rather the party itself. The voters are not my favourite french people but when you do 25%, you have very diverse folks. But the people engaged in the party, from the local politicians in rural area to the leaders are simply pond scums. You can't get an idea of the FN by looking at them on the TV, you have to meet them and see what they do when they get anywhere near to power. It's ignorance, stupidity and meanness taking decisions.

I have had the priviledge to know a family of real FN people in the late 90's. They were making comments about arabs every other sentence. I am all for not crying wolf, but when someone tells you that arabs are thieves and arabs don't want to work, and arabs are like vermins that invade the country, you might start to think that "racist" is an adequate term.

We have FN neighbours in the countryside. When they drink a bit and start talking, it's just horrifying. You have the impression of being in 1935.

As for the fascism, that's where they come from. Again, it's not Trump or the alt right. It's a party that has a perfect continuity with historical, actual fascism. It was founded by people who supported Vichy and Pétain, French Algeria and the colonies, who hated democracy etc etc, and despite a gigantic PR effort to appear acceptable and normal, they have never really deviated (apart on minor stuff like the economy, because they don't have a clue and don't give a damn. They can go Milton Friedman into hatrdcore left wing in a matter of months and nobody even notices.)

It's time to stop being naive. Some people are nasty, some political forces are truly horrifying. The FN is one of them. It's a concentrate of everything wrong with France. And if it gets to power, it will be a historical disaster, and I am not being hyperbolic.

Your concerns about the FN are not without merit, given the history of the party and other factors that might indicate that they really do have a lot of the same aspects as the old party. But they do clearly touch upon something important, given how much their support has risen over the past decade. And they are likely helped along by the fact that the terms "racism" and "fascism" have indeed been used too loosely in the past, diminishing the effectiveness of how they are used right now.

And while the elections of 2017 do suggest that populist parties will get worse results than in 2016, there is no indication of a long-term receding of the populist trend; more like an oscillation. Perhaps if other parties were to be more cognizant of the issues that lead people towards populists (sovereignty, uncontrolled immigration among them) those parties would be less popular right now. Maybe a few insane people in high office is the kick in the ass that the EU needs to understand that the current system is headed only towards a fracturing of the union.

I can agree with most of that.

I think that at least in France, the left wing has in the 80's recycled their class warfare program for identities politics. They did so because they accessed power in1982 on a very left wing platform that they didn't manage to apply. So they ended up doing a huge swing towards the centre (le tournant de la rigueur), abandonned the working class and concentrated on fighting racism and made the FN into the big ennemy.

Perhaps it's telling that the same trend of far-right wing groups perceived as "racists" or worse are rising all over the Western world, and similarly the working class are feeling neglected and marginalized. It's clearly more than just France.

On March 12 2017 19:26 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Let's be clear, racism was and is a gigantic and systemic problem in France, that needs to be adressed and ruins our society. But with a complete lack of real effort towards the working class, that strategy has been supremely counter productive. Suddenly voting for fascist scums has become a way to protest (just like the contemporary hysteria towards islam feeds fundamentalism), suddenly the popular classes and the immigrants were not united in a joint effort towards the bourgeoisie, and suddenly the FN could claim that they were defending the workers by saying that it was all the immigrants fault.

Well, one might ask who gave them the opening? If only the insane guy cares what you have to say then you aren't left with much of an option. People do some rather crazy stuff when they have no good options - and trying to force people to choose between terrible and terrible can get people to elect Trump.

On March 12 2017 19:26 Biff The Understudy wrote:
The EU needs a shitloads of reforms and it's not quite clear how and when it can be done. It needs a much bigger transfer of sovereignty and a more federal like approach. It's a hugely important project for the future of Europe and the peace in our part of the world, and the only coherent way to resist Russia and protect Eastern Europe from its expansionist views, and not to be completely dominated by the US. We have the choice of being a superpower or abunch of weak and very weak countries surrounded by an extremely dominant neighbout on the west and an extremely aggressive one on the East.

Europe moved too fast towards a goal that may have never been a feasible one. It expanded quite rapidly and took upon itself the problem of every superstate that consists of too many cultures for its own good. A smaller, more pragmatic alliance of France, Germany, Britain (or maybe without Britain), Italy, and Benelux would have probably had a much longer lifespan. Instead, they went for a rather rapid - and perhaps poorly conceived - mass expansion that, in a more aggressive time, might be called an empire which overextended.

That Europe "needs reform" is kind of an understatement. I would have probably been more sympathetic to that description of it 3-4 years ago. At a time when it's hopping from one existential crisis to the next, it should be questioned whether or not it really has the means to survive. It has hopped quite seamlessly from economic trouble to external political pressure to internal political pressure towards separation. Just when it looks like it might get some respite it starts up again. It doesn't necessarily even matter if any specific person does or doesn't get elected, the unrelenting pressure alone will slowly but surely cause it to fracture and break.

Certainly, it isn't too hard to bribe a few poorer countries with the promise of monetary investment and European passports. Hell, a few of the EE ones would probably join the Arab League if they could convince themselves that they're sticking it to Russia or something along those lines by doing so. What's harder is to actually make a union work. Too loose a unity and the entire project starts to look pretty pointless; why even have a union if it barely does anything? Too strong a union and you will see what you actually see: that nationalism is a force not easily removed. And that's not even mentioning cultural clashes - a factor which perhaps the refugee crisis helps to illustrate. But it's certainly not the cause of such issues.

Every one of the EU's most precious "four freedoms" comes with a price that is not so easily paid. Freedom of movement is obviously the most controversial, in how it both is so dearly loved by people who want to live and work and vacation wherever they could want across the continent, yet so controversial in the reality that it also encourages an uncontrolled movement of individuals who one would not be so inclined to allow to cross the borders. Goods, services, and capital are really just standard aspects of free trade, which is rightfully perceived these days as a force that encourages wealth creation, but also concentrates the profits into the hands of the wealthiest and the very poor (those who would be overjoyed to be paid Western minimum wage for any work) while screwing over the lower/lower-middle/working class by forcing them into an unfortunate race to the bottom. And of course there's the fact that a unified currency imposed upon such a diverse populace is hardly suitable for the wide range of economies - from the debt-trapped Greece to the industrial powerhouse Germany - where no one is immune to the shocks induced by what their neighbors do nor are they able to control their own monetary policy.

It's not really a matter of "we just have to give them time to get used to it" though, even if it is true that the EU did too much too fast. The people who have lived the EU and predecessors the longest, who voted in support of it in the prime of their youth but now vote against, are those most cognizant of its faults. In that sense I'm certain that I'm talking to the wrong group (a largely younger and more educated, generally multilingual audience) to get sympathy for such a message but it's true that those who tended to show enthusiasm for the movement in their earlier years (I mean, who wouldn't want to support the ideal of a united Europe) are those most able to see a reality of a troubled bureaucracy that is neither democratic nor particularly effective in times of crisis. Sure, those who are clearly net benefactors tend to be more pro-EU, like Germany (though there are certainly anti-EU elements there). There are also those who can be bribed into wanting to be in the EU. It should be no surprise that the general trend is definitively anti-EU though.

Thinking that nations belong together for little more reason than because they all have the fortune of being on one tectonic plate is one of the stupidest reasons for unity ever. The most stable large countries were formed and enlarged with a much stronger sense of unity than anything that being north of the Mediterranean Sea and west of the Ural Mountains could give you. In some countries fascism is almost mainstream, in others you have a barely-suppressed economic implosion being contained to avoid sinking a currency, in another you have on-again off-again financial crises with banks big enough to bring everyone down, and in others you have highly developed industrial economies. And each of these has a centuries-long history rooted in constant border changes and wars and a deep aversion to being dominated by any of their numerous neighbors. And if that wasn't enough they want to incorporate another economy with little more than wheat and coal (if it's not blockaded) to sell, and internal strife that would make the FN look like the one sane voice of reason in an absurd contradiction of a society. Oh, but they do have many willing migrant workers just begging to have a chance to abandon their country for greener pastures at the first opportunity.

Yes, it does suck that in the aftermath of WWII Europe was left in a position where the nations who managed to incorporate the most adjacent land into their nation mostly managed to keep it while the ones who had overseas empires pretty much all lost it. But it doesn't make it so that the Europeans belong together in the slightest. There's hardly an alliance when people can't even agree which foreign devil is their enemy and which one is their dearest best buddy who will give them everything. And those fellow EU members are also of course little more than other such foreign devils who just happen to be in one union with them. It's hardly clear that the EU as a bloc is any less vulnerable to pressure than its component nationlings, given how fractured it is and how any problem with one nationling can lead to a larger cascade failure very easily under the teeniest crisis.

In short, the EU is an abomination which, like a cancer, grew so fast and so recklessly that it made its own life unfeasible. Probably best to go through some painful chemo and kill the cancer before it kills everyone else.

On March 12 2017 19:26 Biff The Understudy wrote:
But let's be clear, the FN is against the EU not for pragmatic reasons (they are no pragmatic reasons to be against the EU at that point and nobody else on the political spectrum is - even the far left is for) but because of their ultranationalist ideology. The idea that we put our differences aside and work together represent everything they hate and fear. And they convince people that the EU is awful with the same xenophobic, simplistic arguments with which they bash immigrants, by exploiting fear, resentment, hatred of the elite and lying about what are the real challenges.

Whatever reason the FN has for opposing the EU, the fact is that they are among the few established groups that are actually willing to do so. Teaming with dangerous idealists is unfortunate to say the least (and downright idiotic in certain situations like funding terrorists to fight a proxy war on the cheap), but in situations where you don't have much of a choice of allies, you take what you can get - and tough-minded idealists are damn good, dedicated fighters even if they can be dangerous. If the FN and I have similar goals - the end of the EU - and real allies towards that end are few and far between, there may be a situation in which we could set aside those differences, for a time, towards a common goal. And it's clear that they see that their message, even if it does often cater to many of the dregs of society, also resonates (for good reason) with the disenfranchised with nowhere else to go - looking for little more than a party that shows a willingness to shed its most disgusting elements in favor of an unpleasant, but moderately palatable, powerful opposition force.

So yes. The FN is the FN and anyone who knows the history of the FN has every reason to be wary of who they are and who they have been. But they also cut deep at issues that are highly important yet systematically ignored by a society for whom such an acknowledgment is utterly dangerous - and frankly in troubled times ideologues are far more powerful and effective than "consensus leaders" who toe the status quo. And if "damned if we leave, damned if we remain" isn't the sign of troubled times I don't know what is.

Ghostcom

Denmark4781 Posts

March 13 2017 06:27 GMT

#14125

On March 13 2017 14:01 lastpuritan wrote:
Wall of post

Please clean up your post if you want a response. As it currently stands there is no way to really start approaching it reasonably as frankly I'm unsure what it is that you want to discuss?

EDIT: You can spare yourself the trouble if you
1) Deny the existence of Turkish suppression (I'm being very nice here) of Kurds
2) Honestly think that someone who declares that "terrorist roams freely through EU" and calls the police for "Wilders dogs" is in any way a reputable news source.

opisska

Poland8852 Posts

March 13 2017 07:36 GMT

#14126

On March 13 2017 14:01 lastpuritan wrote:
This will be one of the rarest times on the internet I'll talk about my identity to make people understand or feel me and people like me. I would like to hear from some fellow German and Dutch friends here on the subject, I got some questions and my share to discuss with y'all.

My mother is french/greek and my father is turkish, my older brother served in the US army for partial training programme mostly focused on endurance and strength gains, not a combat training. This is how we settled in Arizona back in the time and got our citizenship. I got a turkish fiancee with kurdish origin and I have relatives in Germany, my auntie who works for Samsung as engineers and some of my uncles in Belgium who runs snacks shop. I also got lots of friends in Liverpool, Milton Keynes, London and Rotterdam who are garden artists that I'm pleased to visit them on every chance I got.

My brother is strong Trump supporter because he thinks he's less dangerous than democrats who always seem kinda "nicer" to migrants like us, in theory. But he, in reality, claims that they're the responsible ones for the conflicts we got in our universe. Not saying I agree with him but that's what he thinks. And he says the Republicans were surprisingly the ones who helped him to become a part of the American society, as for my uncles and aunties, they keep saying Merkel and politicians in Belgium should be dealing with not the Turkish, but the Russian and Arabic invasion of the societies in Europe. None of their neighbors from those nations are able to speak German as they do etc. They suffered heavy discrimination in Germany years ago, and my auntie was married to a Moroccan man, who got questioned by the policemen for his protest beard couple of times...They're all white people with fluent English, German and regular tax-payers, none wears religious headscarves etc.

As you can see, we're MIXED on our political views and cultural differences, even within our family. But when it comes to Turkey, regardless how they hate Erdogan on internal politics, they fully support him on international level.And as the years pass by, I find myself in the same position. I'll explain shortly why I disliked what Netherlands-Germany did, and why I think it was hypocrisy.

I see myself as a nationalitarian with mostly liberal thoughts. Don't know if there's a preset to label myself though.

1- To me, every human being should be free to demonstrate and protest, gather, walk, rally long as his/her thoughts won't advocate crimes. Netherlands failed here. And this fail is a huge considering how he fed Erdogan's hand and his rhetoric.

2- IF we're gonna bring up -security reasons-

Germany had PKK rallies, right? Ocalan's face and PKK symbol on every flag they hold, pro pkk slogans and more. The people who attended to the PKK rallies might not be terrorists, maybe they were only independent Kurdish state supporters with communists ideas, but that doesn't make them less terrorists sympathizers or potential recruits of upcoming suicide attack in Turkish towns.

https://twitter.com/AliKINCAL/status/840880436301713408

It's nothing but normal that you guys have your own minds about Turkish-Kurdish conflict, you may be thinking the idea of giving the Kurds an independent state within Turkey is the best suitable, democratic thing to do for middle-east, it's always open-debate, however you can't undo PKK's committing terrorist attacks on Turkish citizens again and again, not less horrible than ISIS ones.

From Turkish point of view, they say, "oh hey, these armed struggle separatists run their campaigns freely in the streets of Europe, but we can't. We don't explode ourselves in a Nato ally country for X cause, we pose no threat compared those female kurdish militas or possible recruits. Why aren't we allowed? This is where Erdogan hops in, he says Germany and X states do that because they want to keep an upper hand against Turkey. Because no other explanation would sound logical. In a sense of partnership/friendship you would choose a Turkish yells ERDOGAN!!! with Turkish flag on his hands than a Kurdish yells the name of the of the terrorists organization PKK's leader, OCALAN! As it's obvious, it was never a safety issue.

3- It was a political stance against Turkey, let's be clear, not Erdogan. Because at this point, when we observe Western complaints over Turkey, they're mostly focused on free speech, kurdish conflict and jailed journalists. Aside from free speech and Erdoganist non-secular conservative views, whole Turkey is united against the PKK and some of the journalists inside. (Gulenist journalists and pkk propaganda tools)

It puts you in position where you stand against 70 millions of turkish citizens and support 6 millions of kurdish separatists. Why or worth? Erdogan hops in again, he remarks how you ban his rallies and turkish press in Netherlands, whilst the same West lectures him about his crackdown on kurdish journos when they -without a doubt- advocated PKK crimes in their newspapers.

"AKP ON TARGET"

+ Show Spoiler +

"YOU CAN NOT STOP THE SPRING COMING" "after heavy pkk ambush"

+ Show Spoiler +

https://twitter.com/MevlutCavusoglu/status/840885370493534209

https://twitter.com/Ed_Husain/status/840865554625884160

Or he addresses police brutality in Netherlands with 0 media coverage on global media, whom was super fast to criticize his policemen when they do the same to the rock or molotovs throwing, unrest causing groups on their similar, repetitive, boring headlines like, "IS TURKEY BECOMING MORE AND MORE DICTATORSHIP? BLABLA URGES AND RAISES CONCERNS"... I grew tired of reading how Turkey is so fuktap, and who urges it next. Is Turkey the new sexy after Baath? Will it continue until we completely believe that we're enemies and one side should be destroyed, or we continue to tease each other forever, because it sells... It really sells.. Dutch government stole right wing votes from Wilders, Erdogan got his share. Somehow Dutch ambassador to Turkey was on vacation before such important-expected events. Felt like it all staged.

https://twitter.com/Ed_Husain/status/840682677598617601

When I saw this, I found myself happy that the Kurdish separatists did not claim rights on land in the Netherlands. Because if Dutch police could do this, who would know what they would do to those who sympathize with a terrorist organization? Erdogan had allowed the Kurds to rally in every city of Turkey for years, until they decided to dig up the trenches with municipal vehicles.

+ Show Spoiler +

This is the same old story over and over and over again - Turks and Kurds, Israel and Palestine ... even we have a good share of that in the Europe: IRA, Basques ... A strong country is unwilling to let a significant majority separate. As those two live in the same country, this doesn't lead to an outward war between armies and gradually at least a part of the minority resorts to guerilla attacks which eventually turn against civil population. The majority labels them "terrorists" and they are automatically the root of all evil and their "terrorism" is then used as an argument in favor of the majority keeping them under their control.

I don't even blame you for your black and white view of the Kurdish conflict, if you have been fed this opinion for decades. Sure, terrorist attacks are despicable, but honestly so is any kind of war. Only we have gotten used to this absurd notion that "standard war" is somehow OK - look it even has rules for "humane behaviour". How is killing other people - even if only in agreed-upon ways - humane still fails me completely. Terrorist attacks are, sadly, the only method of resistance that is usually accessible to the minority. I can't imagine how terrible it must be, if your loved one is killed in a terrorist attack and hating the perpetrator is the natural thing to do. However, the rational thing to do is to go ask you government: why do we need these dry ugly mountain in the first place? Why haven't you let them form their own state decades ago? The people who are dying are dying primarily because of the power-hunger of politicians who can't imagine giving "their" territory away for free. The "terrorists" are a symptom, not a root problem.

Equalling PKK and ISIS is a grave misunderstanding. Sure, you can dispute how many Kurds the current PKK actually represents and what power games are happening in there, but it is originally a grassroots organization for independence. ISIS is a bunch of whackjobs who have taken over a large chunk of territory where they weren't exactly welcome. They do not fight for the people they control, not at least for a majority of them. Yes, both commit acts of terrorism, but that's where the parallel ends.

Bringing out "Turkish fight against ISIS" is a big hypocrisy. If Turkey wanted to get rid of ISIS, it can have not prevented the Kurds to help with that - instead it abuses to Syrian conflict to advance their anti-Kurdish agenda. When there are Turkish soldiers dying in the fight against ISIS, you should again go ask the government why are they wasting the lives of Turkish soldiers for their stubborness to cooperate with Kurds.

I don't see why I should support "70 millions over 6 millions" - the fact that you have the numbers doesn't make you the "right side". However I also quite doubt that the opinion in so clear-cut in Turkey and am afraid that your idea that the whole Turkey hates Kurds is a result of your social bubble and/or propaganda. Even your usage of "Gullenist journalists" is a warning sign about your possible affection by official propaganda.

I find your insight that this moves may alienate the whole Turkey, instead of just Erdogan supporters, valuable. I am not even sure that it was a good decision to deny them to speak, because it seems rather short-sighted and childish. However you should understand that from our - well at least mine - point of view, at the moment, Erdogan is a much larger threat than the PKK ever was to us and this fact thus provokes responses accordingly.

zatic

Zurich15310 Posts

March 13 2017 08:22 GMT

#14127

What is currently happening in the Netherland has zero to do with the PKK, and bringing that in is just an attempt to deflect from the issue. To put it bluntly, no one cares about the Kurds anymore.

The European conflict with Turkey is all about Erdogan moving Turkey toward a authoritarian, non-secular state. In that context there are many arguing that the AKP should be hindered from drawing support for their referendum from Turks living in Europe. So far, that is simply exchange of opinion, nothing more.
The Netherlands are unique in that they actually did take action - and their decision to actively block Turkish politicians from speaking in NL has been widely criticised across Europe. Headlines today in Germany read "The Netherlands are gambling away their liberal heritage".

As for Germany, as it stands right now the AKP is free to hold rallys. There might be many people here not happy with this, but AKP members enjoy the same freedom of speech as everyone else over here.

LegalLord

United Kingdom13775 Posts

March 13 2017 08:26 GMT

#14128

I have to say, the way that most Turks are overly obsessed with how much they dislike the Kurds does not give them much clout.

It's so much so that I always assume that no matter what bad thing happens in Turkey, the Kurds will be the ones blamed for it. That's almost always how it ends up working.

RvB

Netherlands6190 Posts

March 13 2017 11:06 GMT

#14129

On March 13 2017 14:01 lastpuritan wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

This will be one of the rarest times on the internet I'll talk about my identity to make people understand or feel me and people like me. I would like to hear from some fellow German and Dutch friends here on the subject, I got some questions and my share to discuss with y'all.

My mother is french/greek and my father is turkish, my older brother served in the US army for partial training programme mostly focused on endurance and strength gains, not a combat training. This is how we settled in Arizona back in the time and got our citizenship. I got a turkish fiancee with kurdish origin and I have relatives in Germany, my auntie who works for Samsung as engineers and some of my uncles in Belgium who runs snacks shop. I also got lots of friends in Liverpool, Milton Keynes, London and Rotterdam who are garden artists that I'm pleased to visit them on every chance I got.

My brother is strong Trump supporter because he thinks he's less dangerous than democrats who always seem kinda "nicer" to migrants like us, in theory. But he, in reality, claims that they're the responsible ones for the conflicts we got in our universe. Not saying I agree with him but that's what he thinks. And he says the Republicans were surprisingly the ones who helped him to become a part of the American society, as for my uncles and aunties, they keep saying Merkel and politicians in Belgium should be dealing with not the Turkish, but the Russian and Arabic invasion of the societies in Europe. None of their neighbors from those nations are able to speak German as they do etc. They suffered heavy discrimination in Germany years ago, and my auntie was married to a Moroccan man, who got questioned by the policemen for his protest beard couple of times...They're all white people with fluent English, German and regular tax-payers, none wears religious headscarves etc.

As you can see, we're MIXED on our political views and cultural differences, even within our family. But when it comes to Turkey, regardless how they hate Erdogan on internal politics, they fully support him on international level.And as the years pass by, I find myself in the same position. I'll explain shortly why I disliked what Netherlands-Germany did, and why I think it was hypocrisy.

I see myself as a nationalitarian with mostly liberal thoughts. Don't know if there's a preset to label myself though.

1- To me, every human being should be free to demonstrate and protest, gather, walk, rally long as his/her thoughts won't advocate crimes. Netherlands failed here. And this fail is a huge considering how he fed Erdogan's hand and his rhetoric.

2- IF we're gonna bring up -security reasons-

Germany had PKK rallies, right? Ocalan's face and PKK symbol on every flag they hold, pro pkk slogans and more. The people who attended to the PKK rallies might not be terrorists, maybe they were only independent Kurdish state supporters with communists ideas, but that doesn't make them less terrorists sympathizers or potential recruits of upcoming suicide attack in Turkish towns.

https://twitter.com/AliKINCAL/status/840880436301713408

It's nothing but normal that you guys have your own minds about Turkish-Kurdish conflict, you may be thinking the idea of giving the Kurds an independent state within Turkey is the best suitable, democratic thing to do for middle-east, it's always open-debate, however you can't undo PKK's committing terrorist attacks on Turkish citizens again and again, not less horrible than ISIS ones.

From Turkish point of view, they say, "oh hey, these armed struggle separatists run their campaigns freely in the streets of Europe, but we can't. We don't explode ourselves in a Nato ally country for X cause, we pose no threat compared those female kurdish militas or possible recruits. Why aren't we allowed? This is where Erdogan hops in, he says Germany and X states do that because they want to keep an upper hand against Turkey. Because no other explanation would sound logical. In a sense of partnership/friendship you would choose a Turkish yells ERDOGAN!!! with Turkish flag on his hands than a Kurdish yells the name of the of the terrorists organization PKK's leader, OCALAN! As it's obvious, it was never a safety issue.

3- It was a political stance against Turkey, let's be clear, not Erdogan. Because at this point, when we observe Western complaints over Turkey, they're mostly focused on free speech, kurdish conflict and jailed journalists. Aside from free speech and Erdoganist non-secular conservative views, whole Turkey is united against the PKK and some of the journalists inside. (Gulenist journalists and pkk propaganda tools)

It puts you in position where you stand against 70 millions of turkish citizens and support 6 millions of kurdish separatists. Why or worth? Erdogan hops in again, he remarks how you ban his rallies and turkish press in Netherlands, whilst the same West lectures him about his crackdown on kurdish journos when they -without a doubt- advocated PKK crimes in their newspapers.

"AKP ON TARGET"

+ Show Spoiler +

"YOU CAN NOT STOP THE SPRING COMING" "after heavy pkk ambush"

+ Show Spoiler +

I agree that the Turkish minister should've been able to give a speech. The thing is that he was allowed and the Dutch and Turkish governments were still negotiating about letting him do just that when the Turkish government threatened sanctions. Only then was access denied and did our government make it clear that the Turkish family minister wasn't welcome. Knowing that she still went. It's kind of rich to start bitching about The Netherlands when the Turkish government was clearly provoking and looking for such a response to whip up nationalist frenzy.

Your whole point about the Kurds is ridiculous, we don't give a damn about the Kurds.. We've had both (legal) protests of Kurds and Erdogan supporters here.

On the police violence: It's how our police treats everyone who riots. The protesters started throwing stones and stuff. Only after that did the police intervene. It's no different than how the police treats football hooligans. Peaceful protesting is allowed, rioting is not.

Keniji

Netherlands2569 Posts

March 13 2017 12:22 GMT

#14130

On March 13 2017 17:22 zatic wrote:
What is currently happening in the Netherland has zero to do with the PKK, and bringing that in is just an attempt to deflect from the issue. To put it bluntly, no one cares about the Kurds anymore.

The European conflict with Turkey is all about Erdogan moving Turkey toward a authoritarian, non-secular state. In that context there are many arguing that the AKP should be hindered from drawing support for their referendum from Turks living in Europe. So far, that is simply exchange of opinion, nothing more.
The Netherlands are unique in that they actually did take action - and their decision to actively block Turkish politicians from speaking in NL has been widely criticised across Europe. Headlines today in Germany read "The Netherlands are gambling away their liberal heritage".

As for Germany, as it stands right now the AKP is free to hold rallys. There might be many people here not happy with this, but AKP members enjoy the same freedom of speech as everyone else over here.

Your last paragraph is not completely right. Rallies of the AKP in germany are mostly tolerated at the moment, but they are NOT protected by freedom of speech. The BVG made clear that that persons in the role of officials of foreign goverments are not.

I am still not sure how the netherlands should have reacted according to some german opinion pieces. The praise merkels 'never do anything', but what do you do if a foreign government make threats? Of course, the decision of the netherlands helps erdogan, but its not the job of the netherlands to base their decision (solely) on inner politic effects in turkey. Erdogan was clearly looking for it, dont you think he would have increased his provocations until he gets his scapegoat? There is clearly a point where you cant sit back anymore. It might not have been that point yet (i disagree) but some german journalist act like it would be the best to sit passively until the referendum in turkey is over, whatever they do until then

LightSpectra

United States1128 Posts

March 13 2017 12:47 GMT

#14131

I love any excuse to trot out this graph:

+ Show Spoiler +

Like I've said many times before: The European countries that have lots of refugees/immigrants like Finland and Germany are doing just fine because they haven't succumbed to neoliberal austerity. The Netherlands, Italy and France, who have comparatively less migrants but high unemployment over the past few years and less economic growth, have shown a bump in the polls for the far-right whackos.

The EU has problems. I don't think its main problem is unrestricted travel or denationalized immigration restrictions, I think its main problem is that the single-market is trotted out as an excuse not to tax the rich. It's an easily solvable problem without dissolution.

zatic

Zurich15310 Posts

March 13 2017 12:55 GMT

#14132

On March 13 2017 21:22 Keniji wrote:

Show nested quote +

Your last paragraph is not completely right. Rallies of the AKP in germany are mostly tolerated at the moment, but they are NOT protected by freedom of speech. The BVG made clear that that persons in the role of officials of foreign goverments are not.

I am still not sure how the netherlands should have reacted according to some german opinion pieces. The praise merkels 'never do anything', but what do you do if a foreign government make threats? Of course, the decision of the netherlands helps erdogan, but its not the job of the netherlands to base their decision (solely) on inner politic effects in turkey. Erdogan was clearly looking for it, dont you think he would have increased his provocations until he gets his scapegoat? There is clearly a point where you cant sit back anymore. It might not have been that point yet (i disagree) but some german journalist act like it would be the best to sit passively until the referendum in turkey is over, whatever they do until then

Source on the bolded part? I assume you mean BVerG as in constitutional court, and at least I can't find anything on that. When was that ruling supposed to have happened?

In any case I wasn't taken sides, just pointing out that the opinions about NL's action are all over the map. At the same time when headlines criticise the ban, others voice their support for NL. Which of course is a fantastic thing and precisily what we are seeking to defend.

I am personally not sure what the right call is here. It's a tough call between freedom of speech and allowing foreign propaganda officials to freely operate in your country.

Laurens

Belgium4514 Posts

March 13 2017 12:55 GMT

#14133

On March 13 2017 21:47 LightSpectra wrote:
I love any excuse to trot out this graph:

+ Show Spoiler +

What makes you say Germany is "doing just fine" and Netherlands/Italy/France aren't? What do you base this on?

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

March 13 2017 12:57 GMT

#14134

The Dutch reaction was completely valid. Quite honestly, with how Turkish officials are behaving, threatening and trying to cause uproar in Europe we may actually have to resort to some strict treatment of Turkish civilians if this keeps on happening. It's bad, but it is probably the only historically-proven measure to ensure the functioning of the society. And I rather see it done by reasonable politicians than by the actual Nazis.

LightSpectra

United States1128 Posts

March 13 2017 13:02 GMT

#14135

On March 13 2017 21:55 Laurens wrote:

Show nested quote +

What makes you say Germany is "doing just fine" and Netherlands/Italy/France aren't? What do you base this on?

Sorry if I was unclear, this is all in response to LL's analysis of the EU as having systemic problems that will cause its inevitable demise. I'm speaking exclusively about the foreboding possibility of the far-right whackos getting elected:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Dutch_general_election,_2017
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_French_presidential_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Italian_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_German_federal_election,_2017

As you can see, Wilders and Le Pen are doing pretty darn good compared to Petry. (Italy's a weird example, as you can see Salvini's far-right party Lega Nord has been doing really well in the polls as well, but their vote is split with Gallo's party M5S who are left-wing populists.)

Laurens

Belgium4514 Posts

March 13 2017 13:09 GMT

#14136

On March 13 2017 22:02 LightSpectra wrote:

Show nested quote +

Ah ok.
It's still quite close. The last polls have Wilders polling at 22/150 seats or ~14,6%, AFD is hovering at about 10%.
Le Pen is in a league of her own.

LightSpectra

United States1128 Posts

March 13 2017 13:11 GMT

#14137

The number alone isn't the important thing, you have to look at who they're running against. PVV is projected to win the most seats in the Netherlands. FN is almost assuredly going to make it to the run-off. AfD is projected to win the Union's and SPD's table scraps.

Broetchenholer

Germany1840 Posts

March 13 2017 13:21 GMT

#14138

"YOU CAN NOT STOP THE SPRING COMING" "after heavy pkk ambush"

+ Show Spoiler +

Uhm, sorry mate, the PKK situation and the latest diplomatic problems between Turkey and Europe are linked but the way you equalize them makes no sense. I can't reasonably comment on the conflict with the Kurds, as i am not knowledgeable enough in it. I assume though, that the Kurds are not the only party to receive blame in the conflict and not every Kurd asking for an independent State is a terrorist.

That said, both turkish and kurdish gatherings have always happened in Germany and probably the Netherlands as well, you may express your opinion as long as you don't call for crimes. I don't know how extreme some kurdish events are but i assume as well, that the german Verfassungsschutz is watching them closely.

In Germany, AKP ministers are allowed to speak even though Erdogan is screaming nazis on top of his lungs, it's not our fault that they decide on one weeks notice to turn a wedding into an election event and wonder why the location is not suited for it. It's not about national security, it is about the turkish foreign minister being trampled to death by a human stampede if a fire breaks out. And i would guess that afterwards some cities took the bait and used that reasoning to ban the loudmouths from the turkish government.

And no, it was not a political stance against turkey. If Erdogan would allow Turkey not to be associated with him, there would be a chance of that. As it stands, there is only Erdogan and his hateful rhetoric. His policy is rightfully scaring a lot of people and he is doing everything in his power to escalate the conflict for his gain among turkish people who will believe the bullshit he claims about Dutch Nazis as the truth.

RvB

Netherlands6190 Posts

March 13 2017 13:24 GMT

#14139

On March 13 2017 08:45 Big J wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

So, two graphics for Germany and the US on household income:

+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +

What is happening is that the bottom is stagnating or even dropping over time.

it's very hard to accurately measure the value though that is being added by public services. Education is expanding, healthcare outcomes are much better than they were decades ago, you've basically got access to all information for free if you have a smartphone and so on. The environmental situation is improving in places that were polluted etc.. All of which doesn't really impact your net worth immediately.

You are talking about technological progress. Yes, we profit from that. But society also paid for all of that. We live in peaceful times, we build up more and more wealth because noone destroys it. The standard rises, that is true. But it does not come for free. There were investments made to research technology, to build up houses and infrustructure, to educate people, to build up the WWW and so on and so on. There are still investments made for that, I can't access the internet for free, behind every service is someone who profits in one way or another from you using it. You pay for almost everything, with money or with your data, everything has some upkeep or gets lost eventually. And that is OK. What is a problem is if the people who own all these things take much more than what it is worth, but noone can enter the market who isn't dirty rich to begin with.
What do you do as a small firm that needs investments, when all the investors only invest if you pay them more than your employees for no work at all? There is no way around getting that capital, so it's up to those who have the money to dictate their own income, and they simply take more and more of it:

+ Show Spoiler +

The ones with capital are cutting deeper and deeper into the overall cake for themselves. Firm and Capital income that is by the way heavily undertaxed, i.e. socialism for the rich. Where are the true economic liberals, that ask for "any income is to be taxed equally, whether it is capital income, work income or heritage. It's liberalism, not tribism or heritagism."
How come, that when I enter this world no matter how hard I try, no matter what I do, it is completely up to some investors or company owners whether they want me to succeed or not? People that simply were lucky to be born from someone who owned a pile of money or land or rights, that generates money. That is not liberalism!
Why can't I download music today for free on the internet? Why is it protected? People did not expect the internet to happen back in the days, it was an entrepreneurial risk they were taking. But no problem, instead of giving the wealth of the world to the people through the internet, we come up with new laws so that you have to pay for it again. You know, gotta protect the interests of those who are powerful already.
We had absurd cases of companies fighting over the right to use a certain geometric form for their phones, how in the heck is that useful for society? It isn't, it is socialism for the rich, so that they can protect the most absurd rights and monetarize them. And then tell me again that we live in a free market society. "Oh yeah, you can always enter the market. Just not if you want to make something in a 3-dimensional shape, those are all 'owned'."
You know something is deeply wrong, when we start living in a society that has to forbid everything so that we cannot spread information, music and films for nothing. "But then they don't make films and music anymore" - "But what about the supply and demand logic and market forces?" "Fuck that! Gotta make more money for myself!"

I don't speak German so it's kind of hard for me to respond to those numbers. In regards to the US numbers you have to keep in mind that it's talking about family income. This can be explained by a faster increase in the number of households than GDP, an increase in employer-provided benefits and pension contributions (which aren't taken into consideration in household income) and inequality. I've tried finding a graph for real median personal income per quintile but couldn't find one. ALl I can find is an average which does show a dip after the financial crisis but shows a long term increase.
[image loading]

Even if we take household income it shows a stagnation at most and not the poor getting poorer as you claimed.

fredblog.stlouisfed.org
fred.stlouisfed.org

LightSpectra

United States1128 Posts

March 13 2017 13:28 GMT

#14140

Does that graph account for rising housing and utility costs?

Prev 1 705 706 707 708 709 1398 Next

Please or register to reply.

European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 707

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming