|
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. |
Today (11/04) was published the first poll testing all the second round hypothesis with the 4 first candidates:
+ Show Spoiler +
Even more instructive are the detailed results (in a second round hypothesis) according to social class and political affinity. Some personal selection:
+ Show Spoiler +Macron vs Le Pen
CSP+ [upper classes]: 75/25
CSP- [lower classes]: 50/50
Retired: 72/29
Workers [“blue collars”]: 46/54
Fillon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 68/32
CSP- : 37/63
Retired: 76/24
Workers: 32/68
Mélenchon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 65/35
CSP- : 53/47
Retired: 67/33
Workers: 50/50
2012 Sarkozy voters: 33/67
Mélenchon vs Macron
CSP+ : 39/61
CSP- : 57/43
Workers: 61/39
Retired: 36/64
2012 Hollande voters: 48/52
Mélenchon vs Fillon
CSP+ : 59/41
CSP- : 71/29
Workers: 82/18
Retired: 43/57
2012 Le Pen voters: 60/40
4 polls have Le Pen/Macron at 23-24 and Fillon/Mélenchon at 17-19.
|
On April 12 2017 07:27 lastpuritan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2017 16:26 Velr wrote:
So erdogan is jailing thousands of journalists and teachers, banning newspapers and closing tv stations because he is such an awesome democrat that just wants to push a normal constitutional reform?
Sounds legit. Never said any of these in my post. But yeah, we fully support his decision to shut down newspapers and tv stations of Gulen organization, or PKK media, deal with it. You don't even let our government to rally for our citizens and expect us to be nice on coup plotters. We should have fed them to the dogs we buy from Netherlands police.
Yeah, all these tens of thousands of teachers/journalists were coup plotters. Are you for real?
And well, judging from the protests Erdogan smashed in Istanbul (Ghezi park or what was it called?), it doesn´t seems like Turkye needs any help when it comes to police brutality. But i´m sure it would have been nicer if these protests were held by thousands of douplepassport second generation immigrants favoring a guy that likes to call your goverment nazi...
Having a coup right during primetime was also kinda "neat", these Gulenist must be really dumb.
Btw: Having political rallies (for elections/campaigning) in a foreign country is afaik against the turkish constitution, but well... Erdogan said its ok. All hail.
|
On April 12 2017 07:27 lastpuritan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2017 16:26 Velr wrote:
So erdogan is jailing thousands of journalists and teachers, banning newspapers and closing tv stations because he is such an awesome democrat that just wants to push a normal constitutional reform?
Sounds legit. Never said any of these in my post. But yeah, we fully support his decision to shut down newspapers and tv stations of Gulen organization, or PKK media, deal with it. You don't even let our government to rally for our citizens and expect us to be nice on coup plotters. We should have fed them to the dogs we buy from Netherlands police.
Who is "we"? You do not represent all turks, no matter how much you think so.
If you want to be able to label a group a public enemy and then shut down any press you deem associate with that group, well, if thats your preference, then you are in favour of a totalitarian regime, not democracy. Your "Gulen is evil" means nothing outside the pro-erdogan circlejerk. Deal with it.
|
On April 12 2017 07:27 lastpuritan wrote:
But yeah, we fully support his decision to shut down newspapers and tv stations of Gulen organization, or PKK media, deal with it.
I'm pretty sure it's your friends and family back in Turkey, not "us" (whoever that would be) who will soon have to deal with a near-totalitarian regime. I see you like it though, so have fun.
|
On April 12 2017 08:06 TheDwf wrote:Today (11/04) was published the first poll testing all the second round hypothesis with the 4 first candidates: + Show Spoiler +Even more instructive are the detailed results (in a second round hypothesis) according to social class and political affinity. Some personal selection: + Show Spoiler +Macron vs Le Pen
CSP+ [upper classes]: 75/25
CSP- [lower classes]: 50/50
Retired: 72/29
Workers [“blue collars”]: 46/54
Fillon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 68/32
CSP- : 37/63
Retired: 76/24
Workers: 32/68
Mélenchon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 65/35
CSP- : 53/47
Retired: 67/33
Workers: 50/50
2012 Sarkozy voters: 33/67
Mélenchon vs Macron
CSP+ : 39/61
CSP- : 57/43
Workers: 61/39
Retired: 36/64
2012 Hollande voters: 48/52
Mélenchon vs Fillon
CSP+ : 59/41
CSP- : 71/29
Workers: 82/18
Retired: 43/57
2012 Le Pen voters: 60/40 4 polls have Le Pen/Macron at 23-24 and Fillon/Mélenchon at 17-19.
This election is the weirdest and most surprising I have seen in my lifetime. I am quite amazed by Mélenchon steamrolling Le Pen by such a margin considering how much more favorable she is seen by many right wing voters compared to her father and how confrontational and radical in its rhetoric Mélenchon is.
Working class voting so overwhelmingly for Le Pen should be a huge red light for the left wing. I have expressed how little sympathy I have for FN voters, but the left wing has fucked up massively if their supposed core electorate votes for such a misguided and toxic platform. It's really time for the PS to champion the working class again, because at the moment nobody does except a hard to believe far left and an easy to believe but utterly deceptive FN.
The sad truth about French politics is that the left has betrayed the workers under Mitterand, and that it will be really hard to get them back, especially when the idea that all problems are caused by arabs and black people stealing our jobs (that never gets old) has gotten so deeply rooted in some part of the population.
In that respect, maybe Mélenchon is showing us the right path, as weird as I feel saying it.
And meanwhile I still don't know at all who to vote for.
|
The left strugles in just about any western european country with "keeping" the workers. In fact they have lost them about ~20-30 years ago but still don't seem to realise it.
I talked with some local politicians about it, they are absolutely clueless about the reasons and don't even see a fault on their side. It was honestly scary how deluded these guys were. It reminded me of the "deplorables" comment by Hillary...
I told them i normally vote for their Party but cross out every Name on the list that is Teacher, Student, Lawyer (because there are allready enough lawyers in politics anyway) or anything that hasn't had a "normal" job. Which means like 80% of the List. They weren't amused :p
|
The working class as it has been historically known is evaporating. The various tenets of socialism were mostly addressed at dangerous, low-paying factory jobs, most of which are now in China and South Asia. The various socialist parties of Europe are correct in trying to evolve their party platforms to something more relevant in the modern age. The problem is some of them, like the Socialist Party of France and have simply moved to neoliberalism with a kinder face, which has backfired immensely since the mid-2000s. As a result their voters turn to frantic options like the FN.
That's why I wanted Benoit Hamon to win, he would have brought some fresh ideas and re-invigorate social-democracy. Unfortunately the PS is so discredited among France that they have no interest in it anymore.
|
On April 12 2017 23:28 Velr wrote:
The left strugles in just about any western european country with "keeping" the workers. In fact they have lost them about ~20-30 years ago but still don't seem to realise it.
I talked with some local politicians about it, they are absolutely clueless about the reasons and don't even see a fault on their side. It was honestly scary how deluded these guys were. It reminded me of the "deplorables" comment by Hillary...
I told them i normally vote for their Party but cross out every Name on the list that is Teacher, Student, Lawyer (because there are allready enough lawyers in politics anyway) or anything that hasn't had a "normal" job. Which means like 80% of the List. They weren't amused :p
That's so funny. Broad platform, slim candidate recruitment.
|
On April 12 2017 23:30 LightSpectra wrote:
The working class as it has been historically known is evaporating. The various tenets of socialism were mostly addressed at dangerous, low-paying factory jobs, most of which are now in China and South Asia. The various socialist parties of Europe are correct in trying to evolve their party platforms to something more relevant in the modern age. The problem is some of them, like the Socialist Party of France and have simply moved to neoliberalism with a kinder face, which has backfired immensely since the mid-2000s. As a result their voters turn to frantic options like the FN.
That's why I wanted Benoit Hamon to win, he would have brought some fresh ideas and re-invigorate social-democracy. Unfortunately the PS is so discredited among France that they have no interest in it anymore.
The working class as it has historically been described by the whores of capitalism, not by socialists. It's not about who is right, it's about who creates the terminology. As always the conservative elites have been pretty good at dividing the working class by arbitrary definitions that go by profession, social status and income instead of an universal criteriion of ownership.
|
I agree with that, but socialism has traditionally focused itself on the abusive nature of wage slavery. Nowadays most jobs are safe, pay well, and there's that 35 hour working cap; the problem is in bad times, unemployment spikes to the 10-20% levels, and there's a perception that social-democrats are not capable of culling that problem.
|
On April 12 2017 23:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2017 08:06 TheDwf wrote:Today (11/04) was published the first poll testing all the second round hypothesis with the 4 first candidates: + Show Spoiler +Even more instructive are the detailed results (in a second round hypothesis) according to social class and political affinity. Some personal selection: + Show Spoiler +Macron vs Le Pen
CSP+ [upper classes]: 75/25
CSP- [lower classes]: 50/50
Retired: 72/29
Workers [“blue collars”]: 46/54
Fillon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 68/32
CSP- : 37/63
Retired: 76/24
Workers: 32/68
Mélenchon vs Le Pen
CSP+ : 65/35
CSP- : 53/47
Retired: 67/33
Workers: 50/50
2012 Sarkozy voters: 33/67
Mélenchon vs Macron
CSP+ : 39/61
CSP- : 57/43
Workers: 61/39
Retired: 36/64
2012 Hollande voters: 48/52
Mélenchon vs Fillon
CSP+ : 59/41
CSP- : 71/29
Workers: 82/18
Retired: 43/57
2012 Le Pen voters: 60/40 4 polls have Le Pen/Macron at 23-24 and Fillon/Mélenchon at 17-19. This election is the weirdest and most surprising I have seen in my lifetime. I am quite amazed by Mélenchon steamrolling Le Pen by such a margin considering how much more favorable she is seen by many right wing voters compared to her father and how confrontational and radical in its rhetoric Mélenchon is.
Yup, definitely the weirdest. Mélenchon's image improved tremendously over the last weeks (hence the beginning of the shitstorm campaign to depict him again as an extremist...), so it helps. But Le Pen is also even more confrontational, plus she's far-right. She cannot get any massive report from the far-left to the center-right, so in that second round scenario she could only get help from Fillon's electorate i.e. 17-20% so far. Some of those Fillon voters would still vote Mélenchon to block her, and some of them would abstain, so the result seems coherent/logical. In that scenario she cannot play the “appeal to lower classes” (unlike vs Fillon or Macron) so she would be drawing dead there.
Working class voting so overwhelmingly for Le Pen should be a huge red light for the left wing. I have expressed how little sympathy I have for FN voters, but the left wing has fucked up massively if their supposed core electorate votes for such a misguided and toxic platform. It's really time for the PS to champion the working class again, because at the moment nobody does except a hard to believe far left and an easy to believe but utterly deceptive FN.
The sad truth about French politics is that the left has betrayed the workers under Mitterand, and that it will be really hard to get them back, especially when the idea that all problems are caused by arabs and black people stealing our jobs (that never gets old) has gotten so deeply rooted in some part of the population.
In that respect, maybe Mélenchon is showing us the right path, as weird as I feel saying it.
And meanwhile I still don't know at all who to vote for.
There was this interesting question in Ipsos' poll:
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/792053Solutionsparthmeprsidentielle.jpg) For English speakers: Who's the best candidate to bring good solutions in the following domains: Reduce social inequalities Moralize public life Defend the environment Increase the purchase power Guarantee the future of the pension system Fight against unemployment Ensure national cohesion Embody France in the world Bring good solutions when it comes to immigration Fight against insecurity (terrorist threat, delinquency)
Mélenchon scores nicely on the social question. But yeah the cultural battle on immigration/xenophobia/racism seems durably lost. The right also won with its securitarian/repressive propaganda. /:
|
Crazy how Fillon scores even less than Macron on immigration and insecurity issues. The guy got elected in the primary partly thanks to Juppé being perceived as weak on these subjects.
|
On April 13 2017 00:46 OtherWorld wrote:
Crazy how Fillon scores even less than Macron on immigration and insecurity issues. The guy got elected in the primary partly thanks to Juppé being perceived as weak on these subjects.
Les électeurs préfèrent l'original à la copie... [Electors prefer the original to the copy]
|
On April 12 2017 23:55 LightSpectra wrote:
I agree with that, but socialism has traditionally focused itself on the abusive nature of wage slavery. Nowadays most jobs are safe, pay well, and there's that 35 hour working cap; the problem is in bad times, unemployment spikes to the 10-20% levels, and there's a perception that social-democrats are not capable of culling that problem.
We are struggling with quite some qualification divide here in my opinion. What you are talking about is true for high-qualified labor which is scarce, which employers want to pay for. Ask a cook or a regular industry employee in a field with low qualification/high competition. They are very replacable, job safety is a thing of the past, 35-40 hour work is a formality and often just bypassed with allin-contracts (and there is no choice for a different contract). In many fields subcontracted work is booming people with 20 years of work experience are hired by subcontractors to do the same job they did before but for less.
My current employer gets around 300+ applications in 2 weeks searches for jobs that require a high-school diploma.
Sure, if you have a good university degree, if you work in a STEM field which I suppose many here do, there is no problem. You are wanted, you went with the times and you are scarce on the market. All the others? Their jobs are moving away, they are competing with foreigners that are not only often cheaper in wage, but also in many countries have less rights than an employee with the proper passport and automatization is hitting some of them as well.
Social democrats can't do a lot about it. They are a workers rights party, with some socialist values when it comes to helping out those who are in need, not one that is trying to better capitalism. Most of these things have been achieved, which is why the working class is rightfully pissed when social democrats want to give more and more money to unemployed and migrants, while the working class is the major tax paying class. If you want to help the working class you can't do it with the capital of the working class, you have to fundamentally try to change how you tax and how you create employment. You have to fundamentally change people's perception of what the state should do and who should pay for it. There are a ton of rights that we take for granted and are free, which when commercialized, rich people and firms would pay tremendous amounts for.
|
Big J I'm not sure what you think the solution to unemployment and job insecurity/low pay/etc should be. Can you elaborate more on that?
|
On April 13 2017 01:44 warding wrote:
Big J I'm not sure what you think the solution to unemployment and job insecurity/low pay/etc should be. Can you elaborate more on that?
The plain analysis is that money is with the top percent, the top percent have no demand for more goods so we are not creating jobs. Give the money to the people,you stimulate demand which will initially lead to high inflation but also stimulate growth and thus employment. The problem is obviously if you tax the rich they will just move their money away to other states and you just lose out. I have no solution that can be employed by a single state, maybe except for the USA.
|
The race to the bottom when it comes to taxation is a problem. The US had this problem with out own states passing favorable laws for creditors, banks and pass favorable tax laws to keep them in state. The issue has just expanded as the speed of the global market grew parallel to nation's domestic markets.
|
On April 13 2017 01:56 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2017 01:44 warding wrote:
Big J I'm not sure what you think the solution to unemployment and job insecurity/low pay/etc should be. Can you elaborate more on that? The plain analysis is that money is with the top percent, the top percent have no demand for more goods so we are not creating jobs. Give the money to the people,you stimulate demand which will initially lead to high inflation but also stimulate growth and thus employment. The problem is obviously if you tax the rich they will just move their money away to other states and you just lose out. I have no solution that can be employed by a single state, maybe except for the USA.
Or a stronger EU that doesn't let states compete against each other on who cuddles millionaires best. European countries are engaged in a destructive fiscal war and generally compete where they should cooperate and fix standards. That will never stop before we have a supranational instance that can say "sorry guys but I put a federal tax at X%".
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Yes, the clear problem with Europe is that there just isn't enough of it to go around. If there's more Europe there will be less problem!
|
On April 13 2017 01:56 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2017 01:44 warding wrote:
Big J I'm not sure what you think the solution to unemployment and job insecurity/low pay/etc should be. Can you elaborate more on that? The plain analysis is that money is with the top percent, the top percent have no demand for more goods so we are not creating jobs. Give the money to the people,you stimulate demand which will initially lead to high inflation but also stimulate growth and thus employment. The problem is obviously if you tax the rich they will just move their money away to other states and you just lose out. I have no solution that can be employed by a single state, maybe except for the USA.
That's not how economics works. The top percent save money which is = to investment. That investment is essentially what generates economic growth for the future, not consumption.
The key to a prosperous economy is not consuming as much as you can. In fact, if you incentivize consumption over investment you end up with lower rates of growth.
EDIT: An EU tax policy that forces every country to adopt the uncompetitive tax rates the French apply is a sure-fire way to get people like me to start voting for the loony anti-EU politicians of this world. The EU doesn't really allow states do easily coddle millionaires. Companies have to apply the VAT rates of the countries they sell in, corporations have to pay corporate tax in each country they have activities in, individuals have to live more than half the year in the country where they pay income taxes in. Capital gains are paid in the country they are generated in (I believe, my fiscal knowledge isn't very deep in this particular respect). I don't think this argument is very well thought through Biff.
EDIT2: Plus, where do the rich go when they don't want to pay high income taxes? Switzerland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/199763Sixhypothsessecondtour.jpg)
