On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Everybody, who actually bothered to listen to Westerwelle before the last election without denouncing him based on idealogy or the yellow press, will know that his speeches were easily the most compelling and the FDP's agenda was one of the most social (if not the most social), and most desirable agendas presented by any party last time. Of course, they completed exactly zero from it. Big talks are in no way connected to what actually gets enacted. Especially small parties tend to make big populist promises, which are completely impossible to implement, since they know that they won't be in the position of power and thus won't have to try to fulfill anything they promise.
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
:/ Dude, just go outside for once and look at their election posters "Reichtum für alle" is usually the classical example, together with "Das Reichtum besteuern" and those 2 aren't 2 lonely examples, they write and say the most outrageous things, why? Because they know that they will never reign and therefore don't actually have to keep their promises. I feel like I have to explain this every few pages >.<. It's great to be in the opposition and it's great not to actually have any real power, because you can do and say what you want and what sounds good, it's not like you'll ever have to prove that you're being serious about it (and thank god for that, because some of their demands would be ruinous for the country).
EDIT: The bulgarian ninja'd me and as long as you say that the greek state was at fault for the path they've chosen to take, the greek people who voted them and did nothing about it are partially at fault too, so therefore them paying for it isn't THAT unfair anymore. (I realise that that is a gigantic generalisation and that the rest of the EU was at fault too, but I don't wanna go too deep into this and awnsering a generalisation with a generalisation is easier.) EDIT2: And this isn't the euro-crisis thread.
Will be funny to see what happens. The 3 most likely options are probably 1. CDU+FDP 2. CDU+SPD 3. SPD+Grüne+Linke
hoping for the 3rd option, thinking it will be a the 2nd.
This boggles my mind. I didn't come to Germany from an "ex"-communist country, just to have the questionable "pleasure" to be governed by other "communists"...
Also, I can promise you that if SPD+Grüne+Linke form the governement, Die Linke will fulfill its current agenda exactly as well as FDP fulfilled their agenda in this term... The only thing that might happen is that they could enact a minimum wage. Even then, the consensus those parties would meet will probably be similar to the consensus SPD and CDU had about the VAT (Mehrwertsteuer) during the grand coalition (SPD - no raise in VAT (16%) + CDU - raise to 18% = consensus: raise to 19% -.-). Meaning: I'd be surprises if they actually raised the minimal wage above €8/h.
Your first sentence is very curious - be free to vote against them (assuming you have the right to do so), but if they should ever get voted into government, you should accept that, that's democracy. Btw, they are not full blown communists, they don't claim to be nor does their program indicate such intention. Far left, socialist, sure, but not communist.
However, you are of course right that they would not be able to realize their program (which is the expected modus operandi for coalition government - they have to find consensus). But they'd be able to give a SPD/Grüne government a more leftist touch, which I'd presonally quite like. It's unrealistic, however, as Union and FDP were able to succesfully demonize them in the public opinion. So don't worry
I realize that their agenda can hardly be called communist. What I have in mind are their members. Many of their members from the Eastern provinces are ex-communists (former members of the commmunist party in East Germany or otherwise high in the former hierarchy). Do you have any idea how insanely stupid and/or morally bankrupt you had to be in order to be in the upper echelons of the communist party?
On September 19 2013 02:56 Daumen wrote: Im getting really excited for the election, cant wait to see the results ... I dont want Merkel to get a 3rd term :x Hope to see another Chancellor.
Not saying that Gysi must be Chancellor but I like the way he talks in the Bundestag. If he would have been in the Kanzler-Duell it would have been more interesting and more heated (in a good way).
Even though I'm not sure if he'd still talk the way he does if he wouldn't be in the constant opposition party that will never reign :/(actually I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't, on some points at least).
I thought the same... maybe... but we will never know if we dont vote him. His opposition-talk is better than the opposition talk of the other parties, wich he points out quite often.
Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Ofc, every party has populism, they want to be voted. I head that sentence very often "Die Linke is populistic." but never something specific :x
Many would agree that the majority of people that dont have any money and are not to blame for the crisis should NOT pay the price for it. Is that populism? If yes, is it wrong?
Im not very well informed on politic manners though, maybe you were getting at something else.
So you need examples? Here are just some taken from their answers to the Wahl-o-mat: minimum wage: their request: €10/h now, €12/h in four years. I agree that people should be able to earn enough money to support themselves. I'm against the 1-euro jobs in Germany. Neither €10/h, nor €12/h are that much money. However, there are some major flaws with such a request. First of all, there is gastronomy. Generally, restaurants and co. barely manage to survive and often enough go bankrupt only a few years after they open. Increasing the wages of waiters would hurt the restaurants significantly, while barely doing anything for the waiters themselves that already mainly rely on tips from the customers. Another example are universities. Students working at the university get €9/h in NRW. Increasing their wages to €10 (€12) means an increase of 11%-33%. The provinces (Bundesländer) have to pay for this. However, we know how tight their budget is. Such an increase in their wages means either a 11%-33% cut in the student workers at every university in NRW or the money has to be cut somewhere else. Wages of less than €10/h exist in many communes and all provinces. This puts yet another burden on them. The biggest argument against the minimal wage as proposed by Die Linke is the huge difference in standards between Eastern and Western provinces. It's absolutely unreasonable to expect that something like this could work in the whole country. (Especially enacted as fast as proposed by die Linke)
Their answer to the Euro question: „Voraussetzung für den Fortbestand des Euro ist, dass die Kürzungspolitik, beendet wird. Es ist die Politik von Troika, Merkel & Co, die die Gemeinschaftswährung zerstört. Statt Kürzungen wollen wir höhere Löhne, bessere Sozialstandards und Arbeiterrechte in ganz Europa. Der heute vorherrschende Wettbewerb durch Steuer-, Sozial- und Lohndumping muss durch eine Abstimmung der Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitiken der Euro-Länder ersetzt werden.” ... You don't think that this is a populist rhetoric?
Free electricity: Their proposal: every home gets 300 free kWh plus 200 kWh for every person in the household. Using rounded down numbers: 80.000.000*200 + 40.000.000*300 = 2,8*10^10 kWh The cost for generation and transport for 2013 is 14,32 cents. 2,8*10^10 * 0,1432 € = ~4*10^9 Euro They want to finance this through the increased governtment income through VAT on the EEG-Umlage, which is around 1*10^9 for 2013. This is only 4 times less than what is needed for their proposal. Additionally, there will be a decrease in this VAT income due to the 2,8*10^10 kWh they want to provide for free. The decrease would be around 250 mio. Furthermore, they want to give a €200 subsidy to everybody who wants to buy new oven/refrigerator/washing machine and want to finance it through the same means. All my numbers are rounded in favor of their proposal. If you take the exact numbers, there would be a few dozen more million euro missing. How is such an impossible proposal anything but populist?
Complete stop of all coal power generation plants: Really? So they want to immediatelly shut down all nuclear power plants (23,3% of all generated power in Germany) and all coal power plants in the next 10-30 years (43,6%). Do you really not see any problem with this?
Retirement with 65: Do you have any idea how big the burden on the state would be if this gets enacted? This is more or less impossible to finance now and will completely impossible in the next few years, considering the ever increasing amount of retirees and life expectancy in Germany.
Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs: Their answer: "Statt Sanktionen benötigen wir mehr gut bezahlte Arbeitsplätze.” Great idea! Let's just create more well paid jobs...
I don't think I need to continue (I certainly could though). Calling die Linke anything but populist is delusional.
so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
On September 19 2013 05:13 Skilledblob wrote: so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
Utopic fantasies are in no way beneficial to any discussion. As a matter of fact, the only thing die Linke has achieved is to destroy any meaningful opposition to CDU. Who knows, maybe this time they will actually manage to fool enough voters and force the government into a gridlock, which will most likely benefit CDU even more in the long run.
On September 19 2013 05:13 Skilledblob wrote: so every party has to say the same because otherwise they are populist. I see your logic here.
It is not important if their demands are doable at the moment. what is important is the fact that they make demands that differ from the other parties. I dont want another party in the parlament that just says the same like every other party because then I could just vote for SPD or CDU or dont vote at all.
Politics is not a black and white business. Decisions are made through discussion and for that discussion parties like Die Linke are important because they offer a position that is far enough away from the other parties that the other parties have to fear the loss of voters at the next election if they dont at least move a bit in the direction of the opposition ( and SPD is no opposition).
And populism is one of the most stupid arguments ever. A political party that actually cares about what the people in the country want? Oh my, we cant have that can we?
But please by all means go vote FDP again, they were so social after all to those poor hotel owners. They really needed that free money.
I'd never vote for the FDP and I severely doubt that you read what ggrrg wrote and copy-pasted into his post
Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs: Their answer: "Statt Sanktionen benötigen wir mehr gut bezahlte Arbeitsplätze.” Great idea! Let's just create more well paid jobs...
"Sanctions if unemployed people decline too many jobs" "Just make more jobs then!"
Grade A problemsolving right there. I'm not saying that they don't add something to the democratic process, but if you don't see that they are populistic and often downright stupid, illogical and disagree with themselves, then I can't help you anymore.
And we actually had a discussion here that managed to be without any needless aggression, that suprised me and I was happy about that, but then you write stuff like that. Why do you do that? Why can't you just voice your opinion like an adult instead of starting to throw stuff like that around and poisoning the athmosphere? I tried to stay nice here and I think even in the part here that's actually ontopic one can hear that I reacted accordingly to your needlessly aggressive post, I consciously decided not to clean it up though since it isn't too bad and so you realize how your post actually looks for others.
TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
EDIT: Your attitude aside, yes, I do take people calling me an FDP voter as a serious insult for obvious reasons and since you named some of them in that sentence I'm pretty sure that it was ment that way as well >___>.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
I don't see how anything said about die Linke is hyberbolic (bar my communist remarks). I think I gave enough examples of purely populist instances in their agenda. If you feel like those are not valid or that they actually have some reasonable requests, feel free to list discuss them in this thread.
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote: TLDNR: This is a thread about politics DO NOT start useless fights that last over several pages and end up getting somebody warned or banned in the end (yes, that's what your post would cause if this just goes on and we let this get more heated).
Please look in the mirror from time to time. Who turned light hearted remarks about Gysi into a hyperbolic dispute again?
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
Reading through their demands or even just their answers in the wahl-o-mat does show that it's mostly just populism, if you have another opinion, feel free to show me that most of the demands they try to get votes with aren't exactly that. Until then don't call my statement a hyperbole and read more carefully, I wasn't talking about Gysi in particular, I actually praised him a few posts before that, but I was talking about his party.
On September 19 2013 03:27 SilentchiLL wrote: Rewarding populism usually leads to very bad things and most of the stuff Die Linke does is populism.
And contrary to the guy I was criticizing I wasn't going for the guy I was talking to directly but that party and he didn't seem to mind.
EDIT: even you must have chuckled when you saw this + Show Spoiler +
Ein praktisches Beispiel für Populismus? – Der Vorschlag der „Linken“ für einen „Schutzschirm für Sozialkassen“ und die Reaktionen im Bundestag
Ein Antrag der Linksfraktion auf Staatsgarantien für Sozialversicherungen ist im Bundestag auf geschlossene Ablehnung aller anderen Fraktionen gestoßen. Als „populistisch und brandgefährlich“ wies der haushaltspolitische Sprecher der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, Steffen Kampeter, den Vorstoß am Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2009, zurück. „Wir brauchen eine umfassende Reformdebatte über soziale Leistungen“, sagte der CDU-Politiker in der rund 75-minütigen Bundestagsdebatte. SPD, FDP und Grüne hielten der Linksfraktion vor, unrealistische Vorschläge zu machen, die nicht finanzierbar seien. Die SPD verwies darauf, dass die Bundesregierung bereits Rentenkürzungen für das kommende Jahr ausgeschlossen und eine Schutzklausel verabschiedet hat.
Nach dem Willen der Linksfraktion soll die Bundesregierung gesetzlich regeln, dass auch nach der Bundestagswahl Ende September Sozialleistungen nicht gekürzt werden. Kürzungen der Sozialleistungen wären Gift für die Kaufkraft und würden die jetzige Krise noch verstärken, heißt es in dem Antrag. „Die Bundesregierung muss für die sozialen Sicherungssysteme bürgen und durch eine Staatsgarantie einen wirksamen Schutzschirm für die Menschen spannen.“
Der stellvertretende Chef der Linksfraktion, Klaus Ernst, verwies darauf, dass bis Ende 2010 allein in der Arbeitslosen- und Krankenversicherung die Fehlbeträge auf 50 Milliarden Euro ansteigen würden. Gleichzeitig unterstütze die Bundesregierung marode Banken mit insgesamt 480 Milliarden Euro und halte sie damit künstlich am Leben. „Menschen, die mit der Krise überhaupt nichts zu tun haben, sollen die Krise bewältigen und zahlen“, hielt Ernst der Bundesregierung vor. Der Antrag der Linksfraktion mache hingegen deutlich: "Wir bitten den Bürger nicht zur Kasse.“
Als „Frontalangriff und Verrat an den nachfolgenden Generationen“ bewertete hingegen der CDU-Politiker Kampeter den Antrag der Linksfraktion. Die Bürger erwarteten von der Politik eine kluge Reform der sozialen Sicherungssysteme. Die Linke dagegen fordere von der Politik eine „Selbstblockade des Staates“. Das sei ein „übles Spiel mit der Angst“.
(...)
Die SPD-Haushaltspolitikerin Waltraud Lehn wehrte sich gegen den Vorwurf, die Bundesregierung habe maroden Banken unter die Arme gegriffen. „Wir haben dafür gesorgt, dass Geld fließt für Investitionen“, sagte sie. Außerdem würden die Renten in diesem Jahr steigen. Das zeige: „Auf unseren Sozialstaat ist Verlass, auch in Krisenzeiten.“
(...)
Auch die gesundheitspolitische Sprecherin von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Birgitt Bender, forderte die Linksfraktion auf klarzustellen, wie sie einen Schutzschirm für Sozialleistungen finanzieren wolle. „Wenn Sie sagen ‚keine Kürzungen’, müssen Sie auch sagen, wie viel Mehrbelastung auf die Bürger zukommt.“ In der Rentenversicherung hat die Bundesregierung bereits auf die Befürchtung sinkender Löhne reagiert und eine Rentengarantie für die rund 20 Millionen Ruheständler verabschiedet. Finanziert werden soll die Schutzklausel dadurch, dass künftige Rentenerhöhungen halbiert werden. Sozialminister Olaf Scholz (SPD) erwartet allerdings nicht, dass die Schutzklausel in Anspruch genommen werden muss, da Rentenkürzungen derzeit nicht erkennbar seien.
All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
You do realize that willkommenskultur nach kanadischem vorbild has nothing to do with actually changing the willkommenskultur? Its just a synonym for "less uneducated immigrants from africa and the middle east" without sounding racist.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
You do realize that willkommenskultur nach kanadischem vorbild has nothing to do with actually changing the willkommenskultur? Its just a synonym for "less uneducated immigrants from africa and the middle east" without sounding racist.
No, because that is assuming that the AfD's internal policy-making process reflects a coherent political culture, rather than the powerpoint-style thoughtspeech which I alluded to. AfD's programme includes a cost/benefit-based immigration system, but also for work-permits for Asylum-seekers, which can be subsumed under the same logical principle. As I read the character of AfD's campaign, there is no spleen in them, no under-the-covers innuendo. Their platform is really as bland as they say it is.
The point concerns the shameless catachresis of the political campaign as a whole. It benefits the nebulous atmosphere of the political season by inviting us all to channel ourselves unto an ambiguous slogan.
On September 19 2013 07:57 SilentchiLL wrote: EDIT2: An example (sorry that it's in german) + Show Spoiler +
Ein praktisches Beispiel für Populismus? – Der Vorschlag der „Linken“ für einen „Schutzschirm für Sozialkassen“ und die Reaktionen im Bundestag
Ein Antrag der Linksfraktion auf Staatsgarantien für Sozialversicherungen ist im Bundestag auf geschlossene Ablehnung aller anderen Fraktionen gestoßen. Als „populistisch und brandgefährlich“ wies der haushaltspolitische Sprecher der CDU/CSU-Fraktion, Steffen Kampeter, den Vorstoß am Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2009, zurück. „Wir brauchen eine umfassende Reformdebatte über soziale Leistungen“, sagte der CDU-Politiker in der rund 75-minütigen Bundestagsdebatte. SPD, FDP und Grüne hielten der Linksfraktion vor, unrealistische Vorschläge zu machen, die nicht finanzierbar seien. Die SPD verwies darauf, dass die Bundesregierung bereits Rentenkürzungen für das kommende Jahr ausgeschlossen und eine Schutzklausel verabschiedet hat.
Nach dem Willen der Linksfraktion soll die Bundesregierung gesetzlich regeln, dass auch nach der Bundestagswahl Ende September Sozialleistungen nicht gekürzt werden. Kürzungen der Sozialleistungen wären Gift für die Kaufkraft und würden die jetzige Krise noch verstärken, heißt es in dem Antrag. „Die Bundesregierung muss für die sozialen Sicherungssysteme bürgen und durch eine Staatsgarantie einen wirksamen Schutzschirm für die Menschen spannen.“
Der stellvertretende Chef der Linksfraktion, Klaus Ernst, verwies darauf, dass bis Ende 2010 allein in der Arbeitslosen- und Krankenversicherung die Fehlbeträge auf 50 Milliarden Euro ansteigen würden. Gleichzeitig unterstütze die Bundesregierung marode Banken mit insgesamt 480 Milliarden Euro und halte sie damit künstlich am Leben. „Menschen, die mit der Krise überhaupt nichts zu tun haben, sollen die Krise bewältigen und zahlen“, hielt Ernst der Bundesregierung vor. Der Antrag der Linksfraktion mache hingegen deutlich: "Wir bitten den Bürger nicht zur Kasse.“
Als „Frontalangriff und Verrat an den nachfolgenden Generationen“ bewertete hingegen der CDU-Politiker Kampeter den Antrag der Linksfraktion. Die Bürger erwarteten von der Politik eine kluge Reform der sozialen Sicherungssysteme. Die Linke dagegen fordere von der Politik eine „Selbstblockade des Staates“. Das sei ein „übles Spiel mit der Angst“.
(...)
Die SPD-Haushaltspolitikerin Waltraud Lehn wehrte sich gegen den Vorwurf, die Bundesregierung habe maroden Banken unter die Arme gegriffen. „Wir haben dafür gesorgt, dass Geld fließt für Investitionen“, sagte sie. Außerdem würden die Renten in diesem Jahr steigen. Das zeige: „Auf unseren Sozialstaat ist Verlass, auch in Krisenzeiten.“
(...)
Auch die gesundheitspolitische Sprecherin von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Birgitt Bender, forderte die Linksfraktion auf klarzustellen, wie sie einen Schutzschirm für Sozialleistungen finanzieren wolle. „Wenn Sie sagen ‚keine Kürzungen’, müssen Sie auch sagen, wie viel Mehrbelastung auf die Bürger zukommt.“ In der Rentenversicherung hat die Bundesregierung bereits auf die Befürchtung sinkender Löhne reagiert und eine Rentengarantie für die rund 20 Millionen Ruheständler verabschiedet. Finanziert werden soll die Schutzklausel dadurch, dass künftige Rentenerhöhungen halbiert werden. Sozialminister Olaf Scholz (SPD) erwartet allerdings nicht, dass die Schutzklausel in Anspruch genommen werden muss, da Rentenkürzungen derzeit nicht erkennbar seien.
Yeah well I don't see this as a good example of populism. It's their opinion that social spending shall not be cut at all and in fact be raised. So it makes sense to try and get that in the Bundestag. Why is it bad for a party to actually do something about their program?
On September 19 2013 05:31 SilentchiLL wrote:If you feel like those are not valid or that they actually have some reasonable requests, feel free to list discuss them in this thread.
Well I'm not too focused on economics and social laws and regulations (because I really understand nothing at all of it) but what makes Die Linke outstanding to me is two things: 1. No more war and bring the troops home (guess what, that would be one way to cut a little spending) 2. Complete ban on the export of weapons.
And to be honest, for me that is enough.
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
wow, I didn't really know they had anything in their program at all except of economy related stuff. But now that I read that I remember an election poster here in Aachen of them saying *Einwanderung begrenzen* or something on that line (Limit Immigration).
Speaking of a Canadian Willkommenskultur, I was welcomed very coldly this week in Munich when an "uneducated immigrant" of North African Arab descent made off with my laptop. Surely the first measure to keeping a welcoming house is to keep the guests polite.
On September 19 2013 22:37 MoltkeWarding wrote: Speaking of a Canadian Willkommenskultur, I was welcomed very coldly this week in Munich when an "uneducated immigrant" of North African Arab descent made off with my laptop. Surely the first measure to keeping a welcoming house is to keep the guests polite.
Sorry, was my metaphor too Haute Bourgeois for our uprooted generation? I suppose everyone is an immigrant now, even in our own countries, neighbourhoods, sometimes even with our own families.
On September 19 2013 22:55 MoltkeWarding wrote: Sorry, was my metaphor too Haute Bourgeois for our uprooted generation? I suppose everyone is an immigrant now, even in our own countries, neighbourhoods, sometimes even with our own families.
as a german the AfD scares me more then any nazi partie ... its unbelievable they can get people vote them with all the lies they tell ... they act like they come from basis but come from the super rich just... i better stop i rly hate them
as most young internet users of germany i am favoring the pirates quite alot, but the guys in there and voting for them are often so ... i rly hate that they not even TRY to be more serious ... its not cool vote for someone with green/purple hair wearing a blue pair of suspenders in the reichstag ...
and mostly frustrated i am about my german fellow citizen ... super disapointed as much shit merkel does, shes teflon, everything perls off her like she hasnt even done it ... she switch her oppinion every 5 minutes after the wind of the votes ... dont understand me wrong, i support most of what she says right now, but i am sure in 2 months she will say something completly different
but since the spd is going to be a joke, the fpd is already a joke and the green guys are throwing stupid phrases around (no i dont mean this pedophile shit they bring up in press right now thats just rubbish) its the hardest vote ever...
left with what ? the npd (neo nazis) who cant speak proper german, sounds like dwarfnazis on crack and have a brain of a dead mice ? or the left party who wants 10k for everyone for doing nothing and a holiday on moon for everyone ? i dont vote someone when they not even try to say something thats doable
most frustrating vote of my god damn life well the vote help tool in the internet tells me my main party would be the "animal protection party" or "the party" (who have the mottos BEER BEER AND GOOD WEATHER) ... so why the fuck not ... better then dont going vote ^^
for me theres no better country in life then my (as most people think ^^) the gouverment could be worse, and the cabaret/comedy is great with such good deliveres in charge but ... still ... god i wish i would like at least ONE of them
On September 19 2013 22:20 schaf wrote: Yeah well I don't see this as a good example of populism. It's their opinion that social spending shall not be cut at all and in fact be raised. So it makes sense to try and get that in the Bundestag. Why is it bad for a party to actually do something about their program?[1]
Well I'm not too focused on economics and social laws and regulations (because I really understand nothing at all of it) but what makes Die Linke outstanding to me is two things: 1. No more war and bring the troops home (guess what, that would be one way to cut a little spending) 2. Complete ban on the export of weapons.[2]
On September 19 2013 20:51 MoltkeWarding wrote: All election posters are unctuous, I particularly enjoyed the one by the AfD called for a "Willkommenskultur" nach "kanadischem Vorbild", as if this is something which can implemented by managerial initiative. All the worse, since this kind of surreal boardroom agenda-making is symptomatic of the background from which the party draws its leadership.
However, the AfD may spoil the elections for the present coalition, if the electoral threshold is mastered. In all likelihood, a five-party Bundestag will see the re-election of the present coalition, but either a four-party or a six-party Bundestag will not.
wow, I didn't really know they had anything in their program at all except of economy related stuff. But now that I read that I remember an election poster here in Aachen of them saying *Einwanderung begrenzen* or something on that line (Limit Immigration).[1]
I think the bolded part explains A LOT then, because that's basically where Die Linke fails the most and the hardest :/.
[1] And if you read the example and know some stuff about it then it's actually a very good example for populism, I'll try to give you a short and simple explanation. Basically the lefties are saying "We should save the normal people and not spend billions of government euros on saving some rich fat bankowners and shareowners! We should stop saving banks and help the poor people instead!" Which sounds great, doesn't it? But it isn't, it's really, really bad. And that's basically populism, they say things that SOUND good, but only to those who don't know enough about the topic or only when you first hear it, the reason why EVERY other party said that's completely crazy and irresponsible, because you would cripple your own economy when you let all the banks drown, saving the banks was costly and not much fun and it's infuriating that we had to do that, but NOT saving them may sound nice "Let the banks go bankcrupt when they fail!", but it would cripple our own economy, lose a lot of jobs, make taking a loan nearly impossible for small businesses or people because of the rising interest rates and so on and so on. As I said, I wanna keep it short and simple, but the banks are necessary for our system for many reasons, which range from the trust the people have in german banks to their ability to do their job and much more.
[2] No more wars sounds good as well, I'm very much for a peaceful solution for syria too and think Die Linke (and eventually the other parties) did the right thing by being vehemently against military intervention there, but thinking that we can avoid wars entirely seems a bit utopian to me. Forbidding Gun exports sounds nice too, but there are jobs connected to those exports (which of course can't pay for human lives, but then again they'd just get the guns somewhere else if not from us) though I guess that is more of an ethical issue, I'm afraid I'm not a good enough person to give up a well running industry for a gesture that wouldn't change much in the long run since there is always somebody who wants to sell a weapon. I do agree though that it would probably ethically correct not to sell them.
[3] To be honest, I wouldn't have a problem with limiting immigration, it's not about racism and while I don't think that we shouldn't let in any poor people at all (like people asking for asylum and similar cases), I do think that we should concentrate more on getting more well educated people in the country. The politicians always say that we need immigrants, that less and less babies are born and more and more germans die, but they never say that it may be a good idea to do everything in their power to ensure that we get the best kind of immigrants (economically, of course), which means well educated people. I don't care which colour their skin is, which god they pray to or how they dress, but I would prefer it if the people who come here would be well educated so they can contribute to the greater good . But from my experience with immigrants I also think that less well educated immigrants (and especially their children) need to be given more focus in our educational system as well, extra classes for them and stuff like that always makes people think of racism, but in the end it would be better for them, they'd have more success in life and it would help them too (but that may be a completely different discussion). Point is, political correctness can be pretty bad in a lot of ways and actually harm those it tries to protect (e.g. minorities), people aren't all equal and giving people some extra help educationally or maybe even forcing them to take it, like extra-reading/german classes for immigrants after the normal classes wouldn't be racism, it would only mean that we see a problem and do what we can to fix it.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://www.spreeblick.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/linke.jpg)
.
