World Politics

[talkingtocactus]

^ you did well at multiquotes! I'll reply properly when I'm at my computer tho...

I'm not against EU itself (except huge piles of forms I have to fill every spring) but the speed really pisses me off.

i don't mind the speed so much as the lack of checking that's being done, and also i think it's kind of wrong that the "big" nations (ie the ones that have always been in) have no financial scrutiny or at least less scrutiny than new members. as has been proved by spain, just because you're an established member, it doesn't mean you're doing well with your finances!

Seriously, on what grounds there was to take Bulgaria and Romania tu EU? And with Euro, how way too fast it has spread. We've dealt well because depression at early 90s was horrible here and we learnt our lesson damn well. I just cannot understand when it's taken decades countries to form themselves to be what they are, we try to put everything together in short time.

actually i didn't have a problem with those - after all they haven't been as bankrupt or corrupt as greece which was a nation that went through a lot less scrutiny to join (which is my point above). bulgaria and romania were probably brought in partly because they needed the financial input as well as the financial output - their tourism industry is now doing well (bulgaria's is nothing short of booming) and it's probably been a good thing for them to join. i think the thing is about the different amounts of time, is that there were different circumstances. i think for the former soviet bloc especially a promotion of western culture and financial ways was probably needed sooner not later. and like i said these countries arean't the ones causing problems now really, it's the old, established ones like spain (definitely established), greece an ireland (both old and established relative to the soviet bloc nations)

Like now Estonia joined the EU. The country is basicly bankrupt (well it was 2 yrs ago at least) I cannot understand how economy like that can be accepted. Of course former Soviet Countries have potential to grow and develop in a very different way and e.g in Tallinn I've seen such a huge progress in past 10 years (visited there first in 2000, 2nd time 2006 and then 2008) And at least the capital has changed.
One farmer joked, that in the 1900s they were occupied by Russians, in the 2000s they are occupied by Finns (kind of rude to compare us to Russians, after all it's a damn lots of money and damn lots of construction that we've brought to that country)

i don't think it's just their economy tho, it's also about what they can bring to europe, and how they can benefit from the things that go with membership like free movement and so on. it's about being more open as well as finance. which explains why these countries are growing (economically) so fast. budget tourism has made tallinn (and places like it, riga, for instance) very prosperous and ok, that's just the capital, but that kind of prosperity has a habit of spreading to the rest of the nation. damn, i sound like a capitalist

Erm, anyways. EU is here to stay and I think once new generations come to adulthood, it (hopefully) get easier. Of course we'll never ever ever be United States of Europe. Oh god no.

agreed. i don't think we ever could be like the US, there's too much history at stake. and i think the generations that grow up having only known the eu as it is (approximately), ie with one currency, many member states and a good spirit of cooperation but a few problems too, can learn to manage it better in financial terms. it is a very new entity (when i was a kid it didn't really exist) so of course there are teething problems but i think on the whole it's quite positive.

 

[Ajbuckly]

Now that will be the day: Lisa...ahemm...Talking to Cactus = damn, i sound like a capitalist

But IMO EU is still suffering from: We want a Union but don´t really know which sort of Union. Some members would like the package American style. And some oppose(sp?) any sort of Union. And as such not just membercountries but also political parties within the nations. Usually right - winged parties.

But if trade is not put up front and center in Europe then we will loose to Asia or US as we have soo little of interest to anyone =export. AND if growth as in job - creation is the most important thing right now - then something is rotten in the state of EU. Yes education and enlightment(?) is important but at the moment we educate more and more youngst into unemployment.

So where you do "see" the niche in which we/EU can find growth?

PS Just "saw" "In to the Storm?" --- the one about Churchill(sp?). Did not he was so conservative but great movie. The Brown/Blair movie better. IMO

 

[Desertwind]

PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL GIVE HIS STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS ON TUESDAY

And our big Health Care Reform repeal is happening

http://www.aolnews.com/category/politics/

 

[talkingtocactus]

Now that will be the day: Lisa...ahemm...Talking to Cactus = damn, i sound like a capitalist

haha, yeah, i'm closer to marxism than capitalism!

But IMO EU is still suffering from: We want a Union but don´t really know which sort of Union.

i think that's very true, i think people went into it thinking that it'd be good for trade but without really thinking of how it might pan out in the future, and that's a problem. it's also what makes it so different from the US of A - when that was begun, there was a very clear idea of where they wanted it to go and how they wanted it to work, whereas in europe i think that was lacking.

But if trade is not put up front and center in Europe then we will loose to Asia or US as we have soo little of interest to anyone =export. AND if growth as in job - creation is the most important thing right now - then something is rotten in the state of EU. Yes education and enlightment(?) is important but at the moment we educate more and more youngst into unemployment.

yep, totally agree!

So where you do "see" the niche in which we/EU can find growth?

well that's a tough one for europe and the us - the big euro nations and the us all made the same economic mistake, imho - we sold off our industry (mostly under the conservative govts in the 70s/80s) to try to make bigger short term profits. that created massive joblessness everywhere, an entire generation seeing government as bad because it sold off industry and put them out of work in favour of investment, and no real avenues for making money fast in any future recession. industry and new deal stuff was what sorted that out after the great depression (and here too) but now we western nations have no industry because we gave in to the rise in chinese/indian/far eastern production (which is probably of a lower quality, has far more dangerous or insanitary working conditions, but is cheaper) we have nothing to produce - and production is what makes jobs and money. so basically we all screwed ourselves. well done conservative governments!

PS Just "saw" "In to the Storm?" --- the one about Churchill(sp?). Did not he was so conservative but great movie. The Brown/Blair movie better. IMO

i don't think i've seen that. churchill was quite conservative but then i think that's another thing with things like the eu (and definitely something that's an issue in the US right now) which is that the world has changed since churchill. before WWII even relatively liberal views were still fairly conservative by modern stands, imho, and so society was relatively cohesive. for instance even liberals in the past were quite oppressive of women's rights, gay rights etc. the world has changed *so* fast in the last 50 years or so that those ideas don't fit with it any more. the question is do you change your ideas to fit changes in society (liberal/progressive) or do you try to make society go back to how it was so it fits with your ideas (conservative)? personally i'd take the liberal route every time.

 

[Ajbuckly]

So where you do "see" the niche in which we/EU can find growth?

well that's a tough one for europe and the us - the big euro nations and the us all made the same economic mistake, imho - we sold off our industry (mostly under the conservative govts in the 70s/80s) to try to make bigger short term profits. that created massive joblessness everywhere, an entire generation seeing government as bad because it sold off industry and put them out of work in favour of investment, and no real avenues for making money fast in any future recession. industry and new deal stuff was what sorted that out after the great depression (and here too) but now we western nations have no industry because we gave in to the rise in chinese/indian/far eastern production (which is probably of a lower quality, has far more dangerous or insanitary working conditions, but is cheaper) we have nothing to produce - and production is what makes jobs and money. so basically we all screwed ourselves. well done conservative governments!

.

LOL I haven´t figured out that multiquoting yet. Bummer
As to the above couldn´t agree more. TVs -cars and berries(frossen berries here are from China). We are debating at the moment: a brigde or tunnel. Tunnel = work places stay here. Brigde = work goes to China as both steel and pay is cheaper. Costs including transport. :wtf::wtf::wtf:.
So flying in steel or sailing from China is considered.

But just hear on the radio that bacis of most economic growth is from farmming. And if Europe is any thing then it has to farming. Add to that the biodiesel engine. Why not cut a bit of the gas/dependence and devlope new means of olie? WEll 1. internationale politics overrides that one. Make us independ and loose fellow allies in oil producing countries. 2. Norway, Uk and DK makes money off the North Sea and natural gasses. And the Soviet Union makes off their lines. Could the ecomic status tolerate biofuel?

But then what???
Sorry spelling is way off. But I am really frustrated when it comes to the topic

 

[talkingtocactus]

^ it's quite straightforward really, just takes a bit of getting the hang of click multi quote for each post you want to quote then within the

brackets delete anything you don't want.

if it's the same post but quoting it a lot, delete all the bits you don't want to use and separate the ones you do by paragraph breaks, then highlight each paragraph and click the "quote" button, that will put quoting tags around the selection, if you do that for each bit, then you can just type in between them

as for the topic... i assume the work will be going to china in the case you talked about? or at least i wouldn't be at all surprised. i think this is one problem in today's world, and i don't think you even need to be a marx-appreciating-socialist to see it, i think it's pretty clear: profit is more important than *everything*.

as capitalism has grown and got more and more deregulated, making profit has been seen as more important than anything, including the welfare of people. if you read stuff about early (industrialised) markets, then making production faster and more efficient has always gone before looking after workers.

i've just read the jungle by upton sinclair ( (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle) he was a socialist in the first part of the 20th cent but was also pretty influential in california politics, until of course the right wingers decided that socialism was some kind of evil and kicked him out) and the depiction of just how far the workers were exploited was pretty shocking (although not surprising, especially for me because i did a lot of study of 19th century/industrial working practices for my last degree). sinclair spent weeks undercover in the industry so it was genuine material he was using. it's a great book and to an extent i think it still works today - of course now there is a level of employee welfare that we can't go below, in the west anyway, and if we're conducting our business officially (ie if you employ illegals, you can get away with treating them like crap).

but for me this is a problem - big corporations complain that having to put safety procedures in place costs them money: but these are people's lives! so they farm their business out to places where people can be bought more cheaply and exploited more, but hey, they make tons of money so it's all fine.



the problem from that is that if you farm your business overseas then you start decimating industry - as has happened here in europe and in the us - and then you end up with a workforce that is not only jobless but also really pissed off. surely it's better to invest in having a happy, healthy workforce with actual jobs to go to?

i think a lot of right-leaning or certainly neoliberal, capitalist people see these things like employee welfare or improved job standards etc purely as whims that eat into profits, but a socialist would say it's an investment in a better workforce. the same goes for healthcare and education. capitalists don't see why those of them that have made it and got rich should pay the way for those that haven't - well, presumably because if you educate the nation better and treat its sicknesses, you wind up with a better workforce in the future, and i think having a steady future productivity/profit has to be better than having sky high profits followed by a recession? but that depends on workers being healthy, able to do the job, and think for themselves. but no, i forgot, they don't like people to think for themselves, they just want them to fit into the giant production machine on as little pay/benefits as corporations can get away with paying and shut up while the bosses rake in the cash.

[/rant]

as for cutting off dependence on oil, i can't see it happening any time soon. oil is what keeps the nastiest people in the middle east sweet and stops them turning on their "friends" in the usa (hmm i wonder why the west didn't go after the saudis, who are far more supportive of sharia law and al qaeda type islamism than iraq have ever been, oh yeah, they keep our oil habit going, and you never, ever piss off your (drug) dealer). oil is what keeps the car and banking industries going. there is too much money in oil for people (by which i mean the us, because here in europe we're doing a bit better on this one) to ever not be dependent on it. which is a problem because some time pretty soon it's gonna run out. the saudis are gonna stop playing nice. it'll even run out in all those beautiful places that have suddenly been marked as less important than profit like the alaska oilbeds. and one day america will wake up to no oil and have to go cold turkey and it won't be pretty!

 

[Desertwind]

Don't forget to watch President Obama's ADDRESS TO THE NATION SPEECH TONIGHT 6 p.m. on most channels~

http://www.aolnews.com/category/politics/

 

[Desertwind]

42 MILLION people tuned into watch President Obama's State Of The Union speech on Tuesday. He spoke for over an hour, and said all the right things. An amazing orator~

Some news of what's going on today~

http://www.aolnews.com/category/politics/

 

[PerfectAnomaly]

It's nice to see the priority of the House GOP is to be a bunch of misogynistic assholes.

House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape

Congratulations, America, these are the idiots you voted into power in the House.

 

[talkingtocactus]

^ yeah that really is bad, it makes me sad & angry in equal measure, and if it goes through it'll be a massive step backwards.

some crazy stuff going down in egypt too, in the wake of tunisia. wonder if this is the beginning of the end for several mid-eastern regimes...

 

[Ajbuckly]

Well without someone to form a new vision for Egypt will the international comunity take over and thereby create more trouble or will it all stop with the military take over? Tanks lining(sp?) at Sharmel Shik at the moment?

As for our economic debate even Obama says: Freeze public spending and raise education?

But if there is no growth in jobs and economy where are people to get a job? Is westen economy Titanic?

 

[Ducky]

And the Soviet Union makes off their lines. Could the ecomic status tolerate biofuel?

Erm, Soviet Union? Hasn't existed for 20yrs.

I was wondering the biofuel. Like with cars we now have 95E10 - I mean, I've seen stuff that it never worked in US, ruined cars there so is it really solution? Of course I think in use they used maize so I wonder if it works in different.

Btw, when I visited Germany, the biogas, green energy and stuff is HUGE there, I wonder when it spreads here.

 

[talkingtocactus]

Well without someone to form a new vision for Egypt will the international comunity take over and thereby create more trouble or will it all stop with the military take over? Tanks lining(sp?) at Sharmel Shik at the moment?

i don't know what'll happen but i think america are too quick to get involved. the problem is nations are supposed to have sovereignty and that sovereignty isn't supposed to be interfered with by other nations unless there is a threat of war or there's previous invitation etc. what happens within a nation's borders should be up to that nation. but because the us has been involved so deeply in the mid-east (because of oil, and by the way this goes just as much for the uk) it has made ties that would cause disaster in the us if they get broken, and so they routinely interfere in sovereign matters when it's frankly none of their business. and that is how colonialism and imperialism happened and if you look at the places that were colonised by the british empire, how they have fared since then ain't pretty on the whole. i think the us (and the uk) need to take a step back on some of these issues. of course they can't because they'd lose their precious black gold.

also it's tough because the us put so many of these people in power - obama has been saying the us supports the democratic freedoms of the egyptian people, but who's funded the mubarak government for most of its duration? just like bush said saddam had to be stopped, but who gave saddam the means to be a tyrant? just like bush said bin laden had to be stopped, but who gave bin laden money and weapons for years? this is the crux of the problem for me - it's short term thinking; if the us (and the uk although largely just as the us' bitch) keeps making deals with (and exploiting) dodgy regimes in order to get oil discounts, then those dodgy regimes (who know they're being expolited) will keep returning to bite the west hard on the arse.

excuse the rant but if the middle east is ever to be sorted then us foreign policy since world war 2 is a huge culprit and needs to realise its mistakes and either help in a more understanding way (ie not painting the mid easterners as "the other") and/or back off. is it really any surprise the mid east is so angry?

But if there is no growth in jobs and economy where are people to get a job? Is westen economy Titanic?

good question :S

And the Soviet Union makes off their lines. Could the ecomic status tolerate biofuel?

Erm, Soviet Union? Hasn't existed for 20yrs.

but if putin had his way it would!

I was wondering the biofuel. Like with cars we now have 95E10 - I mean, I've seen stuff that it never worked in US, ruined cars there so is it really solution? Of course I think in use they used maize so I wonder if it works in different.

i don't think it'll ever take off in the states really because they are so dependent on oil, addicted to it, and that's because oil makes more money than biofuel. that's why the electric car industry, which came about a long time ago, was killed off by the petroleum industry and is only just re-emerging. maybe if the states hits a huge crisis and suddenly can't get oil because the mid-east shuts it out or the stocks under alaska run out or something, but til then? no way.

Btw, when I visited Germany, the biogas, green energy and stuff is HUGE there, I wonder when it spreads here.

i think in europe it's more likely - over here we are less dependent on oil, more aware of environmental concerns and more keen to find alternatives. which is good

btw i feel like i've been sounding really negative about the us in this post, i'm not, i love it generally, but dear god the foreign policy is shocking....

 

[Desertwind]

Now on our news here, the militia has released 10,000 prisoners from jail to roam free in the streets.. great.. what's next? I had no idea that Mubarak was 85, I thought he was like 65

http://www.aolnews.com/category/politics/

 

[talkingtocactus]

i don't really see the problem in releasing prisoners, it depends on what kind they are and i'm pretty sure it's unlikely they're the violent kind. both our nations have vastly overcrowded prisons because, frankly, we keep putting people in there that don't belong there. people who lie on insurance papers or tax (unless of course they're billionaires or corporations in which case tax evasion is just fine) or who commit relatively minor fraud or petty robbery etc really don't belong in jail, they should be getting community service and/or hefty fines.

the prison system (including comm service and fining) is supposed to be for rehabilitation more than punishment (ha, there speaks a lefty) and putting minor, non violent offenders inside is a total waste of resources, financially speaking (especially as fines could generate revenue for the system) and in terms of actual space.

also there are far too many people in jail who are seriously mentally ill and therefore have mitigating factors for their crimes. of course they should be punished and rehabilitated but if they have any serious mental illness (ie schizophrenia, bipolar, personality disorder* etc) then a secure hospital is the place for them, not a jail where the punishment aspect may well fall on deaf ears anyway without psychiatric input.

the thing is unless they've released hardcore rapists, murders, child abusers etc, i think the idea of them roaming the streets has less impact "ohnoez! the people who told a lie on an insurance claim or stole some groceries from walmart are coming to get us!"

if releasing a few (and compared to the size of your jailed population, 10,000 is a few) petty offenders makes more space for more effective rehab AND punishment of the really violent, nasty, sadistic criminals, then it's not a bad idea.

* the exception to this being psychopaths. psychopathy is generally known as sociopathy/antisocial personality disorder these days and technically is classed as a PD. however given that it's seen as untreatable and its main feature is lack of remorse (owing to a lack of emotive capability) rehabilitation is likely to be impossible. however that means punishment is too (if you don't even know you've done wrong, how will punishment impact you?). the issue in those cases is that with no remorse/sense of right or wrong, there's a higher propensity to reoffend and thus psychopaths should be kept in jail in order to prevent reoffending.


and yes, mubarak looks younger than he is, that black hair dye does some weird things