Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: News Around The World
No, there are more options. It is also possible to offer loans without imposing harsh austerity measures. More loans might be required, but this could be done by reducing interest rates such that western European countries make less profit or even a small loss. Also, rather than reducing the deficit, Greece might decide to reduce the debt instead. This could be done through a one time harsh tax on the shipping sector.
The problem is that politicians in countries like Netherlands and Germany cannot accept any losses from the rescue packages to Greece as they will be punished very harshly by their electors base even though taking a loss might be cheaper than an economic slowdown in Greece and the rest of the EU (which is what currently is going on). This is why our politicians choose the route that will cost us more in the end.
The EU is a project by Europeans that is not completed yet and maybe will never get completed. We make mistakes sometimes and we will have to learn from them and change our institutions accordingly. The things is that it is a project for all Europeans. Together we are stronger. So when one of us (Greece) is in trouble we all need to step in and take some losses so that we can heal. It is for the greater prosperity of us all. Instead of giving something to the Greek, we're actually making profit for them. When you're together in a project like the EU, you need to be willing to give something away when one of you needs it. Today, however, we refuse to give up even a tiny bit. Even when it is worse for us in the end.
The problem is that politicians in countries like Netherlands and Germany cannot accept any losses from the rescue packages to Greece as they will be punished very harshly by their electors base even though taking a loss might be cheaper than an economic slowdown in Greece and the rest of the EU (which is what currently is going on). This is why our politicians choose the route that will cost us more in the end.
The EU is a project by Europeans that is not completed yet and maybe will never get completed. We make mistakes sometimes and we will have to learn from them and change our institutions accordingly. The things is that it is a project for all Europeans. Together we are stronger. So when one of us (Greece) is in trouble we all need to step in and take some losses so that we can heal. It is for the greater prosperity of us all. Instead of giving something to the Greek, we're actually making profit for them. When you're together in a project like the EU, you need to be willing to give something away when one of you needs it. Today, however, we refuse to give up even a tiny bit. Even when it is worse for us in the end.
The problem is that politicians in countries like Netherlands and Germany cannot accept any losses from the rescue packages to Greece as they will be punished very harshly by their electors base even though taking a loss might be cheaper than an economic slowdown in Greece and the rest of the EU (which is what currently is going on). This is why our politicians choose the route that will cost us more in the end.
I think the real problem is they can't because they married the deflactionary ideology, in order to be able to convince people they deserve to get poor, making possible a more polarized distribution of income. They lie to their citizens in order to cheat them and then they can't do it anything else, even if it comes that is useful to their goals.
The EU is a project by Europeans that is not completed yet and maybe will never get completed. We make mistakes sometimes and we will have to learn from them and change our institutions accordingly. The things is that it is a project for all Europeans. Together we are stronger. So when one of us (Greece) is in trouble we all need to step in and take some losses so that we can heal. It is for the greater prosperity of us all. Instead of giving something to the Greek, we're actually making profit for them. When you're together in a project like the EU, you need to be willing to give something away when one of you needs it. Today, however, we refuse to give up even a tiny bit. Even when it is worse for us in the end.
I agree, now E.U. is a royal rumble, where countries are like wrestlers caught in a big cage.
I think the real problem is they can't because they married the deflactionary ideology, in order to be able to convince people they deserve to get poor, making possible a more polarized distribution of income. They lie to their citizens in order to cheat them and then they can't do it anything else, even if it comes that is useful to their goals.
The EU is a project by Europeans that is not completed yet and maybe will never get completed. We make mistakes sometimes and we will have to learn from them and change our institutions accordingly. The things is that it is a project for all Europeans. Together we are stronger. So when one of us (Greece) is in trouble we all need to step in and take some losses so that we can heal. It is for the greater prosperity of us all. Instead of giving something to the Greek, we're actually making profit for them. When you're together in a project like the EU, you need to be willing to give something away when one of you needs it. Today, however, we refuse to give up even a tiny bit. Even when it is worse for us in the end.
I agree, now E.U. is a royal rumble, where countries are like wrestlers caught in a big cage.
I'm more with luuut: I don't think it is a plan to achieve higher polarization or impoverish people, I have more faith on explanations based on individuals following the incentives they have in their quest to maximize their own welfare :P
I have more faith on explanations based on individuals following the incentives they have in their quest to maximize their own welfare :P
I think this is not in any contrast to my idea.
Maybe we should think that "the plan" is not made at a political level (if you intend for political those faces you know on tv), they simply execute, with more or less understanding.
If you look at the creation of euro currency, you can't fail to sse that all its flaws were clear BEFORE its beginning, and nobody at that time could doubt about the effects it was going to produce (reunification of Germany, that show a lot of similar dinamics were just happened).
But it was made. Voluntarily. There are a lot of explicit declaration from the "fathers" of euro that showed how they knowed it all before.
The real problem is the functioning of democracy in western democracies.
The chain of representation produced by elections, carry only a free power for elected politicians. Without political responsability.
So the only problem is to get elected. The rest is easy to imagine, if you realize that what it nneds to get there.
(editado)
I think this is not in any contrast to my idea.
Maybe we should think that "the plan" is not made at a political level (if you intend for political those faces you know on tv), they simply execute, with more or less understanding.
If you look at the creation of euro currency, you can't fail to sse that all its flaws were clear BEFORE its beginning, and nobody at that time could doubt about the effects it was going to produce (reunification of Germany, that show a lot of similar dinamics were just happened).
But it was made. Voluntarily. There are a lot of explicit declaration from the "fathers" of euro that showed how they knowed it all before.
The real problem is the functioning of democracy in western democracies.
The chain of representation produced by elections, carry only a free power for elected politicians. Without political responsability.
So the only problem is to get elected. The rest is easy to imagine, if you realize that what it nneds to get there.
(editado)
Reunification of Germany was different. They overvalued East-German Mark 4x of it's real value, when they changed it to DM, so East-German people's salaries weren't so low compared to the West-German ones. This meant however, that East-German industry didn't have a chance.
Pre-Euro currencies weren't overvalued, everbody took great care about it.
(editado)
Pre-Euro currencies weren't overvalued, everbody took great care about it.
(editado)
Is it true that in England changed the law on rape?
That now, no need to prove the accused guilty, but on the contrary - the accused must prove his innocence?
That now, no need to prove the accused guilty, but on the contrary - the accused must prove his innocence?
Reunification of Germany was different. They overvalued East-German Mark 4x of it's real value, when they changed it to DM, so East-German people's salaries weren't so low compared to the West-German ones. This meant however, that East-German industry didn't have a chance.
Pre-Euro currencies weren't overvalued, everbody took great care about it.
there are some differences of course.
But there a a a lot of studies that show how Germany reunification is in some way similar to the euro currency story.
First of all the choice to make as FIRST STEP in creating a political union the unification of the currency.
It determined the complete de industrialization od ex-DDR and spoliation of its full productive apparatus (and there were a lot of great industries working and productive there even if media always forget to remember it).
The logical consequences was migration of worker from east to west, giving low salaries workers for German companies.
(editado)
Pre-Euro currencies weren't overvalued, everbody took great care about it.
there are some differences of course.
But there a a a lot of studies that show how Germany reunification is in some way similar to the euro currency story.
First of all the choice to make as FIRST STEP in creating a political union the unification of the currency.
It determined the complete de industrialization od ex-DDR and spoliation of its full productive apparatus (and there were a lot of great industries working and productive there even if media always forget to remember it).
The logical consequences was migration of worker from east to west, giving low salaries workers for German companies.
(editado)
But there a a a lot of studies that show how Germany reunification is in some way similar to the euro currency story
Can you point me any such study? Because as far as I know, it is actually the opposite: German reunification had nothing to do with Euro, as everything was unified right away, as opposed to the currency union we have in Europe. It was a "shock" unification (despite west and east Germany being much more different than most EU countries are wrt each other), while in EU every step takes 20 years and we are nowhere near to have a single country. There can't be an East Germany debt crisis or anything like that. The two countries were very different before, and this meant a lot of turmoil after erasing the border, but it was dealt with as a (single) country, as opposed to an association of countries.
Can you point me any such study? Because as far as I know, it is actually the opposite: German reunification had nothing to do with Euro, as everything was unified right away, as opposed to the currency union we have in Europe. It was a "shock" unification (despite west and east Germany being much more different than most EU countries are wrt each other), while in EU every step takes 20 years and we are nowhere near to have a single country. There can't be an East Germany debt crisis or anything like that. The two countries were very different before, and this meant a lot of turmoil after erasing the border, but it was dealt with as a (single) country, as opposed to an association of countries.
oh yes, you're right about the absence of the problems for public sector (that's quite obvious!)
I was referring to the economic mechanisms produced to ex-DDR economy .
I think we should stop pretendig the problems of public sector are interesting in analizing this crisis.
I think public sector shows us only the symptoms, we should look at private sector to find out the disease.
About DDR annexion I suggest you this book (I've read it in italian and it has a lot of information and all you need to know about sources and studies):
Anschluss
if you read german (I don't!! :P)
I was referring to the economic mechanisms produced to ex-DDR economy .
I think we should stop pretendig the problems of public sector are interesting in analizing this crisis.
I think public sector shows us only the symptoms, we should look at private sector to find out the disease.
About DDR annexion I suggest you this book (I've read it in italian and it has a lot of information and all you need to know about sources and studies):
Anschluss
if you read german (I don't!! :P)
Hmm... it seems to be true:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11375667/Men-must-prove-a-woman-said-Yes-under-tough-new-rape-rules.html
And even if the charges were dropped, the name of the accused will be public:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11331015/Rape-row-Men-wrongly-accused-of-rape-mustnt-have-anonymity.html
Jesus! How could anyone prove that the girl said yes, even if she did so? Usually there are no victims, and it's not written on FB... And if somehow there is a proof about the consent, then why is it needed to make the name of the accused public? Well, hopefully this won't spread here...
(editado)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11375667/Men-must-prove-a-woman-said-Yes-under-tough-new-rape-rules.html
And even if the charges were dropped, the name of the accused will be public:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11331015/Rape-row-Men-wrongly-accused-of-rape-mustnt-have-anonymity.html
Jesus! How could anyone prove that the girl said yes, even if she did so? Usually there are no victims, and it's not written on FB... And if somehow there is a proof about the consent, then why is it needed to make the name of the accused public? Well, hopefully this won't spread here...
(editado)
New guidance will be issued to all police forces and prosecutors as part of a 'toolkit' to move rape investigations into the 21st century
21st century? Making the defendants prove their innocence is rather 13th century...
The article is not very detailed, though, mainly reflecting satisfied comments by lobbyists, so it could be better than it sounds (for instance, limiting the inversion of the burden of the proof to cases in which it's reasonable to presume coercion - an army member and its superior, let's say).
The second article is retarded, but it is not about any law change: accusations are typically public, at least in all countries I know of, and we all have seen very famous trials covered in the media, of course well before knowing whether anyone will be convicted or not. What happened is that some MPs in the UK asked for men accused of rape in particular to enjoy an anonymity no other defendant has. So probably there is nothing to "spread" to Hungary (if anything, the anonymity proposal could spread, not the publicity, which I suspect is already there :P). The first article, though, does contain a dangerous concept that I hope no one imitates...
21st century? Making the defendants prove their innocence is rather 13th century...
The article is not very detailed, though, mainly reflecting satisfied comments by lobbyists, so it could be better than it sounds (for instance, limiting the inversion of the burden of the proof to cases in which it's reasonable to presume coercion - an army member and its superior, let's say).
The second article is retarded, but it is not about any law change: accusations are typically public, at least in all countries I know of, and we all have seen very famous trials covered in the media, of course well before knowing whether anyone will be convicted or not. What happened is that some MPs in the UK asked for men accused of rape in particular to enjoy an anonymity no other defendant has. So probably there is nothing to "spread" to Hungary (if anything, the anonymity proposal could spread, not the publicity, which I suspect is already there :P). The first article, though, does contain a dangerous concept that I hope no one imitates...
In many countries rape victims are not taken seriously and it is assumed that the victim is lying untill it is proven he/she is not, even though there are very few incentives to wrongly accuse someone of rape and it's very rare as well. The law is not changed though, but there is a new guidance. This means that in court nothing will have changed and it will still be necessary to prove that somebody actually raped someone. However, this new guidance forces prosecutors, police, etc. to do a real investigation when someone says he/she is raped until it is evident that the accuser is lying. I'd say this is a really good step, especially for a country where rape victims are not taken seriously.
(editado)
(editado)
Don't be funny. Cardinal rule of law states, that a person is innocent, until his gulit is proven. Not vice versa.