• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EU voting -> good tools to see where you stand and where your poltiics stand

joG said:
You are pulling my leg.
Click to expand...

No. You are making claims based on nothing for nothing.

First claiming that the Eu cuts liberties, now claiming that it doesnt have the power to and on and on.

Make up your mind on what your opinion actualy is!
 
PeteEU said:
No that is not the entire point, in fact it is far from that. That it is a consequence of the common market is another matter.
Click to expand...

The German said:
So how many of your liberties have been cut by the EU?

The only thing I can think of are the light bulp restrictions and smoking banns.

The EU high court actualy struck down bills in Germany which limited liberty - such as "Sicherungsverwahrung".

And the free flow of people and capital is anything but a restriction of liberty.
Click to expand...

Transferring sovereignty and decision making abilities further from the citizens into a higher, international organization doesn't reduce liberty? Huh?

Whether you want to justify it as "necessary" or "worth it" or not, it's still primary functioning role is to add another layer of bureaucracy between the average Joe and the people who make decisions. Why shouldn't Spain or Austria have sovereignty over what laws the citizens want to make?

You and I might have an effect on a local community election, even less in a city election, less in a state election, less in a national election, and absolutely zero ****ing influence whatsoever on international elections and decision making.
 
The German said:
The German word for Liberterian is "Liberaler" or "Neoliberaler".

And we are supposed to believe that you have soething to do with these people when you can even understand their name?
Click to expand...

Most of my work and writing is in German, but thank you very much for your help. You did a fine job, inded, of translating that word. ;)
 
The German said:
.....
First claiming that the Eu cuts liberties, now claiming that it doesnt have the power to and on and on.
.....
Click to expand...

Did I? Maybe you could remind me which words I used to do that?
I think I said something quite different.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Transferring sovereignty and decision making abilities further from the citizens into a higher, international organization doesn't reduce liberty? Huh?
Click to expand...

By that analogy then your national parliement is taking your liberty away from your locally elected mayor.. or the residential president of your housing unit. By that analogy, your father is taking your liberty away by not allowing you out later than 10 in the evening..

Whether you want to justify it as "necessary" or "worth it" or not, it's still primary functioning role is to add another layer of bureaucracy between the average Joe and the people who make decisions. Why shouldn't Spain or Austria have sovereignty over what laws the citizens want to make?
Click to expand...

I dont disagree totally, but it is not exactly true. A lot of the "EU bureaucracy" existed on a national level before the EU. All that is done now, is a coordination of rules and standardisation to eliminate trade barriers.

You and I might have an effect on a local community election, even less in a city election, less in a state election, less in a national election, and absolutely zero ****ing influence whatsoever on international elections and decision making.
Click to expand...

In other words you are against democracy? Life aint perfect, and we have tried the local chiefdoms and it did not work. That is why we get together in countries and other organisations to improve our overall power against others.
 
joG said:
Oh come on. I have a really lot to do with them and to say that they are liberal is rather funny. They say they are liberal, though.
Click to expand...

Yes they are liberal, and are part of the liberal group in the EU parliament. We are talking about the correct definition of liberal of course.. not the bastardised American version. They are conservative libertarians basically.
 
The German said:
And even they are pro EU.

Every major political party here is pro EU.
Click to expand...

Of course they are. The only ones that are against the EU are nationalists that cant hack it in the normal parties and have to form their own. Any sensible person can see that being part of a common market with open borders and freedoms we all love is the way to go. The anti-EU crowd (many of them) are isolationist nationalists with factist tendencies... they are anti-freedom and anti-democracy as we have seen everywhere they have gotten power ... /wave Hungary. I am just waiting for the Hungarians to implement registration of Jews, Romani and non Hungarians.. no wait, they already started doing that. Great "freedom" the ultra right nationalists are promoting eh?

We are European champion in exports and the Euro currency enables us to sell our cars, chemicals, machines, computers and motors everywhere on the continent without engaging in currency transactions and paying import/export taxes.

We are the only country which took avantage of the free European market and saw it`s potential to make grand profits and big buisness. And now everyone hates us because they were to stupid to see that potential.
Click to expand...

Naw people dont "hate" Germans because of their success.. they hate them because of the Kaiser and Hitler... yes it goes back to that ultimately. Germany has ALWAYS been the biggest economic power in Europe.. even when the British Empire was around, then the combined German states were more powerful economically.. they could just not figure it out politically till the Prussians came around and that is when the British Empire started to see the German's as a threat along with the Russians and Ottomans.

Ultimately, the reason France, Spain, Italy, Greece and so on have not exploited the EU in the same way as the Germans, is not the German's fault, but their own. And you can not tell me that Spain, Italy, Greece and even France have not benefited massively from the EU.. just not as much as the Germans. It is also easier to blame the Germans for the problems of your country, than to admit that you are the reason there are problems... it is the scapegoat mentality... we did it with Jews for centuries, then the "left wing" and then the Muslims.. and now it is German's fault.
 
eteEU said:
Yes they are liberal, and are part of the liberal group in the EU parliament. We are talking about the correct definition of liberal of course.. not the bastardised American version. They are conservative libertarians basically.
Click to expand...

Compared with etatism? But that does not make it liberal in the British sense.

Interesting you would call the American definition of liberal 'bastardised'.
 
PeteEU said:
Naw people dont "hate" Germans because of their success.. they hate them because of the Kaiser and Hitler... yes it goes back to that ultimately.
Ultimately, the reason France, Spain, Italy, Greece and so on have not exploited the EU in the same way as the Germans, is not the German's fault, but their own. And you can not tell me that Spain, Italy, Greece and even France have not benefited massively from the EU.. just not as much as the Germans. It is also easier to blame the Germans for the problems of your country, than to admit that you are the reason there are problems... it is the scapegoat mentality... we did it with Jews for centuries, then the "left wing" and then the Muslims.. and now it is German's fault.
Click to expand...

The thing is that it is not that simple. But it is exactly that type of populist squish that the EU lobby has been preaching. Of course it is true that a free trading area is good in economic terms.*) But that gain has been greatly reduced. Germany went into ca 8 years of stagnation with millions of unemployed losing probably more than 1 or 2 percent per annum growth because of the Euro. That is huge. This is now happening to most of the rest of Europe. So when the EU lobbyists tell you about how great the profit from the EU has been and says that is why you need more of it, he is not being honest.

But that is not the worst part of it. The dishonesty and deception has been undermining ligitamcy of the whole project and in many countries distrust is tending towards the type of impatience that we have recently seen bring down states.


*) And as far as I know, almost none of the people you call 'anti-EU crowd' are against that aspect of the Treaties. But there is high value in talking about your political enemy in such populist terms.
 
I got

GP
72%
UKIP
64%
CON
59%
BNP
58%
LIB
57%
Lab
56%

I think i may have broken the quiz :p I would probably have gone for the TUSC myself, Spain seemed more accurate


IU
66%
UPyD
57%
PSOE
51%
PP
44%

As I probably will got for the IU if i can vote here, (which reminds me i should probably check)
 
joG said:
The thing is that it is not that simple. But it is exactly that type of populist squish that the EU lobby has been preaching. Of course it is true that a free trading area is good in economic terms.*) But that gain has been greatly reduced. Germany went into ca 8 years of stagnation with millions of unemployed losing probably more than 1 or 2 percent per annum growth because of the Euro. That is huge. This is now happening to most of the rest of Europe. So when the EU lobbyists tell you about how great the profit from the EU has been and says that is why you need more of it, he is not being honest.
Click to expand...

Bull****. First off the German sagnation was due to unification and the costs involved with that. It had absolutely nothing to do with the Euro. Germany has benefited massively from the Euro as it has fuelled its exports with a cheap currency relative to what it would have been with Deutsch Mark.

But that is not the worst part of it. The dishonesty and deception has been undermining ligitamcy of the whole project and in many countries distrust is tending towards the type of impatience that we have recently seen bring down states.
Click to expand...

For **** sake, what dishonesty and deception? People like you keep saying that but never provide any proof. Typical anti-European bull****, all words but no substance.

*) And as far as I know, almost none of the people you call 'anti-EU crowd' are against that aspect of the Treaties. But there is high value in talking about your political enemy in such populist terms.
Click to expand...

The people I call anti-EU are against the EU and want it dissolved, either directly or indirectly. People like Farrage, Front National and so on. People who blame the EU for everything regardless if the EU is involved or not. People who use fear and ignorance for political gain.

The Treaty principles have been the same since the Treaty of Rome. Have you even read the Treaty of Rome? Much of what is "hated" is in that Treaty, including freedom of movement of people and goods, and a common market.
 
The first link helps you with finding out what your MEPs have been up to.

So for instance. here:
https://www.myvote2014.eu/en/their-vote/issues
So from the MEPs from my country, Romania:
I can see that all MEPs have voted YES on the harmozined education legislation and 2 were absent.
I can see that mainly ALDE and EPP MEPs haven't voted yes on maternity pay.

But most of all, I can see which candidate sucks balls and hasn't been doing his job because I can see his record. Well her record because the MEP that represents me is the president's daughter, Elena Basescu.

https://www.myvote2014.eu/en/their-vote/meps
And I can see that she abstained on ACTA instead of shutting it down. I guess I know who I won't be voting for in a month.


Lets look at Farage:
My my, he was absent 4 times including on the legislation about Romanians and Bulgarians having access to the full labor market. So he didn't go there to vote NO like a good little donkey, he didn't go at all so he can play partisan politics in the UK and say "OMG, 29mil RO AND BG ARE INVADING!".
He was conspicuously absent when the vote on tackling homphobia was cast.. guess we know why that is.
And he didn't vote on a law to help young people startup businesses and then he complains about the youth unemployment. My my, he's been a naughty boy.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Transferring sovereignty and decision making abilities further from the citizens into a higher, international organization doesn't reduce liberty? Huh?

Whether you want to justify it as "necessary" or "worth it" or not, it's still primary functioning role is to add another layer of bureaucracy between the average Joe and the people who make decisions. Why shouldn't Spain or Austria have sovereignty over what laws the citizens want to make?

You and I might have an effect on a local community election, even less in a city election, less in a state election, less in a national election, and absolutely zero ****ing influence whatsoever on international elections and decision making.
Click to expand...

I agree with your point completely and it's an issue I stand by. 500 mil people represented by ~750 MEPs.
As opposed to Germany: 81mil people represented by 631 parliament members.
France: 65 mil people represented by 925 parliament members.
and the list goes on and on. The EU ratio is just awful.

And ofc, we don't get to vote for the EU Comission president or for the EU Council president. Not that the EU Council president has any real power except to represent the EU and carry out the will of the heads of state of the EU but anyway, 1 more position that could be democratically elected.

So this is an issue. If the EU is to win the hearts and minds of the people it has to reform itself to be the paragon of democracy.
 
PeteEU said:
Bull****. First off the German sagnation was due to unification and the costs involved with that. It had absolutely nothing to do with the Euro. Germany has benefited massively from the Euro as it has fuelled its exports with a cheap currency relative to what it would have been with Deutsch Mark.
Click to expand...

While it is correct that Germany had problems integrating Eastern Germany and this had an influence on the later developments I sketched, they were different than you indicate. The relevant problem in this case was that in the takeover the GRD's currency had been exchanged 1on1 with the DM but without the economic backdrop that that would have required. This had weakened the underpinning of the Western currency but had not yet discounted into the exchange rate. So, when the DM entered the Euro the economy that had justified its relative strength was no longer structurally the same. Effectively the question at that time was, whether a country (in this case Germany) would enter at a rate that was higher and thus profit owners of capital to invest (outside Germany) or lower, which would have been advantageous for labor. We discussed this intensely at the trading desk and with people at the Bundesbank and on the board of Wise Men at the time. This problem was well known.

Having taken the easy way that seems to have been pushed by Mitterrand, a relatively high rate was signed off on. In effect this fixed prices for non-tradables within Germany at a level that meant the economy could not grow as quickly as it would have, had the currency fix been lower. German industry was suddenly less competitive, which does not mean it lost all exports, it just couldn't support the growth and jobs it was accustomed to, which translated into stagnation. This lead to investments in the rest of Europe, where the price of non-tradables was lower causing inflation in these countries and stagnating ones in Germany.

This is not the major problem of the Maastricht Treaty, which was willfully constructed in a way that would create such cyclical imbalances that must lead to crisis and damage as the could no longer be neutralized by floating exchange rates. Why build a currency you knew would not work? Because a number of the mechanisms required by a currency were not palatable to the peoples of Europe at that time. In effect the later crisis would be used to force the "Immer Tiefere Union" (always deepening union) as a fellow at the Finance Ministry formulated it at the time and later recurring in the Treaty of Lisbon in those words. Such deceit is not so surprising in EU matters. It is a variant of the Monnet Method which well known euroctatic procedure.

PeteEU said:
For **** sake, what dishonesty and deception? People like you keep saying that but never provide any proof. Typical anti-European bull****, all words but no substance.
Click to expand...

I have often found that the use of expletives by a person is negatively correlated with the quality of what he says.
 
joG said:
While it is correct that Germany had problems integrating Eastern Germany and this had an influence on the later developments I sketched, they were different than you indicate. The relevant problem in this case was that in the takeover the GRD's currency had been exchanged 1on1 with the DM but without the economic backdrop that that would have required. This had weakened the underpinning of the Western currency but had not yet discounted into the exchange rate.
Click to expand...

That was political. In no way could Western Germany come and say oh.. you Eastern Germans are less worth than we are...

So, when the DM entered the Euro the economy that had justified its relative strength was no longer structurally the same. Effectively the question at that time was, whether a country (in this case Germany) would enter at a rate that was higher and thus profit owners of capital to invest (outside Germany) or lower, which would have been advantageous for labor. We discussed this intensely at the trading desk and with people at the Bundesbank and on the board of Wise Men at the time. This problem was well known.

Having taken the easy way that seems to have been pushed by Mitterrand, a relatively high rate was signed off on. In effect this fixed prices for non-tradables within Germany at a level that meant the economy could not grow as quickly as it would have, had the currency fix been lower. German industry was suddenly less competitive, which does not mean it lost all exports, it just couldn't support the growth and jobs it was accustomed to, which translated into stagnation. This lead to investments in the rest of Europe, where the price of non-tradables was lower causing inflation in these countries and stagnating ones in Germany.
Click to expand...

So you are pissed over the starting value of the Euro? That you wanted to artificially lower the German mark at the time? That you have forgotten that when the Euro started it the value vs the dollar was under 1 dollar, which was highly competitive for Germany? They would kill for that exchange rate now...

This is not the major problem of the Maastricht Treaty, which was willfully constructed in a way that would create such cyclical imbalances that must lead to crisis and damage as the could no longer be neutralized by floating exchange rates. Why build a currency you knew would not work? Because a number of the mechanisms required by a currency were not palatable to the peoples of Europe at that time. In effect the later crisis would be used to force the "Immer Tiefere Union" (always deepening union) as a fellow at the Finance Ministry formulated it at the time and later recurring in the Treaty of Lisbon in those words. Such deceit is not so surprising in EU matters. It is a variant of the Monnet Method which well known euroctatic procedure.
Click to expand...

The mechanisms that were lacking, were lacking because of in large part.. the Germans refusal to implement them from the start.

I have often found that the use of expletives by a person is negatively correlated with the quality of what he says.
Click to expand...

And yet you did not answer the question, which is typical of anti-EU people.. and you wonder why the discussion is so lacking quality.
 
joG said:
While it is correct that Germany had problems integrating Eastern Germany and this had an influence on the later developments I sketched, they were different than you indicate. The relevant problem in this case was that in the takeover the GRD's currency had been exchanged 1on1 with the DM but without the economic backdrop that that would have required. This had weakened the underpinning of the Western currency but had not yet discounted into the exchange rate. So, when the DM entered the Euro the economy that had justified its relative strength was no longer structurally the same. Effectively the question at that time was, whether a country (in this case Germany) would enter at a rate that was higher and thus profit owners of capital to invest (outside Germany) or lower, which would have been advantageous for labor. We discussed this intensely at the trading desk and with people at the Bundesbank and on the board of Wise Men at the time. This problem was well known.

Having taken the easy way that seems to have been pushed by Mitterrand, a relatively high rate was signed off on. In effect this fixed prices for non-tradables within Germany at a level that meant the economy could not grow as quickly as it would have, had the currency fix been lower. German industry was suddenly less competitive, which does not mean it lost all exports, it just couldn't support the growth and jobs it was accustomed to, which translated into stagnation. This lead to investments in the rest of Europe, where the price of non-tradables was lower causing inflation in these countries and stagnating ones in Germany.

This is not the major problem of the Maastricht Treaty, which was willfully constructed in a way that would create such cyclical imbalances that must lead to crisis and damage as the could no longer be neutralized by floating exchange rates. Why build a currency you knew would not work? Because a number of the mechanisms required by a currency were not palatable to the peoples of Europe at that time. In effect the later crisis would be used to force the "Immer Tiefere Union" (always deepening union) as a fellow at the Finance Ministry formulated it at the time and later recurring in the Treaty of Lisbon in those words. Such deceit is not so surprising in EU matters. It is a variant of the Monnet Method which well known euroctatic procedure.



I have often found that the use of expletives by a person is negatively correlated with the quality of what he says.
Click to expand...

I agree about a 1000% with all of this. The DM was arbitrarily pegged to the Euro for a three year period and I've heard personal accounts from German friends and family what the final transition to the Euro was like for them. Essentially things that used to cost 1 DM suddenly costed 1 euro, while the arbitrarily defined exchange rate was 2:1 DM:Euro. This means the average German's purchasing power was cut in half overnight, and wages did not follow the same change.

The sole purpose of the Euro was to redistribute income like an international welfare system.
 
PeteEU said:
That was political. In no way could Western Germany come and say oh.. you Eastern Germans are less worth than we are...
Click to expand...

So you think that the East Germans are that stupid and think that their worth is determined by the value of their currency? Interesting point of view.



So you are pissed over the starting value of the Euro? That you wanted to artificially lower the German mark at the time? That you have forgotten that when the Euro started it the value vs the dollar was under 1 dollar, which was highly competitive for Germany? They would kill for that exchange rate now... [/QUOTE]

Who is pissed? We made a huge amount of money out of that pigheaded attitude. It is the German and Greek and French and Dutch and other Euroland peoples that should be pissed and are becoming so, as they begin to understand how badly they were deceived, cheated and hurt by their elected Representatives. If the people don't want something and you create a crisis of that dimension and do that type of existential harm to your people willfully, you should be jailed for life. Madoff did less harm and was no less criminal in intent. But, when you say that "They would kill for" it now, at least you admit to understanding how dire situation is into which your politicians shoved the people they swore to protect. It is really quite revolting.



PeteEU said:
The mechanisms that were lacking, were lacking because of in large part.. the Germans refusal to implement them from the start.
Click to expand...

You must have misunderstood me. I never said the German political elite was not involved. Why they didn't even check the Greek books though they knew that they were wrong. That is, of course, only gross negligence and not really so bad compared to the other things.



PeteEU said:
And yet you did not answer the question, which is typical of anti-EU people.. and you wonder why the discussion is so lacking quality.
Click to expand...

Oh, what was that?
 
joG said:
So you think that the East Germans are that stupid and think that their worth is determined by the value of their currency? Interesting point of view.
Click to expand...

Is that what you think? LOL. Lets see... During the DDR a citizen had 1000 East German Marks... and then there was unification. Now if we had your way, those 1000 East German Marks would be worth less ... so lets say 50% deduction. So instead of 1000 Deutch Marks, they now only have 500... do you really think that would be popular in the East and not seen as a demeaning to them? They were already seen as second class citizen and then suddenly their net worth was only half of that of a western German? yea right that would have gone off smoooooth.

Who is pissed? We made a huge amount of money out of that pigheaded attitude. It is the German and Greek and French and Dutch and other Euroland peoples that should be pissed and are becoming so, as they begin to understand how badly they were deceived, cheated and hurt by their elected Representatives. If the people don't want something and you create a crisis of that dimension and do that type of existential harm to your people willfully, you should be jailed for life. Madoff did less harm and was no less criminal in intent. But, when you say that "They would kill for" it now, at least you admit to understanding how dire situation is into which your politicians shoved the people they swore to protect. It is really quite revolting.
Click to expand...

Eh, now you make no sense what so ever. First you complain that the conversion rate was too low or something like that for the Germans and it hurt the German economy and still does, and now you are saying that it is the other countries that should be pissed for having too high a currency or whatever babble you are talking about. It makes no sense.

You must have misunderstood me. I never said the German political elite was not involved. Why they didn't even check the Greek books though they knew that they were wrong. That is, of course, only gross negligence and not really so bad compared to the other things.
Click to expand...

LOL that is some conspiracy theory there.. They knew they were wrong? Where did you get that idea from? Farage? And the proof of this... where?
 
I'm just happy UKIP and the BNP were my two bottom parties..:)

Paul
 
The German said:
No. You are making claims based on nothing for nothing.

First claiming that the Eu cuts liberties, now claiming that it doesnt have the power to and on and on.

Make up your mind on what your opinion actualy is!
Click to expand...

I have no idea what to make of joG.

For once, he has claimed it were actually Putin and Schröder who caused the Iraq war in 2003, by "forcing" Bush to start it. WTF?

He then went on namedropping about allegedly knowing many people inside the German government in person, which flies directly in the face of the many blatant falsehoods and half-truths he advances about the German political system and German political ideologies.

So either he's not telling the truth, or if he's really working in the administration, its state is much, much worse than I possibly imagined.
 
Last edited:
First quiz:

76% German Green Party
71% Social Democrats and Pirates respectively
69% Free Democrats (moderate libertarians)

When looking at all European parties:

80% for sp.a in Belgium, NEOS in Austria, Europa+ in Poland
78% for DK in Hungary
 
German guy said:
I have no idea what to make of joG.

For once, he has claimed it were actually Putin and Schröder who caused the Iraq war in 2003, by "forcing" Bush to start it. WTF?

He then went on namedropping about allegedly knowing many people inside the German government in person, which flies directly in the face of the many blatant falsehoods and half-truths he advances about the German political system and German political ideologies.

So either he's not telling the truth, or if he's really working in the administration, its state is much, much worse than I possibly imagined.
Click to expand...

I stopped taking him seriously after he blabbered something about modern Germany being a repressive country that wishes to be a hegemon again.
 
It occured to me that I never posted my stats.
So from Romania I got the highest 65% compatibility with PNL (national liberals, minority party who was in govt and now isn't, in EU they're ALDE -> my fav party from a political standpoint but the leadership of the party is very, very stupid).
And then PP-DD which is a moronic party. Which i will never vote for.
Ironically, the only other party who I'd vote for was PDL, democrat liberal, and they came at the bottom of the list with just 53%.

And it makes sense because there were a lot of questions about EU integration which I disagreed with, or tax powers, and that sort of thing. And all parties in romania are pro-europe. I mean, all major parties are pro-europe. Really, there is just 1 party in Romania that is anti-EU and that's PRM and they're run by a guy who means well, but is a complete idiot.

That being said, eu-wide, I got most similarity (over 70% )with the the Danish Social Liberal Party (Det Radikale Venstre) and the Labour Party in Netherlands (Partij van de Arbeid) and then the Pirate Party in Finland and the 5 star movement in Italy, Beppo's the clowns' party. Which is quite interesting coz I despise the M5S and think they're kinda stupid. and a lot of other parties.


Surprisingly, both the SPD and the FDP from Germany scored 66% with me which is 1% more than the highest I got in my own country, PNL. So the fact that there are no parties in my country even within the top 10 that more accurate represent my views is sorta troubling to me.

My general "political space" is seen as being a bit pro-EU, a bit Liberal values and a bit to the Economic Left... so that's like surprising. and I'm apparently alone in Romania with my political views in Europe, but have a lot of like-minded individuals in France and northern Italy and Ireland.
 
Last edited:
Rainman05 said:
That being said, eu-wide, I got most similarity (over 70% )with the the Danish Social Liberal Party (Det Radikale Venstre)
Click to expand...

ARGH the transvestite party!!!!!!! They switch positions depending on the day and wind... all in so to gain political power and government positions!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom