Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 422 posts

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#321

Post by ketzu »

throwaway292893 wrote: post #185
londons_explore wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a worldwide agreement that no country will ever stop a citizen from leaving, as long as they have permission to enter another country. Even if the person is in prison or debt, they can always leave with just themselves to another country willing to take them. If all nations agreed to that, we could stop worrying about most other human rights abuses, and country governance becomes more of a free market…

I don't think that would solve the North Korea, Uighur, Hong Kong, or Taiwan crisis. Holding China accountable would solve 70% of human rights abuses.

> Holding China accountable would solve 70% of human rights abuses.

Do you mean that "70% of human rights abuses" in china or worldwide? And if worldwide, do you think the 70% of human rights absuses happen in china or that other nations will stop based on the fear of consequences?

Right now my first impression was that you claim that 70% of all human rights abuses happen in china, which, to me, seems like it is very very wrong. But that would be an uncharitable reading, so I'd be interested in if I get it wrong.

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#322

Post by tpm »

refactor_master wrote: post #183
londons_explore wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a worldwide agreement that no country will ever stop a citizen from leaving, as long as they have permission to enter another country. Even if the person is in prison or debt, they can always leave with just themselves to another country willing to take them. If all nations agreed to that, we could stop worrying about most other human rights abuses, and country governance becomes more of a free market…

The free market has a pretty terrible track record when it comes to human rights, though. What would countries stand to gain from this, realistically? No country wants economic refugees.

a lot of countries want "economic refugees", even the same politicians that are posturing against them

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#324

Post by bloak »

vixen99 wrote: post #292
andrepd wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hungary is objectively an authoritarian regime because it removed separation of powers, stacked court with political appointees, closed down virtually all independent press, made state TV into a propaganda piece for Fidesz, etc. Not because it "disagrees with the EU".

Stacking the court with appointees? Something the US will never do.

Hungary (and Poland) have been quite clever in how they undermine freedom: almost every individual thing they've done can be justified in isolation by saying, "Look, countries X, Y and Z do the same thing!", but when you look at all those things together and look at how they interact you realise that the situation is really quite bad there - even compared to the USA! Or that's my understanding of the situation; I'm not really an expert in the constitutional law of central European countries.

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#325

Post by ricardobeat »

saiya-jin wrote: post #318
andrepd wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hungary is objectively an authoritarian regime because it removed separation of powers, stacked court with political appointees, closed down virtually all independent press, made state TV into a propaganda piece for Fidesz, etc. Not because it "disagrees with the EU".

You can be an authoritative regime and still hate Russia and its puppets with passion for what atrocities they did in last century (1956 for Hungary, less but still bloody 1968 for Czechoslovakia).

How great to have a choice of authoritarian regimes!

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#326

Post by watwut »

ceilingcorner wrote: post #107
nomercy400 wrote: post #91

I am surprised Hungary agreed. And Poland. The governments in those nations are not shy to touch on the freedoms of their population, and often disagree with the EU when the EU points these things out. Also Poland being directly next to Belarus will affect their relations.

Disagreeing with the EU != equivalent to an authoritarian regime. Politics is more complicated than Good Guys vs. Bad Guys.

Good thing the parent did not said that. What he said was that these countries are "not shy to touch on the freedoms of their population" and that they dont like when someone in EU points that out.

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#327

Post by jiofih »

newdude116 wrote: post #306
Hikikomori wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting and fun read, but don't see how it relates to the near future, and even longer term. Energy demands likely closely follows population growth, which has been trending down for the last 50 years or so. Once it levels out so will energy demands, with some time lag as some countries catches up with standard of living. Unless your argument is that we will be unable to meet our energy demands at that point in t…

Besides, that Germany is extremely bad suited for re-newable energies (little sun, wind at the wrong places, little hydroelectric power): 1. Yes, population growth may stop 2. Your argument with population numbers is totally irrelevant. Economics growth, which is linked to energy consumption, won't stop. If is stops, our society will likely collapse. https://ourfiniteworld.com/2011/02/21/there-is-no-steady-sta... In…

So after your random-blog-post defense failed, you’re gonna completely drop the subject? I’d love to hear a proper response to the parent.

Germany already produces enough renewable energy to sustain all residential use. There is no real physical limitation to achieving 100% renewables despite your “argument”.

These are both very shallow articles. You need to find better sources if you’re gonna spout such claims, big words have no meaning of their own.

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#328

Post by 3np »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #317
cnlevy wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia and Belarus are very close allies. I doubt anyone who is at risk by transiting in Moscow would be safe in Minsk

You think Russia would risk having their planes banned all through Europe to give a two bit dictator a reporter?

You think EU would give Russia the same treatment as Belarus?

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#329

Post by triceratops »

londons_explore wrote: post #221
refactor_master wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The free market has a pretty terrible track record when it comes to human rights, though. What would countries stand to gain from this, realistically? No country wants economic refugees.

There are a few countries who will pretty much let anybody in. Migrants often bring with them skills that the locals don't have, and in any mass migration, those who migrate (vs stay where they are) tend to be the fitter, smarter, richer people. The main reason not to take migrants is you might see substantial economic losses as migrants send income back home to support family. You might alienate your existing popula…

> There are a few countries who will pretty much let anybody in.

Which ones? Any particularly large ones among them? "Mass migration" implies that there a ton of people inbound.

Re: EU bans Belarusian airlines from European skies

#330

Post by triceratops »

julianlam wrote: post #293
EliRivers wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you might see substantial economic losses as migrants send income back home to support family. Is that a real problem? Assume they get paid in local currency (e.g. US dollars). Option one; they buy a foreign currency with those US dollars, and send that foreign currency overseas. The dollars stay in the US and get spent. Option two, they send those US dollars overseas; those US dollars ultimately either come back to…

A currency exchange is a zero sum transaction. Whether it is US dollars or Philippine pesos makes no difference, the value stayed in-country. When it gets sent overseas, it leaves the country and is spent elsewhere, so that is a loss in value for the originating country. The only value remaining would be whatever fee was charged on its way out.

A currency remittance is potentially zero-sum. A currency exchange, that is changing one currency for another, is theoretically neutral.
Post reply on HN