351–360 of 602 posts
So says The Washington Post. What doesn't seem to get through to the global elite is that regardless of the decision, the people demand constitutional and auditable mechanisms to 'voice' their opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a big chunk of Americans almost want it to be a police state, so they have something to fight against. It makes me think of Sam Altman's recent article about Trump. He said he was taking some risk by writing that, and some commenters here praised his bravery in taking a public stand on this. It's ridiculous. Bravery would be a prominent techie taking a stand for Trump. He's not going to suffer any consequence…
I got some really bad looks in my office building when some people overheard me telling a colleague I rather Clinton lose than Trump lose, due to her preference for fighting wars. One person looked at me like if they could kill me, he would, like I was some enemy. A lot of anti-Trump people accuse Trump supporters of bigotry and exclusion, but I think that's projection on their part. No, I don't feel comfortable writ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a big chunk of Americans almost want it to be a police state, so they have something to fight against. It makes me think of Sam Altman's recent article about Trump. He said he was taking some risk by writing that, and some commenters here praised his bravery in taking a public stand on this. It's ridiculous. Bravery would be a prominent techie taking a stand for Trump. He's not going to suffer any consequence…
I got some really bad looks in my office building when some people overheard me telling a colleague I rather Clinton lose than Trump lose, due to her preference for fighting wars. One person looked at me like if they could kill me, he would, like I was some enemy. A lot of anti-Trump people accuse Trump supporters of bigotry and exclusion, but I think that's projection on their part. No, I don't feel comfortable writ…
Trump publicly stated his support for the Iraq war during an interview in 2002. He's since backpedaled claiming that he was against it "before it started" but all indications are that he was, at most, neutral on the war before it started (being against the war after it starts is kind of irrelevant).
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/19/donald-trump...
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-w...
> A lot of anti-Trump people accuse Trump supporters of bigotry and exclusion, but I think that's projection on their part.
A lot of Trump supporters are really good at ignoring the obvious terrible things about Trump and his campaign and latching onto the one or two things they like about him. You can't honestly claim that there is no bigotry or exclusion in Trump's campaigning. He's called for a ban on Muslims entering the country. He's called for building a huge wall along the Mexican border and deporting 11 million immigrants. Plus, you know, the "rapists and murderers" comment about Mexicans entering the US.
If you think that Trump is the better candidate in spite of his obvious shortcomings, you should have the honesty to say so, rather than pretend his shortcomings aren't real.
As someone with no dog in this fight, I have to say that many of the pro-stay comments here are dismissive, arrogant, and the epitome of hand-waving "we know best and everyone who disagrees with us is stupid or evil." It's an ugly and insular attitude that is itself usually a sign of ignorance of the other side's arguments and motivations. As a dev, I find it hard to believe that someone who can be so easily blinkere…
The disdain and disgust impressed on the elderly in this issue in particular is distressing. Seeing people advocate for selective voting or implying that the younger persons' views are worth more because of their older countrymen's vicinity to expiration is personally upsetting as a self-loathing Millenial.
My personal opinion is that voting age is too young in most countries. It should be upped to 30.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By representatives. You need a buffer between raw emotion and action. Otherwise, this happens.
A big part of this vote is a huge swathe of voters who felt that they were not being properly represented by their representatives. All three major parties had similar lines on economic liberalisation, immigration and freedom of movement and so on and this has been the case for almost 20 years. So when a new party stepped in and said "we hear you, we want things to change to" it's not surprising it captured some of t…
So, can they rejoin? Or will the entire country collapse due to the awkwardness of reversing the earlier decision?
They didn't leave yet and may not. I feel like this has been used as a vehicle for Boris Johnson to increase his chances to be prime minister and others' to provoke changes. It seems to me that Britain didn't seriously consider the repercussions of an exit that doesn't involve cherry-picking.
I think this particular Golem has too much momentum now to simply decline the advice of the electorate, however it did occur to me that Cameron's 3 month delay in applying Section 50 would allow the attention of the public to be distracted to some extent.
I'm strangely moved by this whole thing. It's a pretty decent status check on where we are with democracy ATM. I'm not against democracy, but I do think we need to pay attention to what it can & can't do. On one hand, this has been a model of democracy. A primary election agenda and referendum. The phrasing of the question was simple, clear and unbiased. The "will of the people" won over the will of the ruling struct…
The problem with democracy is the people are easily influenced by false truths. I'm all for democracy, but I also realize that a well informed vote and an uninformed vote are equal and therein lies the problem. It's not really something that can be fixed within a true democracy.
Someone whose job it is to run the country should be much more informed than people who only make political decisions once every couple years for major policy decisions involving the whole country with ride ranging ramifications.
I think its the same argument communists make - that the USSR, China, Cuba, etc have all been failed states that never were what Marx and Lenin intended, and they devolved into totalitarian dictatorships rather than becoming the socialist paradise the ideological founders wanted.
In the context of republics, a similar argument stands. We should have representatives with empathic relations with their constituents going both ways - the people should be picking the best amongst themselves to rule, but most existent democracies have devolved into elites picking the leaders and voters having no relations whatsoever with their own leadership, which was supposed to be the entire point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, perfect illustration of my point. The government benefits the people enormously. Yes, it has a lot of problems, but we're way better off with it than without it. I can totally understand a desire for reform, but simply tearing it down is insane.
The only way to force the government to reform is to vote out the party that screwed up. Unfortunately, in the US, both parties colluded to work for their corporate sponsors, not the people who vote for them, so they both need to be disrupted somehow. Most voters understand it, and that explains the anti-establishment voting in this election (Sanders/Trump)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem the EU has always had is that it wasn't really unified and that non elected officials held to much sway over countries. Countries, not states, not territories, or such. Meaning that you had distinct separation, governments, and the like, being controlled by people not of the same. This will always lead to strife. If anything vote simply reaffirms that EU favoring side either failed to communicate properly…
Is the EU really that bad?! I had the feeling that they forced countries to do the right thing, for example granting human rights. Even here in Germany we had laws that let you lock up people forever. What was the bad stuff that happend in the EU? The "crisis" was mostly due to the "elected" governments of the countries which have now financial problems. What the EU did in the last years was mainly telling "the peopl…
Now the law is coming back and a argument of the supporters is that its about EU integration and cost.
The law is very clearly against western principles, surveillance for everybody even if they did nothing.
This is just one example, the EU is used to push threw laws that can not get threw on National level and then get imposed top town.
The EU gets much better coverage then they deserve because people are into the idea of "Europe United, No War" but nobody really knows or cares much beyond that.
> The "crisis" was mostly due to the "elected" governments of the countries which have now financial problems.
Maybe you should look at this graph:
http://worthwhile.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451688169e20176155c5...
The left the question about debt open (legally) but gave the impression that it would be common. The market assumed so, and this provided false incentives for all the governments. When the debt was not common, as you can see, the bond yields spread again and some of the nations were not able to role over their debt.
Instead of fully committing to the idea of not sharing debt and letting Greece default, they don't allow that and keep Greece limping along. This is the worst of all ways because nobody knows what to expect form the EU.
The ECB has also not helped the case by conducting monetary policy so badly, that it has lead to something so bad that its only comparison is the the Great Depression. Their are multiple nations in Europe that are doing worse then they did in the GD. The GD on a global scale was far worse then what happened this time, but Europe is the outlier and that has mostly to do with the EMU and the ECB mismanagement.
Its unbelievably hard for Greece to service debt and reform while also having a NGDP that is dropping like crazy. No nation on the planet could deal with that. Greece is poor but they are not flexible, so going the forced price/wage deflation route is also not gone be easy (thats essentially what some of the Balics did).
To be fair to the ECB, even if they did do everything perfectly, they would still not be able to do a perfect job. Their is broad agreement about that in the research area of common currency zones. The problem of uniformity is quite real. Compare the NGDP of Germany and Greece. Germany in the same monetary union has a growing NGDP, the NGDP of Greece is lower then it was in 2008.
The EU and specially the EMU has totally disgraced the hole project of european union. Now the nations hate each other, calling "them" lazy or nazis in newspapers. When the project was mostly about Free Trade and Free Movement it was growing together.
Now we could get into a hole lot more issues such as the other horrible protectionist polices and the cartel enforcement that they do. Their are many other issues but this post is already to long.
tl:dr; The EU(specially EMU) is a horrible institution that is horribly managed in almost every way, specially everything that relates to economics.