卐 Politics 卐

Plakkis · ^

How much exactly did the shootings affect peoples opinions on politics there?

FuZ · ^

I don't know, i don't watch the news and politics stuff

Khelly · ^

Stay safe

Plakkis · ^

FuZ wrote:

I don't know, i don't watch the news and politics stuff

Aight, I've seen some articles in french that had some maps from some pre-polls I think and they were showing a shift to more right-winged attitude.
Just wanted to ask how accurate they were since I don't know anyone from France

B1rd · ^

I heard Finland is gonna abolish benefits and give everyone a basic income.

ksg · ^

That's what's on the table right now, yeah.

Pirtelö · ^

12279094_422926714573408_5276045146302042781_n.jpg?oh=6ce263a420b1a92593cabfe0466c3d8b&oe=56DA3569

Plakkis · ^

B1rd wrote:

I heard Finland is gonna abolish benefits and give everyone a basic income.

Basically that kind of system is already in use, but with a massive amount of byrochracy and it's really abusable by certain kind of people. Biggest difference would be that you could actually accept all the jobs, now if you're living on welfare 'nd stuff, you can't accept every low pay job or you'll be getting less money from working than doing absolutely nothing.

There's other stuff behind that too, but it remains to be seen what is actually going to happen with this

LunarStorm · ^

The political situation in Sweden has been interesting for quite some time, ever since the election back in October 2014.
The election process in Sweden is different from most countries, instead of one party with the most votes winning we have several parties who together group up in a block. So the right block consists of four parties while the left block consists of two. The winning block then forms the government.

In 2014 neither block was able to reach a majority, because neither side wanted to include the Sweden Democrats in their block since that would mean that they would have to support their politic opinions, which are generally all about immigration in Sweden.

These were the results in the election in 2014

Rightwing: M, C, FP, KD

Left Wing: S, MP

The government itself was elected to be representatives of the left wing but they cannot take any decisions themselves without the consent of the parliament.
Now that the election was over the parliament have vote for a budget plan to go through. SD then shot down the budget proposal of the left wing and announced that they wouldn't support any budget plan that led to an increase in immigration.

For a while it seemed like there was to be a re-election but in December 2014 the right and left wing came to an agreement which we refer to as the December Agreement (DÖ for short). What this agreement meant was that if there were to be no majority in an election the wing with the most support would win while the other wing simply supports their decisions. So they did this for the sole reason of making sure SD had nothing to say in the parliament. This agreement was to last until 2022.

It was fairly obvious from the start that it wouldn't. Mainly because that would mean that SD which has gotten a lot more support since 2014 were to be the biggest party in the next election I doubt any other parties would simply let them get all their ideas through the parliament.

In October 2015 it fell apart when KD decided that they wanted none of it. Right now there seems to be no plans of another election.

2 weeks after DÖ was abolished the very same parties formed another agreement regarding the immigration issues Sweden was now facing. Although this agreement didn't mention anything that would lead to less immigration. It was once again an agreement made only for the purpose of making sure SD had absolutely no say in the questions regarding immigration. Sweden has now started placing patrols on the border that try their best not to let any terrorists in, but at the moment we're doing nothing to slow down the flood of refugees coming into the country. I personally find it very silly how the politicians have been completly ignoring the immigration questions for years out of fear of being called racists. Now that we have a crisis on our hands they're discussing it but not really countering it in any way.

Now we're sitting here taking in more refugees than most countries in Europe and spending as much money on these immigrants than the UN does helping 6 million refugees worldwide. And it's only going to get worse from here. We are already starting to run out of places where the refugees can sleep with a roof over the head and it sure doesn't help that we have people burning down asylum housings to show their disapproval.

According to recent political surveys the Sweden Democrats have risen to about 20% which sends pretty clear signals about what the inhabitants of Sweden thinks about how the refugee crisis is handled in Sweden.

I personally think that Sweden will sooner or later collapse in debt if this goes on. Those who are against this often bring up how Sweden has done similar things during World War II. But this comparison is vastly different due to certain factors.

The first one is that back during WWII the labor was needed. Wars are generally profitable. Sweden made a big profit selling iron,lumber and weapons to various countries involved. The help of the refugees and former prisoners from concentration camps really helped boost Sweden's economy. Today we really don't have the jobs or the economy to support so many people.

Secondly, during World War II the refugees didn't stay very long. During the earlier part of WWII Sweden had a pretty strict policy about how many refugees were allowed to stay, only taking in about 500 jews. In the latter half and after the war we took in many more, so many that museums and schools were transformed into temporary shelters. Many of them emigrated only a couple of years later to America or Israel. The situation today is looking worse, the war in Syria could easily last 20 years and if Sweden is still standing by then the crisis will have already blown over and I would be proven wrong.

So yeah, looking back at this text I've realised how much bigger it ended up than I initially intended. I just felt like I needed to give some basic information on how we ended up in this mess.

I personally agree with some of the points the Sweden Democrats bring up but wouldn't at the moment vote for them due to a lot of their higher ranked officials saying some very inappropriate things. Immigration aside I'm still laid on the right side of the political scale.

TL;DR
Sweden is in deep shit, we're drowning in kebabs, pls send help.

Mara · ^

Pretty interesting reading.

Plakkis · ^

LunarStorm wrote:

Somehow this sounds really similar to situations in some other countries. It just shows that the current thing that we call democracy isn't really working to the benefit of the country at all, but instead it caters to personal/party beliefs and ideals. All of that is directly represented how fucked up the economy in these countries will become.
People who are full on in this immigration stuff are blind to any arguments and only thing that matters to them is how these people must be helped (with what funds?) and how they will bring happinnes, richness and labor to our countries (increased crime rates, more costs to the government itself and I doubt Sweden had a problem of their own unemployment even before people started flooding in).
And these people have the right to vote and equipped withthe power to call others "racists" and boosting their own policies.

I personally do not know how these problems could be solved with the current way of politics working

I probably should've double cbecked what I wrote, but I'm too tired to correct myself. If anyone sees something blatantly wrong in what I wrote, feel free to correct me instead

Last edited by Plakkis (2015-12-08 22:35:40)

Khelly · ^

Aurelianus Augustus · ^

More of the le friendly immigrants arriving. Great.

Let's just put up concentration camps for them instead. I'm tired of Serbia being a whore for those shits. We're paying our tax money so the country can take it and give it all to those subhuman mutts. Get the fuck out of Greece, Macedonia and my homeland and go to the fucking countries that sent you in the first place - murrica, the home of Democracy and all that gay shit and Turkey.

It's just so fucking silly that everyone seriously believes those are actual refugees. If they were truly refugees, they would've done the sensible and logical thing and actually fucking gone to MAYBE Saudi Arabia or Turkey - two INSANELY economically powerful countries. Nah, let's just pretend we're fleeing from the war and go to Europe because we're so poor and sad with our newest Apple products.

No seriously, I've seen a fucking "refugee" bus with people carrying phones and tablets that I couldn't get even if I saved up for 2 years. That's not someone who needs desperate fucking protection.
I rarely get pissed, but I swear to God, the moment I saw that detail I wished that I could have the strength to push the bus into Danube and let them all drown.

Railey2 · ^

Plakkis wrote:

[...]
-Just like any other "1st world country" we're completely broke [...]

The US has been in debt since 1835. It is probably the most common misconception that national debt is necessarily something negative or unwanted. The word "debt" carries a very negative connotation, since it gets associated with.. debt collectors, losing your property and all these other things.

National debt is very different though. It is a macro-economical mechanism that gets used for both the states and investors benefit. It has been a very valuable strategy for the last century and it is a very valuable strategy now.

Debt can be positive if the state is making smart investments as opposed to paying public sector salaries that are blown way out of proportion (hello Greece).

First and foremost it is a way for the state to get lots of money while simultaneously creating a save haven for private investors, which helps out economic growth a lot.

Most people I've met have this "debts = bad" equation in their heads, but that isn't true. Reality is way more complicated than that, but most of the voters have no clue.

Last edited by Railey2 (2015-12-10 14:30:07)

Plakkis · ^

Railey2 wrote:

That's why I don't use the total debt to define "broke" but instead when you compare it to GDB and in EU we have this thing if debt goes over a certain % of GDB, EU has to take action
If I remember correctly, the value where EU has to "take over" is something around 62%

And we're currently sitting at ~58-60% and it's estimated to go past the magical limit somewhere at the end of 2016 or at the beginning of 2017. And that's why I used the "" when defining a 1st world country.

I guess I might not be explaining myself clearly enough at times when you have to start explaining basic economics like that

^ #61 2015-12-06 21:39:08

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #62 2015-12-06 21:58:02

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #63 2015-12-06 22:03:41

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #64 2015-12-06 22:04:54

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #65 2015-12-07 03:26:31

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #66 2015-12-07 05:31:14

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #67 2015-12-07 06:39:21

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #68 2015-12-07 10:03:51

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #69 2015-12-08 22:17:26

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #70 2015-12-08 22:24:14

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #71 2015-12-08 22:34:17

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #72 2015-12-10 01:27:29

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #73 2015-12-10 01:53:57

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #74 2015-12-10 05:07:39

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

^ #75 2015-12-10 15:19:39

Re: 卐 Politics 卐

Board footer