View Full Version : Bailouts: Dutch Government Collapses Over Debt Woes
bronxboy10
04-23-2012, 09:39 AM
The Dutch Government has collapsed, elections to be scheduled soon:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/story/2012-04-23/dutch-government-collapse/54483476/1
Zippyjuan
04-23-2012, 12:58 PM
More and more reports from Europe suggesting that at least in the sort term, austerity (budget cutting) is not working. Unemployment continues to rise in some countries (Spain just officially was classified as back into a recession after negetive GDP for the first quarter) and deficits are not really coming down much either. So far a lot of pain and little gain.
Europe’s backlash against austerity gained momentum, in a challenge to German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s budget-cutting prescriptions for resolving the debt crisis.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy lost the first round of his re-election bid and a revolt against extra spending cuts in the traditionally budget-conscious Netherlands propelled Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s coalition toward an early breakup.
Together with anti-austerity rumblings in a campaign for elections in Greece, the shift in grass-roots sentiment at the heart of Europe generated fresh doubts about the German-driven strategy for getting to grips with the two-year-old crisis.
“We have organized the track of discipline, that’s very good and we have to continue on that, but we need desperately also to organize the second track, the track of growth, solidarity, investment,” former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, now a member of the European Parliament, said on Bloomberg Television’s “The Pulse.”
The euro fell as bond investors moved money into Germany and out of the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Italy amid concern that a consensus over the crisis response is fraying. The yield on Germany’s five-year bond fell to a euro-era low of 0.61 percent while the premium that investors demand to hold Dutch bonds over bunds rose to the highest since 2009.
Political tensions coincided with a report of a greater- than-expected decline in services and factory output in April, equipping opponents of austerity with evidence that budget- cutting zeal may cast the 17-nation euro region into recession.
Route to Health
Northern European advocates of tight fiscal policies pointed to a separate report from the European statistics office showing that the aggregate debt of euro governments reached 8.2 trillion euros ($11 trillion) in 2011, the highest in the currency’s 13-year history.
Merkel, who has dominated Europe’s crisis response, said debt reduction is the best route to economic health.
“Solid budget management is a factor for producing growth, but of course not the only one,” Merkel said yesterday at the Hanover trade fair, a showcase for high-tech products. “We’re still in the process of overcoming this crisis.”
While that has pushed down German borrowing costs, other European countries are struggling to convince investors that austerity is the best route to political stability and financial health. Ten-year bond yields rose 3 basis points to 5.94 percent in Spain today and 6 basis points to 2.37 percent in the Netherlands.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-23/europe-s-austerity-backlash-gains-steam-in-challenge-to-merkel.html
Austrian Econ Disciple
04-23-2012, 01:42 PM
More and more reports from Europe suggesting that at least in the sort term, austerity (budget cutting) is not working. Unemployment continues to rise in some countries (Spain just officially was classified as back into a recession after negetive GDP for the first quarter) and deficits are not really coming down much either. So far a lot of pain and little gain.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-23/europe-s-austerity-backlash-gains-steam-in-challenge-to-merkel.html
No European country is spending less than they're taking in, in tax-revenues. Tax rates, regulatory-environment, and Welfare-States have not changed at all. Europe is pretty much status-quo since the beginning. It's like blaming the economic environment in the US on budget cuts, which do not exist, and are solely a definition of less of an increase than the politicians wanted (ie, not a cut at all). You can't be that daft.
Zippy - your premise is also wrong IMO. Austerity was never promoted as an immediate or near term solution to stimulating an economy. It's a necessary economic pain to achieve long term fiscal health by deflating debt. Kind of like the withdrawals a junky has to endure to break his addiction to heroin.
hazek
04-23-2012, 02:20 PM
More and more reports from Europe suggesting that at least in the sort term, austerity (budget cutting) is not working. Unemployment continues to rise in some countries (Spain just officially was classified as back into a recession after negetive GDP for the first quarter) and deficits are not really coming down much either. So far a lot of pain and little gain.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-23/europe-s-austerity-backlash-gains-steam-in-challenge-to-merkel.html
Again with the propaganda... Get lost with your BS already, will you?
Even if they were cutting budgets, which they aren't, they are actually also raising taxes on already through the inflation theft and debt collapse impoverished populace. No one around here will argue this could lead to anything good in either short or long term.
wgadget
04-23-2012, 02:24 PM
The Dutch Government has collapsed, elections to be scheduled soon:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/story/2012-04-23/dutch-government-collapse/54483476/1
Hey...Ya suppose they'll have elections after OUR government collapses over debt woes? RON PAUL, maybe?
Seraphim
04-23-2012, 03:09 PM
Domino's, BITCHEZ.
tfurrh
04-23-2012, 03:15 PM
Again with the propaganda... Get lost with your BS already, will you?
Even if they were cutting budgets, which they aren't, they are actually also raising taxes on already through the inflation theft and debt collapse impoverished populace. No one around here will argue this could lead to anything good in either short or long term.
You're back!
hazek
04-23-2012, 03:24 PM
You're back!
I'm the propaganda terminator, I will always be back. :cool: :D
Zippyjuan
04-23-2012, 06:43 PM
Again with the propaganda... Get lost with your BS already, will you?
Even if they were cutting budgets, which they aren't, they are actually also raising taxes on already through the inflation theft and debt collapse impoverished populace. No one around here will argue this could lead to anything good in either short or long term.
You missed that I said in the short term things are worse. The statement is still true and not propoganda. It is why in the first post the Dutch Government collapsed and Sarcozy is trailing in French elections.
NewRightLibertarian
04-23-2012, 07:09 PM
You missed that I said in the short term things are worse. The statement is still true and not propoganda. It is why in the first post the Dutch Government collapsed and Sarcozy is trailing in French elections.
Cutting the astronomical level of debt may not work because they spent so much in the first place. I feel like you were being misleading in your statement.
1000-points-of-fright
04-23-2012, 07:32 PM
Failure to come to an agreement during talks = government collapsing. :rolleyes: A little hyperbolic don't you think?
Zippyjuan
04-24-2012, 03:18 PM
Cutting the astronomical level of debt may not work because they spent so much in the first place. I feel like you were being misleading in your statement.
What do you feel was misleading? Thanks.
The problem with austerity is it complicates the problems they are trying to solve which is how their economies are performing. Austerity requres higher taxes and lower spending. Lower spending means more jobs lost (government directly, others indirectly). These people who get their jobs cut are now unemployed and not generating tax revenues for the government (which then go down) and most qualify for unemployment benefits which come from the government- meaning higher government expenses along with higher revenues.
Those people in turn are also not going out and spending like they were when they were employed so the shops and businesses they used to go to have their sales go down so now they need fewer workers (or fewer hours for the workers they have). These add even more to the unemployment and lower tax revenues so the gap is bigger again and even more cuts are needed. The result is shrinking the economy- not encouraging or allowing it to grow.
Long term reducing debt is good. Sharp cuts during an economic downturn will make things even worse for you in the shorter term though. Given the length and depth of this crisis so far, short term could end up meaning years.
Paul Or Nothing II
04-25-2012, 03:28 AM
What do you feel was misleading? Thanks.
The problem with austerity is it complicates the problems they are trying to solve which is how their economies are performing. Austerity requres higher taxes and lower spending. Lower spending means more jobs lost (government directly, others indirectly). These people who get their jobs cut are now unemployed and not generating tax revenues for the government (which then go down) and most qualify for unemployment benefits which come from the government- meaning higher government expenses along with higher revenues.
Those people in turn are also not going out and spending like they were when they were employed so the shops and businesses they used to go to have their sales go down so now they need fewer workers (or fewer hours for the workers they have). These add even more to the unemployment and lower tax revenues so the gap is bigger again and even more cuts are needed. The result is shrinking the economy- not encouraging or allowing it to grow.
Long term reducing debt is good. Sharp cuts during an economic downturn will make things even worse for you in the shorter term though. Given the length and depth of this crisis so far, short term could end up meaning years.
Oh! So we have the usual Keynesian in the house! Seriously, what the hell have you been doing on this forum for such a long time to not realize the basics of government spending & bubbles!
YES, cutting big will NOT make things better in the SHORT TERM but that's NECESSARY because the artificially low interest-rates & fractional-reserve-banking caused the economy to OVERSPEND & OVERINVEST, by pushing demand & prices TOO HIGH. So cutting government spending will mean that PEOPLE will have more money with them, they may NOT spend it IMMEDIATELY but that's good, at a time when demand & prices are OVERINFLATED, so people not spending & therefore, SAVING it will start building the foundations of the economy again & in the meanwhile demand & prices will FALL & economy may shrink but that CORRECTION is NECESSARY; not allowing the correction to occur will only make things WORSE, just like it was done during Great Depression. And as SAVINGS start building up with people due to less spending & less taxes, & as prices fall/CORRECT, people will start spending & investing again & the economy will start growing again
All this has to do something so simple as laws of supply & demand - when prices rise, demand falls & when prices fall, demand rises - what Keynesians want to do is to prop up the bubble & demand by continuous spending, AGAINST THE WILL OF THE MARKET, due to their lack of understanding of what caused the bubble in the first place while what Austrians want is to let the correction to occur & let it happen QUICKLY rather than prolonging it by trying to prop up the demand, prices & bubble
And yes, you ARE misleading when you say "austerity is not working" :rolleyes:
Firstly, as others have pointed out, what they're doing is hardly "austerity", they have NOT scaled back the government much at all, all they're talking about is tinkering around the edges; secondly, "austerity" is NOT supposed to reduce unemploymen or grow the economy in the short-term anyway, it's supposed to squeeze out the malinvestment in the short-term in order to improve the long-term health of the economy so your insinuation that "it is not working" because employment isn't getting better is totally misleading
Cutting the astronomical level of debt may not work because they spent so much in the first place. I feel like you were being misleading in your statement.
Again with the propaganda... Get lost with your BS already, will you?
Even if they were cutting budgets, which they aren't, they are actually also raising taxes on already through the inflation theft and debt collapse impoverished populace. No one around here will argue this could lead to anything good in either short or long term.
Zippy - your premise is also wrong IMO. Austerity was never promoted as an immediate or near term solution to stimulating an economy. It's a necessary economic pain to achieve long term fiscal health by deflating debt. Kind of like the withdrawals a junky has to endure to break his addiction to heroin.
No European country is spending less than they're taking in, in tax-revenues. Tax rates, regulatory-environment, and Welfare-States have not changed at all. Europe is pretty much status-quo since the beginning. It's like blaming the economic environment in the US on budget cuts, which do not exist, and are solely a definition of less of an increase than the politicians wanted (ie, not a cut at all). You can't be that daft.
+1 to all of ya; we need more & more people to understand REAL economics & to stand up against the propaganda that has been fed to everyone by the Keynesian mystics & charlatans
WilliamC
04-25-2012, 04:41 AM
Cutting the astronomical level of debt may not work because they spent so much in the first place. I feel like you were being misleading in your statement.
Let me defend Zippy a bit, even though I don't know him (or any of ya'll) except via here on RPF.
I think Zippy is very educated about and interested in economics and does his best to present the 'status quo' version of events without trying to too much to defend it.
As far as I can tell he is being very informed, skeptical and rational in his viewpoint, which I appreciate greatly. I don't claim to know his 'true' motivations or beliefs but nothing I've ever read of his indicates he is trying to be deceitful in his point of view or disrespectful to Ron Paul's ideas, and I appreciate that. I enjoy the opinions of those who may or may not necessarily agree with me but who have more knowledge about a subject than I, economics in this case; Zippy and Steve Douglas are two here who I've encountered who I readily admit as to being more educated about economics than I am (there are others of course). While I very much get the impression that Steve Douglas is an open Ron Paul supporter I'm sometimes not quite sure about Zippy, but neither have I seen anything that leads me to believe Zippy really isn't, I just am not sure.
But Zippy to me represents the mindset that most well-educated non-Paul supporters may have, namely that the financial system needs serious reform but not necessarily a complete restructuring on a scale that Ron Paul and most of us would like to see. Perhaps they are uncertain about the unintended consenquences of such drastic reform, perhaps they disagree philosophically with some aspect of Austrian economics, or perhaps they simply understand and have been able themselves to prosper under the current system and so don't want such a drastic change, I don't pretend to know. But I get absolutely no impression that most well-educated non-Paul supporters are 'evil' or 'in on the corruption' or are 'pro-banker' or whatever, and that goes for Zippy as well. If anything he represents the type of person that can be convinced of the benefits of Ron Paul's economic ideas (namely ending the FED and massive decreases in government spending and regulation) if only there were enough evidence showing that the economy would be better off should the USA adopt them.
Similarly, I respect Ivash who, unlike Zippy (to my knowledge) has come out and said he isn't a Ron Paul supporter but is a Republican who appreciates the politics of the Ron Paul campaign and who would (to my knowledge) potentially support Ron Paul should he overcome the GOP establishment mindset and actually win the nomination. I guess you could say they (in my mind) fall into the category of the 'loyal opposition', that is someone whose overall all objectives might not be so different than my own (a better world with more benefits for everyone) but who differ over how we should get there.
Of course I could be completely wrong and there could simply be the motivation of an anti-Paul person seeking to spread FUD but I do not get that impression from Zippy (or Ivash) although I do distinctly detect this from others. Note I don't really 'study' this, these are just impressions I get from my reading and communicating with my fellow RPF members. I don't pretend to have seen everything that anyone else here on RPF except me has written, heck I've forgotten much of what I have written myself.
Anyway, everyone is of course free to and should come to their own conclusions about the motivations of folks here, obviously any of us who bother to post and post frequently have some sort of vested interest in Ron Paul's campaign, but I don't think everyone who isn't an obvious gung-ho Ron Paul supporter is automatically here on RPF to derail the Ron Paul campaign either (indeed there are some obvious gung-ho Ron Paul supporters who seem to me to do more harm than good with their posts, some I have little doubt are being deceptive as to their true motivations). I just really like being able to communicate with people who have different beliefs than I do when they are actually contributing to me learning more about my own. That is I never really learn anything new when I only talk to those who agree with me, I learn more when I talk to those who disagree with me and have very good arguments for their positions and am required to defend them with equally valid arguments in order to engage in real debate.
I know you and I have had some sharp exchanges but I don't doubt you are a genuine Ron Paul supporter. I attribute it more to the fact that how we are communicating is inherently clumsy and (at least to me) lends itself to magnifying differences since (to me) I tend to want to debate more than to simply be a 'me-too'er' when I post. I think most disagreements many of us have are actually minor and many would be resolved with a few minutes of face to face conversation.
luctor-et-emergo
04-25-2012, 04:58 AM
I happen to live in the Netherlands, but it would take a lot of time to even explain how our political system is different from the US.
I'm happy to try and answer some questions but I can't give a general outline without explaining the whole things, which would take me a lot more time then I have on hand at the moment.
Very short overview of our political system, once every 4 years, people pick a party they like on the national stage. This party has a number of people on the list, and the more votes the PARTY receives the more people of that party are allowed to go into the body that is equivalent to congress. Parties can decide for themselves who to put where on the list, some parties are democratic in this way, others are not. Then the 'congress' is filled with 150 seats. The 'government' is then formed by usually three parties, but it can be more as they have to reach a majority.
This time around however, there was one party that deserves some special attention. This party is called 'Partij voor de Vrijheid', or in English 'freedom party'. This is a party that was started by one disgruntled member of the Liberal democrats. He does not like Islam, his name is Mr. Wilders, and if you google him you will find enough things about him. His party is called 'extreme right' in the Netherlands, but his policies are more in the National Socialist spectrum, he want's to give his voting base more stuff, says he can magically make 10.000 nurses appear etc.
Anyways, because this Mr. Wilders has made some extreme remarks regarding Muslims and other minority groups, none of the other parties wanted to form a government with them, or him, as his party has no internal democratic structure, he decides upon everything, no dissent allowed.
A government was formed between the 'VVD' (31 out of 150 seats) which are Liberal Democrats, these people are seen as 'right wing' in the Netherlands, they are somewhat interested in the free market, at least so they claim. They like NATO, Europe, etc. They talk about free market principles and self responsibility but when it comes down to it, they like to regulate. BUT!! They want to bring down the deficit to 3% (but not less). The other party that formed the Government was the 'CDA' or Christian Democrats, this used to be the biggest party with over 40 seats, but they suffered a major credibility loss after re-running our ex prime minister, Mr. Balkenende (google him). Their policies are about the same as the VVD, differences on minor points like more aid to farmers and more religious freedom in schools etc. Anyways, their number of seats was halved, so they were unable to form a government with these two parties.
All the other parties were too small to get the 76 seat majority, except for the socialist party and the 'freedom party', well even to these pseudo- free market socialists, the socialist party is a step too far, and as 4 party agreements were failing, they finally settled for something completely different. A minority government, that would be 'tolerated' by this Mr. Wilders' 'freedom party'. What it came down to was, they made an initial agreement and the CDA and VVD got the secretaries of the different bureaucracies and the prime minister, with all the responsibility and flak that comes with it. And Mr. Wilders with his never very friendly rhetoric was handed the button to blow the whole thing up when the polls look favorable to him.
So they agreed to cut 16 billion from the budget (probably from the proposed increases), and then it was found that more money had to be cut, and then the plug was pulled. That's the whole story...
This is about the shortest background I can give without mixing my opinion in it too much, well I already did. Happy to answer questions if able to.
Liberty74
04-25-2012, 05:28 AM
The collapse is coming...
I have been warning people for over a year now. The propping up through bailouts has only kicked the can down the road. It never addressed structural issues while piling more debt on governments, the people, etc.
I am hearing this June when shit could hit the fan in Europe.
Zippyjuan
04-25-2012, 11:39 AM
Add the UK to the list of countries officially classified as in a double- dip recession.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17836624
The UK economy has returned to recession, after shrinking by 0.2% in the first three months of 2012.
A sharp fall in construction output was behind the surprise contraction, the Office for National Statistics said.
A recession is defined as two consecutive quarters of contraction. The economy shrank by 0.3% in the fourth quarter of 2011.
BBC economics editor Stephanie Flanders says it "adds to the picture that the economy is bumping along the bottom".
She said economic output was slightly smaller now than it was in the autumn of 2010.
The ONS said output of the production industries decreased by 0.4%, construction decreased by 3%. Output of the services sector, which includes retail, increased by 0.1%, after falling a month earlier.
It added that a fall in government spending had contributed to the particularly large fall in the construction sector.
"The huge cuts to public spending - 25% in public sector housing and 24% in public non-housing and with a further 10% cuts to both anticipated for 2013 - have left a hole too big for other sectors to fill," said Judy Lowe, deputy chairman of industry body CITB-ConstructionSkills, said.
In Britain, government spending is a very big portion of the economy- which is why government cuts or spending can have a big impact on the overall economy there- and does need to be reeled in. It should also be noted that it only barely climbed back into the recession category.
We are seeing economic experiments being conducted on a grand scale and it remains to be seen which is the better approach. In Europe the recession is trying to be met with efforts to reduce government deficits which at this time is acting as a break or headwinds on their economies while in the US the government has been trying to use higher government spending (increasing deficits) to try to spur the economy on and worry about reducing the debt later (if ever). It remains to be seen which approach will be the best in the long run.
hazek
04-25-2012, 12:28 PM
In Europe the recession is trying to be met with efforts to reduce government deficits
Cleverly constructed propaganda.
See what he is saying? They are merely TRYING to reduce government spending, when in fact they aren't really managing to do so besides some symbolic stuff for the sake of appearances. Someone reading through his post could easily wrongly assume they are actually successful in their mere efforts to reduce spending.
You just can't stop spreading that BS can't you?
Zippyjuan
04-25-2012, 12:51 PM
Yes, I do always lie and post BS. Thank you for pointing that out so I can mend my ways. I am sorry and it will never happen again.
Thank you for showing me the error in my judgement and facts.
Now what part was a lie again and can you support that position? Call BS- OK, but show why it is BS. Opposing views are good. Share and support them.
We are seeing economic experiments being conducted on a grand scale
To believe that these are all the machinations of benevolent governments flailing innocently about in their attempts to save their respective economies is beyond naive, bordering on the blatantly stupid, please pardon my candor.
There are several possible scenarios at play here and without very inside information, which none of us will ever be privy to, it is impossible to do anything better than speculate as to what is the real agenda afoot. One thing that is speculative in only a token sense is that this is all the product of some very serious power cultivation. I smell a global-scale dialectic at work here, and a possible end-game.
Either "they" are driving us to the edge for the purposes of scaring everyone so sheet-white-shitless that the vast and overwhelming majority of the effected populations will simply lay down for the sake of a warm, if flavorless meal courtesy of the new global socialist state, or they mean to actually wreck it and sit back as we murder each other over simple things like food and shelter. I hold no illusions that what we are witnessing now is the product of benign error. Far from it.
and it remains to be seen which is the better approach.
You mean which is the less horrid. Neither is sound in the least bit.
In Europe the recession is trying to be met with efforts to reduce government deficits which at this time is acting as a break or headwinds on their economies
A necessary condition but not sufficient. Their markets are significantly less free than ours and it shows. Their markets are therefore in proportionally worse shape and people are more vulnerable than are we. By how much I am no longer sure, particularly since 'Bammy and his Marxist bully boys have been at it, thanks to the wonderful set up provided them by the previous two administrations. Without proper freedom, their economies are doomed to this brand of failure. And worst of all, most of the stupid Europeans willingly gave up any right to the means of effective defense decades ago. At this point about the best they can do is use harsh language, and we all know how well that works. At least here if things go that badly we can take some of the bastards with us.
while in the US the government has been trying to use higher government spending (increasing deficits) to try to spur the economy on and worry about reducing the debt later (if ever). It remains to be seen which approach will be the best in the long run.
That is what they say. It is not what they mean. Clearly the goal here is to destroy what exists so that it can be replaced with something else. This year stands to become most interesting.
Paul Or Nothing II
04-26-2012, 04:47 AM
I happen to live in the Netherlands, but it would take a lot of time to even explain how our political system is different from the US.
I'm happy to try and answer some questions but I can't give a general outline without explaining the whole things, which would take me a lot more time then I have on hand at the moment.
Very short overview of our political system, once every 4 years, people pick a party they like on the national stage. This party has a number of people on the list, and the more votes the PARTY receives the more people of that party are allowed to go into the body that is equivalent to congress. Parties can decide for themselves who to put where on the list, some parties are democratic in this way, others are not. Then the 'congress' is filled with 150 seats. The 'government' is then formed by usually three parties, but it can be more as they have to reach a majority.
This time around however, there was one party that deserves some special attention. This party is called 'Partij voor de Vrijheid', or in English 'freedom party'. This is a party that was started by one disgruntled member of the Liberal democrats. He does not like Islam, his name is Mr. Wilders, and if you google him you will find enough things about him. His party is called 'extreme right' in the Netherlands, but his policies are more in the National Socialist spectrum, he want's to give his voting base more stuff, says he can magically make 10.000 nurses appear etc.
Anyways, because this Mr. Wilders has made some extreme remarks regarding Muslims and other minority groups, none of the other parties wanted to form a government with them, or him, as his party has no internal democratic structure, he decides upon everything, no dissent allowed.
A government was formed between the 'VVD' (31 out of 150 seats) which are Liberal Democrats, these people are seen as 'right wing' in the Netherlands, they are somewhat interested in the free market, at least so they claim. They like NATO, Europe, etc. They talk about free market principles and self responsibility but when it comes down to it, they like to regulate. BUT!! They want to bring down the deficit to 3% (but not less). The other party that formed the Government was the 'CDA' or Christian Democrats, this used to be the biggest party with over 40 seats, but they suffered a major credibility loss after re-running our ex prime minister, Mr. Balkenende (google him). Their policies are about the same as the VVD, differences on minor points like more aid to farmers and more religious freedom in schools etc. Anyways, their number of seats was halved, so they were unable to form a government with these two parties.
All the other parties were too small to get the 76 seat majority, except for the socialist party and the 'freedom party', well even to these pseudo- free market socialists, the socialist party is a step too far, and as 4 party agreements were failing, they finally settled for something completely different. A minority government, that would be 'tolerated' by this Mr. Wilders' 'freedom party'. What it came down to was, they made an initial agreement and the CDA and VVD got the secretaries of the different bureaucracies and the prime minister, with all the responsibility and flak that comes with it. And Mr. Wilders with his never very friendly rhetoric was handed the button to blow the whole thing up when the polls look favorable to him.
So they agreed to cut 16 billion from the budget (probably from the proposed increases), and then it was found that more money had to be cut, and then the plug was pulled. That's the whole story...
This is about the shortest background I can give without mixing my opinion in it too much, well I already did. Happy to answer questions if able to.
+1
It's always nice to get a local perspective :)
What I find really funny though is how Europeans distinguish "Right" & "Left" based mostly on social issues because economically they're all more or less socialist :D So if someone believes in nationalism & is anti-EU, anti-UN, anti-massive-immigration then they're "Right-winger"
Well, I don't know, may be Wilders isn't exactly the best guy but may be he's your best bet out there among the poor choices that you have since he seems to be for less taxes & regulation (at least in tone), against foreign aid & wars & he seems to be against EUSSR too
The thing I dislike about him is that he's an Israel-firster, well, people of Israel should be Israel-firsters, that's fine, but Dutch should be Netherland-firsters & Americans America-firsters & so on since I think nationalism (which is different from JINGOISM) is needed in this day & age when there's increasing pressure by the people at the top to centralize power by making all these global political "unions"
Anyways, I couldn't stop laughing at "free market socialism", even though I know what it means in European context but I just find it really weird, especially in the light of what Mises believed that - there's (free market) capitalism & there's socialism, no other system!
So has Ron Paul Revolution had even a slight effect on some people there? Is there ANY chance of the talk about an ACTUAL free market returning to the mainstream in Netherlands? Are people willing to revisit their socialism dreams in the wake of the economic disaster? How do you see the Europeans' general approach towards gun-rights changing in the wake of the current turmoil?
slamhead
04-26-2012, 05:14 AM
I heard it said that freedom is 1000 times more addictive than heroin. I am starting to think that the nanny state and free money is 5000 times more addictive. Why is it so hard for people to understand what needs to be done.
JohnM
04-26-2012, 05:17 AM
In Britain, government spending is a very big portion of the economy- which is why government cuts or spending can have a big impact on the overall economy there- and does need to be reeled in.
In Europe the recession is trying to be met with efforts to reduce government deficits
I have lived in Scotland for over 25 years. In recent years, I have been involved in local politics.
I can tell you what I have seen with my own eyes, in the area in which I live. Between 1998 and 2008, there was a massive increase in public spending. Money was being thrown at all kinds of projects, most of which were, in my opinion, highly dubious. However, they were politically very popular.
In 2008, the economic crisis arrived. People started talking about cuts and austerity. Ordinary people were worried.
What did I see with my own eyes? I saw no significant cuts in public spending. To cut public spending in Scotland is politically impossible. Today, public spending remains much higher than it was ten years ago.
Zippyjuan
04-26-2012, 12:37 PM
Thank you for sharing you personal insights and experiences.
Domalais
04-26-2012, 12:48 PM
What did I see with my own eyes? I saw no significant cuts in public spending. To cut public spending in Scotland is politically impossible. Today, public spending remains much higher than it was ten years ago.
No different than the United States. That's why deficits are lower under Democratic Presidents - Both parties spend exactly the same, but one taxes more. Neither side has the desire, backbone, or power to actually cut the spending that their constituencies love so much.
luctor-et-emergo
04-27-2012, 11:48 AM
So has Ron Paul Revolution had even a slight effect on some people there? Is there ANY chance of the talk about an ACTUAL free market returning to the mainstream in Netherlands? Are people willing to revisit their socialism dreams in the wake of the economic disaster? How do you see the Europeans' general approach towards gun-rights changing in the wake of the current turmoil?
-So has Ron Paul Revolution had even a slight effect on some people there?
He has been called an 'extremist' in the few media reports there were about him, I talk about Ron Paul and the message of freedom all the time, people tend to agree with me on most issues, but then come back with, 'but it isn't going to work'.
- Is there ANY chance of the talk about an ACTUAL free market returning to the mainstream in Netherlands?
Probably just as soon as in the US. My best guess is that the whole thing needs to break down before people are able to even think about another system... They are well educated you know. :)
-Are people willing to revisit their socialism dreams in the wake of the economic disaster?
I think that is the only option, and the best option. The younger generation is probably more open to it. The internet generation, many of them probably have seen some youtube video's about Ron Paul, but the younger generation here is NOT politically active, the few that are, tend to be hardcore socialists that go out waving red flags etc. etc.
-How do you see the Europeans' general approach towards gun-rights changing in the wake of the current turmoil?
Gun Rights ? What are you talking about. We don't have any gun rights. Owning a firearm is a bureaucratic mess and is never allowed for self defense purposes. At least in the Netherlands. Even a screwdriver in a public place is seen as a weapon and can get you fined. Guns will get you caged though.
PS: About Wilders, his only points I agree on are abolishing the EURO currency and the European Union.
Icymudpuppy
04-27-2012, 01:00 PM
This happens in the Netherlands every year. It's how they do bureaucratic holidays over there. Totally a non news item.
hazek
04-27-2012, 01:31 PM
Here's how I can answer for my country in center-south Europe:
-So has Ron Paul Revolution had even a slight effect on some people there?
He has been called an 'extremist' in the few media reports there were about him, I talk about Ron Paul and the message of freedom all the time, people tend to agree with me on most issues, but then come back with, 'but it isn't going to work'.
When he is mentioned, which is awful rarely, it's only briefly without going into much detail what exactly he believes in or what messages he's trying to spread and it's usually labeled with a few general unfitting words. Putting it shorter: he has almost zero effect unless people discovered him online like I did.
- Is there ANY chance of the talk about an ACTUAL free market returning to the mainstream in Netherlands?
Probably just as soon as in the US. My best guess is that the whole thing needs to break down before people are able to even think about another system... They are well educated you know. :)
Slim to none for my country.
-Are people willing to revisit their socialism dreams in the wake of the economic disaster?
I think that is the only option, and the best option. The younger generation is probably more open to it. The internet generation, many of them probably have seen some youtube video's about Ron Paul, but the younger generation here is NOT politically active, the few that are, tend to be hardcore socialists that go out waving red flags etc. etc.
More and more so unfortunately. Note the presidential candidate leading in the polls in France..
-How do you see the Europeans' general approach towards gun-rights changing in the wake of the current turmoil?
Gun Rights ? What are you talking about. We don't have any gun rights. Owning a firearm is a bureaucratic mess and is never allowed for self defense purposes. At least in the Netherlands. Even a screwdriver in a public place is seen as a weapon and can get you fined. Guns will get you caged though.
We are disarmed and people are brainwashed into staying disarmed which I don't see changing until it hits the fan.
I'm afraid it's a pretty bleak picture here in Europe and I'd be seriously considering moving some place else if it wasn't so relatively peaceful thus far. When that changes I'm definitely moving.
Paul Or Nothing II
04-28-2012, 04:23 AM
I heard it said that freedom is 1000 times more addictive than heroin. I am starting to think that the nanny state and free money is 5000 times more addictive. Why is it so hard for people to understand what needs to be done.
The prospect of "free lunch" is very attractive to most people & most of the people too stupid & too intellectually lazy to realize that there's no such thing as "free lunch"; that's the whole issue, always been
That's why one of the freest countries in the world that went on to become the most powerful in history was set up NOT by the majority vote but by a bunch of liberty-minded ELITES, they even restricted voting-rights to ONLY the property-owners because they knew that if every idiot got to vote then people will vote for such thieves who promise to take from those who have earned it & give it to those who haven't
History is replete with examples showing how the systems always end up being TOP-DOWN
There's an economic & other costs to be paid to have the kind of system you want, if enough liberty-minded people, which could be minority-population, were to take over the system either economically &/or politically &/or intellectually then ONLY THEN will be stand a chance at a free-society, the stupid & intellectually lazy majority will probably never choose it on their own
So those who want a free society will have to garner enough economic, political, intellectual clout needed to revamp the system
-So has Ron Paul Revolution had even a slight effect on some people there?
He has been called an 'extremist' in the few media reports there were about him, I talk about Ron Paul and the message of freedom all the time, people tend to agree with me on most issues, but then come back with, 'but it isn't going to work'.
Yes, the only guy asking for peace & VOLUNTARY society is "extremist", funny isn't it! :rolleyes:
Yes, a fair number of people will agree to the basic arguments but won't understand the whole concept of free market & that's why I prefer to broach the issue with pointing out that if all people are supposed to have equal rights then people in government also shouldn't be able STEAL & COERCE others
And the fact that people are largely driven by self-interest so if you have a coercive monopoly then that automatically attracts people who want to use such coercive monopoly to benefit themselves & that's why corruption is rife among democratic governments EVERYWHERE, even though it's the people that are voting them in
- Is there ANY chance of the talk about an ACTUAL free market returning to the mainstream in Netherlands?
Probably just as soon as in the US. My best guess is that the whole thing needs to break down before people are able to even think about another system... They are well educated you know. :)
I'm not so sure that a break-down will necessarily lead to free market because in the times of economic distress, people often tend to move towards more government & socialism but yes, at least the break-down of the system will force people to look at alternatives - & my signature says the rest :D
Yes, & I'm sure people are VERY educated :D - public education - one of the things on Karl Marx's 10 planks!
-Are people willing to revisit their socialism dreams in the wake of the economic disaster?
I think that is the only option, and the best option. The younger generation is probably more open to it. The internet generation, many of them probably have seen some youtube video's about Ron Paul, but the younger generation here is NOT politically active, the few that are, tend to be hardcore socialists that go out waving red flags etc. etc.
Young people, well, people in general, tend not to be too politically active unless they see things turning bad for themselves so again, hopefully now that there's internet, at least they'll be willing to look at the alternatives rather than going back to same old - more government, more socialism!
-How do you see the Europeans' general approach towards gun-rights changing in the wake of the current turmoil?
Gun Rights ? What are you talking about. We don't have any gun rights. Owning a firearm is a bureaucratic mess and is never allowed for self defense purposes. At least in the Netherlands. Even a screwdriver in a public place is seen as a weapon and can get you fined. Guns will get you caged though.
Things could change pretty quickly if things get worse, well, at least I hope they change :)
PS: About Wilders, his only points I agree on are abolishing the EURO currency and the European Union.
Yes, those are the main points, national sovereignty is the core issue at the moment as there's a push towards more political unions & centralization
Here's a Ron Paul classic on the issue :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSXQLUIc1Ak&feature=related
This happens in the Netherlands every year. It's how they do bureaucratic holidays over there. Totally a non news item.
LMAO :D
liza4fregoso
04-28-2012, 04:47 AM
I have lived in Scotland for over 25 years. In recent years, I have been involved in local politics.
I can tell you what I have seen with my own eyes, in the area in which I live. Between 1998 and 2008, there was a massive increase in public spending. Money was being thrown at all kinds of projects, most of which were, in my opinion, highly dubious. However, they were politically very popular.
In 2008, the economic crisis arrived. People started talking about cuts and austerity. Ordinary people were worried.
What did I see with my own eyes? I saw no significant cuts in public spending. To cut public spending in Scotland is politically impossible. Today, public spending remains much higher than it was ten years ago.
Thank you for your experience.
luctor-et-emergo
04-28-2012, 04:47 AM
This happens in the Netherlands every year. It's how they do bureaucratic holidays over there. Totally a non news item.
You're right, it happens more often. We had premature elections the last 5 governments, so they all had internal disagreements.
Right now they passed some quick 'reforms', some of the things are not really detailed or transparent but a couple things were mentioned in the official document;
-Sales tax is going up by 2%, from 19 to 21%
-Income tax for the lowest incomes is going down. (nothing specified)
-Employers will have to pay additional payroll taxes for 'high wage' employees.
-Bonuses or Golden Handshakes are going to be taxed at 75% instead of 30%.
-Banking tax (like 0.05% on every transfer) is going to double.
-Government employees are not going to get a pay raise for two years. (Finally)
-Unemployment benefits (first 6 months) are going to have to be paid by the employer. (I don't really understand, you fire someone, they fail to find a job and you have to pay them for half a year after you fired them ?)
-People with low incomes will get more subsidies for health care, higher incomes will have to pay a higher premium. Yes progressive pay for health care... It's already mandatory to have insurance, but 'rich' people pay an extra premium, and people with lower incomes get a subsidy.
-They are going to put extra money in 'growing the green economy', subsidizing more windmills and solar panels...
-Food is sold at a lower sales tax rate of 6% and solar panels are going to be joining food.
-Tax rates for Fuel, Cigarettes, Alcohol and SOFT DRINKS are going up, like huh ? We didn't have a tax on soft drinks for as far as I know, but apparently we will get one... Gotta keep people healthy!!
-People with an income between 33.000 and 43.000 euro's a year are going to have to pay the inflation rate in % + 1% extra for renting the same house as someone with a lower income. Which should be about 3-5% extra.
But it's more of the same, they have been doing these things for years. They are always short of money, same story everywhere.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.