Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Angela Merkel new German Chancellor

mears said:
My, God you would think you might have a little pride and come up with something. But you can't. Rmember when you criticize everything and everyone you can't even muster some ideas on your own.
Click to expand...

Mmm, so your mighty intellect was working so well you missed the reply to your post which said "see my reply to Teejay above" in reference to "ideas of my own"?

Plenty of ideas, my empty-headed accusatory little friend, something you signally lack.

As for my having pride, surely one who has no shame shouldn't pontificate about such things?

Just how crass and braindead are you?

I mean you accuse me on this thread of having no ideas, you accused me on another thread of plagiarism (an accusation you were unable to support, but didn't have the courage or decency to apologise for), so you must have some kind of problem with assimilating and synthesising information.
 
Here is an article about the balancing act Merkel must perform. It doesn't look to promising in my opinion.

"Germany's two main parties seem to have adopted the most unpopular campaign proposals of each. From the Christian Democrats comes a sales tax increase from 16 to 19 percent and elimination of tax incentives for first-time home buyers. These innovations threaten to further weaken two of the most vulnerable sectors of the German economy: consumer spending and the housing market. From the Social Democrats comes an increase in the rate of income tax paid by Germany's top earners: from 42 to 45 percent."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed.../11/27/merkels_difficult_hand/?p1=MEWell_Pos4
 
...and then all the little parties get to influence the big decisions with their votes too, so it becomes about trading off bits and pieces of policy in exchange for influence.

Great stuff.
 
mears said:
Its not that you people are dumb, justy not well read.

The study, "The EU vs. USA," was done by a pair of economists--Fredrik Bergstrom and Robert Gidehag--for the Swedish think tank Timbro. It found that if Europe were part of the U.S., only tiny Luxembourg could rival the richest of the 50 American states in gross domestic product per capita. Most European countries would rank below the U.S. average, as the chart below shows.

But what about equality? Well, the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered "low income," meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income.

In other words poverty is relative, and in the U.S. a large 45.9% of the "poor" own their homes, 72.8% have a car and almost 77% have air conditioning, which remains a luxury in most of Western Europe. The average living space for poor American households is 1,200 square feet. In Europe, the average space for all households, not just the poor, is 1,000 square feet.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242

I know it hurts. Run along now
Click to expand...
What about:
  1. Cost of living differences between the US and the EU;
  2. The fact that the EU is not one nation with one set of economic policies, but in fact contains a wide variety of countries and;
  3. The effect that better working conditions and a welfare state would have on standard of living, which is not even mentioned in the article
Also, the article never demonstrates a direct relationship between economic liberalism and higher standard of living, and uses GDP as a measure of standard of living, which, as people here have already shown, is laughable.

Edit: and air conditioning? What the fuck? Who needs air conditioning in Sweeden for fucks sake?
 
In Bloom said:
What about:
  1. Cost of living differences between the US and the EU;
  2. The fact that the EU is not one nation with one set of economic policies, but in fact contains a wide variety of countries and;
  3. The effect that better working conditions and a welfare state would have on standard of living, which is not even mentioned in the article
Also, the article never demonstrates a direct relationship between economic liberalism and higher standard of living, and uses GDP as a measure of standard of living, which, as people here have already shown, is laughable.

Edit: and air conditioning? What the fuck? Who needs air conditioning in Sweeden for fucks sake?
Click to expand...

Right, air conditioning. And it was not a comparison of air conditioning in the US and Sweeden, but the US and western Europe. And living space don't you know.

Your writing is not quantifying anything. You are not measuring "better working conditions", or "cost of living". Who is to say which is better? You are presenting any concrete information.

These were Sweedish economists who wrote this report. And they came up with this:
But what about equality? Well, the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered "low income," meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242

ouch!
 
mears said:
Right, air conditioning. And it was not a comparison of air conditioning in the US and Sweeden, but the US and western Europe. And living space don't you know.
Click to expand...
The point is that not everybody needs air conditioning, its a shit comparison, I mentioned Sweden only because (a) it is fucking cold there and (b) the study was done by Swedish economists.

Your writing is not quantifying anything. You are not measuring "better working conditions", or "cost of living". Who is to say which is better? You are presenting any concrete information.
Click to expand...
I'm merely pointing out the limitations of the study, you can't use the exact same absolute standard for measuring poverty in Sweden and America (for example) because Sweden and America are different. And working conditions are pretty obviously better in the poorer sections of the economy, that's why there are so few shitty McJobs in Germany compared to the US, because the companies aren't allowed to treat their employees as badly in Germany.

These were Sweedish economists who wrote this report.
Click to expand...
And their agenda is pretty fucking obvious, even to you, I would hope.

But what about equality? Well, the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered "low income," meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242

ouch!
Click to expand...
Except that without an indication of what the cost of living is in the two countries, that's a pretty useless statement.
 
In Bloom said:
The point is that not everybody needs air conditioning, its a shit comparison, I mentioned Sweden only because (a) it is fucking cold there and (b) the study was done by Swedish economists.


I'm merely pointing out the limitations of the study, you can't use the exact same absolute standard for measuring poverty in Sweden and America (for example) because Sweden and America are different. And working conditions are pretty obviously better in the poorer sections of the economy, that's why there are so few shitty McJobs in Germany compared to the US, because the companies aren't allowed to treat their employees as badly in Germany.


And their agenda is pretty fucking obvious, even to you, I would hope.


Except that without an indication of what the cost of living is in the two countries, that's a pretty useless statement.
Click to expand...


I've been trying to make the same points on this thread and similar points on other threads to mears for over a year.

Guess what? He isn't interested in anything that challenges his "religion".

He's a great steaming pile of nothingness.
 
mears said:
Mc Jobs is how we bring down our unemployment figures? Proof?

The US has lower unemployment and a higher standard of living than Germany. (as measured by GDP per capita)http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_gdp_cap

So GDP per capita is not a good measurement of standard of living you may retort. Feel free to name another
Click to expand...

The US unemployment figures don't include people in part time work who want/need full time work nor do they include people who have stopped looking for work.
 
mears said:
Here is an article about the balancing act Merkel must perform. It doesn't look to promising in my opinion.

"Germany's two main parties seem to have adopted the most unpopular campaign proposals of each. From the Christian Democrats comes a sales tax increase from 16 to 19 percent and elimination of tax incentives for first-time home buyers. These innovations threaten to further weaken two of the most vulnerable sectors of the German economy: consumer spending and the housing market. From the Social Democrats comes an increase in the rate of income tax paid by Germany's top earners: from 42 to 45 percent."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed.../11/27/merkels_difficult_hand/?p1=MEWell_Pos4
Click to expand...


It doesn't "look promising"...why is that? Is it because it doesn't conform to your notions of economic management?
 
As a lot of people have pointed out, GDP is a pretty blunt instrument to compare countries. For people who live in the real world, it is next to useless. There are some pretty obvious reasons why US GDP is higher than in European countries.

Firstly, America's bovine consumers keep maxing out their credit cards and remortgaging their houses to buy goods they don't need, that are usually imported from foreign countries. This produces a high GDP but is hardly the basis of a sound economy. Some day soon, Americans are going to start looking at their credit card bills and wondering if another trip to Wal-Mart is really necessary. Foreign investors are going to start wondering if continuing to shovel money into a country with the largest trade deficit in history is a smart move. When these groups reach a critical mass, the US economy is going to tank. The only question is when. In Germany, consumers are sensibly saving a much larger amount of their incomes. This may not make their GDP look so flash, but it means Germany has the world's highest trade surplus and an economy that is growing slowly and steadily. Of course, this approach is heresy. Free marketeers are lining up to criticise the Germans, how dare they save their money! Don't they realise, if they ran up massive debts they'd have a higher GDP!

US GDP is also higher because Americans have to work a lot harder. Americans typically work longer hours, and have less holiday than Europeans. They also are often pressurised to take less holiday than they are entitled to- its a lot easier to get fired in the US and when you do you're screwed- no medical care, little redundancy pay. If the next guy to you isn't taking all his holiday then you won't either, otherwise who is more likely to get laid off? So sure, you get paid more in the US but you have less opportunity to enjoy it.
 
Poi E said:
The US unemployment figures don't include people in part time work who want/need full time work nor do they include people who have stopped looking for work.
Click to expand...

Yep, I mentioned that (along with many other points) back on p.3 of this thread.
Oddly enough good ol' mears hasn't responded.

D'ya think he's got some kind of "selective reading" disease?
 
It seems the US standard of living is higher than western Europe. It seems Americans, on average are wealthier than their European counterparts. GDP per capita is one indicator. Not all of you may like it and it may not be perfect but is is a way to measure wealth.

Go ahead and name another.

I have put up this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Human_Development_Index#Top_thirty_countries

There is this
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242

"In other words poverty is relative, and in the U.S. a large 45.9% of the "poor" own their homes, 72.8% have a car and almost 77% have air conditioning, which remains a luxury in most of Western Europe. The average living space for poor American households is 1,200 square feet. In Europe, the average space for all households, not just the poor, is 1,000 square feet."

There is this.
http://www.worldfactsandfigures.com/gdp_country_desc.php

the above is my evidence.

But you people don't bring up facts and figures. You are not bringing in concrete evidence to prove me wrong. You don't cite and economists or studies.

Because it pretty clear that American enjoy a higher standard of living than their European counterparts.
 
Originally Posted by smears
But you people don't bring up facts and figures. You are not bringing in concrete evidence to prove me wrong. You don't cite and economists or studies.
Click to expand...

And you have a tendency to selectivise everything you read. Furthermore, you have been advised that your method of measurement is flawed but you continue ignore this.
 
mears said:
"index is defined as the share of the children living in the households with income below 50% of the national median."

The "National Median" sport, but nice try try.
Click to expand...
How about the "Absolute’ child poverty", the percentage of children living in households with incomes below the US official poverty line converted into national currencies (with purchasing power parity exchange rates):

http://www.unicef.org.nz/advocacy/publications/Report_Card_-_Poverty_1.pdf
(figure 2)
 
mears said:
It seems the US standard of living is higher than western Europe. It seems Americans, on average are wealthier than their European counterparts. GDP per capita is one indicator. Not all of you may like it and it may not be perfect but is is a way to measure wealth.
Click to expand...
Its a way to measure mean income, it gives no indication of sustainability or purchasing power. Give up the GDP thing mears, even you must realise why its such a crap indicator by now.

"In other words poverty is relative, and in the U.S. a large 45.9% of the "poor" own their homes
Click to expand...
Fails to take into account debt levels, ammount of available social housing, rent levels, etc.

72.8% have a car and almost 77% have air conditioning, which remains a luxury in most of Western Europe.
Click to expand...
Another poor indicator, which fails to take into account quality and availability of public transport, differences in climate and differences in infrastructure.

the above is my evidence.

But you people don't bring up facts and figures. You are not bringing in concrete evidence to prove me wrong. You don't cite and economists or studies.

Because it pretty clear that American enjoy a higher standard of living than their European counterparts.
Click to expand...
There's the rub, you are making a claim, it is for you to back it up. So far your attempts to do so have been based on highly flawed measurements.

Furthermore, just look at the links people have already provided you with, about child poverty, about proportionate prison population, about debt levels and about economic sustainability.
 
Hmm as promised I'm back but I see this has mutated into a bit of Neo-con advertising:

"God bless America" ffs :rolleyes:
 
nino_savatte said:
You could be right, IB. I reckon he secretly wants to be a Euro. ;)
Click to expand...

No 'fraid we cant be taking just anybody as an immigrant, send 'im back to where he came from.
 
TAE said:
How about the "Absolute’ child poverty", the percentage of children living in households with incomes below the US official poverty line converted into national currencies (with purchasing power parity exchange rates):

http://www.unicef.org.nz/advocacy/publications/Report_Card_-_Poverty_1.pdf
(figure 2)
Click to expand...

for absolute child poverty in this study you cite the US is is listed at 13.9%, Germany ahead at 12.5% and the UK comes in at a whopping 29.1%. So the US seems to be someonewhere in the middle with Europe.

The US unemployment rate is much lower than the continent and GDP per capita higher.

And hate to be redundant boys and girls but:

"the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered "low income," meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income."

and in the U.S. a large 45.9% of the "poor" own their homes, 72.8% have a car and almost 77% have air conditioning, which remains a luxury in most of Western Europe. The average living space for poor American households is 1,200 square feet. In Europe, the average space for all households, not just the poor, is 1,000 square feet.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242
 
Sunburn said:
Well its very touching that you have so much faith in a bunch of right wing Swedish propagandists, whose stated goal is 'to mold public opinion favourably towards free enterprise'. Fortunately, no-one else is listening to them.
Click to expand...

Thing is that I doubt that mears cares about the ideological position of his sources, just so long as he can use them to support his thesis. Most people realise that "think tanks" exist purely to create ideologically-loaded extrapolations of data. It's all about interpretation, and anyone who believes that "thinktanks" produce truth rather than an interpretation of it is either doing so from deliberate choice or is an idiot.

Of course, that leaves mears's "arguments" open to dissection and dismemberment, but by his usual skillful avoidance of answering any hard questions put to him and merely reiterating the same second-rate material time and again, he feels some form of security.

I suppose it's all about avoiding cognitive dissonance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

krtek a houby
Aotearoa/New Zealand changes
Replies
0
Views
167
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
tim
New Caledonia and the resistance against French settler colonists.
Replies
5
Views
435
Wkdloz
Wkdloz
editor
Live video 'portal' between New York And Dublin closes after predictable 'inappropriate behaviour'
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
bcuster
bcuster
Dystopiary
Three people killed, several injured after knife attack in Germany 23/08/24
Replies
14
Views
803
Serge Forward
Serge Forward
editor
New Ukraine forum
Replies
0
Views
544
editor
editor
Back
Top Bottom