3 ms·

Oh yes it is. The Eurozone has exactly ZERO transfers. What is the proposed, officially sanctioned solution? Lower salaries. Austerity. Impoverishment. Then wha

by wazoox 8y ago

Oh yes it is. The Eurozone has exactly ZERO transfers. What is the proposed, officially sanctioned solution? Lower salaries. Austerity. Impoverishment. Then what happens? Fascism. Slow clap... We've tried this shit before, it was the gold standard in the 20s. Remember how it ended? Yeah, it was a heck of a good job! The whole Euro project is brain-dead, and it's killing the EU, fast. Wait to see the results of the coming European elections...

antientropic 8y ago
It is false that there are "exactly ZERO transfers" in the EU. Sadly for Italy however, it is a net contributor of about 5 billion a year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#EU-28_contributions_(2014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#E...
- wazoox 8y ago
  Strictly speaking, there are some transfers, however they're minuscule compared to EU GDP. The simple fact is that rich California pays for poor Montana, but rich Bavaria doesn't pay for poor Greece, doesn't want to and politically can't be forced to do it. IIRC the volume of transfers necessary to reach equilibrium would be around 8% of GDP.
  - taysic 8y ago
    California doesn’t exactly pay for Montana... they do pay for some federal services for which everyone has voted for. In theory though poor management can cause a state to default on its debt.
Udik 8y ago
I don't think the two explanations are mutually exclusive. Yes, given the limitations of Italy's society and economy, the euro is probably causing damages (not in a absolute terms, it has also positive sides, but let's pretend it's a net negative). At the same time, Italy's economy and society are losing the pace with the rest of the world. This might be also a consequence of long economic stagnation due to the euro, but it's definitely a cultural trait: people are angry, distrustful, poorly educated, incapable of finding common ground even on the basics. The political crises of the last thirty years have left a deep mark on the public opinion, which is now suspicious of every public project, every politician, every successful entrepreneur, and addicted to news of political scandals. There is nothing that Italians seem to enjoy more than seeing a politician or entrepreneur indicted for corruption; the widespread idea is that someone stole the money, and the most approved government measures are those that redistribute public money and punish this or that perceived offender. Source: I'm Italian.
- david-gpu 8y ago
  You have described the political landscape in Spain to a T. I fear than in the upcoming general elections we will see the rise of the populist far right, and with it further polarization of the political landscape. Source: am Spaniard.
  - Udik 8y ago
    Sorry to hear that. I also wonder how much this depends on local, contingent events, and how much can be attributed to internet and social media, where the outrage is the driver of clicks and attention, and uninformed conversations thrive. Populists are on the rise everywhere. On the side, the bursts of social justice outrage in the US might be just a different, leftwing expression of the same mechanisms that produced Trump on the right. We urgently need cultural tools to deal with the consequences of social media.
    - wazoox 8y ago
      Populist are on the rise because oligarchy has stolen money and power everywhere. Don't look for pseudo "cultural" reasons (bordering on xenophobia, racism or classism) where a basic Marxist analysis works marvels. Do you really think that Italians are angry and lazy, and Brits too, and Greeks, and Spaniards, and French, and Trump voters? Because of Facebook? Really? Come on. This is silly.
      - Udik 8y ago
        I'm glad that you asked :) I think that yes, a lack of economic growth (in some cases) and an increasing disparity in wealth (in others) makes people angry, and distrustful, on the long term. I also think that "oligarchies stole the money" is an incredibly simplistic explanation for the lack of growth- there are at least two factors, the competition from emerging countries and software, that have removed low skilled and low added value jobs from the West. But still the countries who kept up with their industry and education managed to thrive. On the other hand, the people's anger doesn't come with an understanding of the issues and their causes; it's more of a general bad mood that disrupts everything, what is wrong and what is right in the same way. So that people fight against the problems and the solutions alike. And yes, I think social media act as a multiplier of this unproductive anger, because they give a voice and an audience to those who lack the minimal educational standards that have been traditionally required to those who wrote for the public. It's classist? Fair. But it's true. Information used to flow from an educated elite (think of the incredibly ponderous and boring articles of Marxist newspapers, if you want) to the masses, who tried to absorb and follow (with all the risks that this entailed, as well). In Italy the single voice of the communist party, through its press, could reach every peasant and set the line. While now the communication is horizontal and universal, and angry, uninformed opinions spread and reinforce each other. It's clear since a long time (think of tabloid covers) that indignation, outrage, scandal are extremely successful memes. They survive and spread replacing everything else. We need to learn how to deal with this, not with censorship, but culturally.

by wazoox 8y ago

antientropic 8y ago

It is false that there are "exactly ZERO transfers" in the EU. Sadly for Italy however, it is a net contributor of about 5 billion a year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#EU-28_contributions_(2014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#E...

wazoox 8y ago
Strictly speaking, there are some transfers, however they're minuscule compared to EU GDP. The simple fact is that rich California pays for poor Montana, but rich Bavaria doesn't pay for poor Greece, doesn't want to and politically can't be forced to do it. IIRC the volume of transfers necessary to reach equilibrium would be around 8% of GDP.
- taysic 8y ago
  California doesn’t exactly pay for Montana... they do pay for some federal services for which everyone has voted for. In theory though poor management can cause a state to default on its debt.

Udik 8y ago

I don't think the two explanations are mutually exclusive. Yes, given the limitations of Italy's society and economy, the euro is probably causing damages (not in a absolute terms, it has also positive sides, but let's pretend it's a net negative). At the same time, Italy's economy and society are losing the pace with the rest of the world. This might be also a consequence of long economic stagnation due to the euro, but it's definitely a cultural trait: people are angry, distrustful, poorly educated, incapable of finding common ground even on the basics. The political crises of the last thirty years have left a deep mark on the public opinion, which is now suspicious of every public project, every politician, every successful entrepreneur, and addicted to news of political scandals. There is nothing that Italians seem to enjoy more than seeing a politician or entrepreneur indicted for corruption; the widespread idea is that someone stole the money, and the most approved government measures are those that redistribute public money and punish this or that perceived offender. Source: I'm Italian.

david-gpu 8y ago
You have described the political landscape in Spain to a T. I fear than in the upcoming general elections we will see the rise of the populist far right, and with it further polarization of the political landscape. Source: am Spaniard.
- Udik 8y ago
  Sorry to hear that. I also wonder how much this depends on local, contingent events, and how much can be attributed to internet and social media, where the outrage is the driver of clicks and attention, and uninformed conversations thrive. Populists are on the rise everywhere. On the side, the bursts of social justice outrage in the US might be just a different, leftwing expression of the same mechanisms that produced Trump on the right. We urgently need cultural tools to deal with the consequences of social media.
  - wazoox 8y ago
    Populist are on the rise because oligarchy has stolen money and power everywhere. Don't look for pseudo "cultural" reasons (bordering on xenophobia, racism or classism) where a basic Marxist analysis works marvels. Do you really think that Italians are angry and lazy, and Brits too, and Greeks, and Spaniards, and French, and Trump voters? Because of Facebook? Really? Come on. This is silly.
    - Udik 8y ago
      I'm glad that you asked :) I think that yes, a lack of economic growth (in some cases) and an increasing disparity in wealth (in others) makes people angry, and distrustful, on the long term. I also think that "oligarchies stole the money" is an incredibly simplistic explanation for the lack of growth- there are at least two factors, the competition from emerging countries and software, that have removed low skilled and low added value jobs from the West. But still the countries who kept up with their industry and education managed to thrive. On the other hand, the people's anger doesn't come with an understanding of the issues and their causes; it's more of a general bad mood that disrupts everything, what is wrong and what is right in the same way. So that people fight against the problems and the solutions alike. And yes, I think social media act as a multiplier of this unproductive anger, because they give a voice and an audience to those who lack the minimal educational standards that have been traditionally required to those who wrote for the public. It's classist? Fair. But it's true. Information used to flow from an educated elite (think of the incredibly ponderous and boring articles of Marxist newspapers, if you want) to the masses, who tried to absorb and follow (with all the risks that this entailed, as well). In Italy the single voice of the communist party, through its press, could reach every peasant and set the line. While now the communication is horizontal and universal, and angry, uninformed opinions spread and reinforce each other. It's clear since a long time (think of tabloid covers) that indignation, outrage, scandal are extremely successful memes. They survive and spread replacing everything else. We need to learn how to deal with this, not with censorship, but culturally.