Alowishus wrote:

Vaenamoenen wrote: Syd Lexia wrote: The economic crisis in Greece, I imagine. And the bailouts. s. Yes, but where's the alleged socialism and its flaws we are now learning about? Quote: Market analysts are predicting the Euro will fold and countries will go back to their own national currencies. Some countries probably will. Greece maybe should. I wouldn't worry about it, i had no idea what he was talking about. Unless he was talking about the transition of Russia away from communism.

Wow, I can only infer that you are an Irishman who does not know what European social democracy is, because I stated what “The social democracies of Europe are learning right now [is] that the problem with socialism (and communism) is that you eventually run out of other people's money to redistribute.”

Ok, very quickly because if I’m going to be doing this, I might as well be applying to that history professor job opening I saw last week:

European democracies are predominantly based on the ideology of social democracy, which, for the sake of brevity, stands today as a fusion of representative government & socialism. These countries have large, cradle to grave welfare systems that require heavy taxation and massive borrowing. In effect, it results in (and is motivated by) a form of wealth redistribution & social justice within the modern, capitalist, democratic system. These policies have resulted in an increasing level of debt that has recently reached a tipping point for much of Europe, most prominently in Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Ireland. Hence, my referencing the Thatcher quote that “the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” These countries do not have any more money to take from its citizens or borrow from wealthier countries in order to fund their socialist welfare programs.

For a more detailed description of social democracy and its use of the welfare state, there’s always Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism#Social_democracy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

That’s only the tip of the iceberg over how European economies are hampered by socialist policies, such as public ownership of power companies, gas companies, etc., as well as some very bizarre labor laws that make it extremely difficult to terminate an underperforming employee. It’s hard enough here in the US when my firm defends corporations & universities against union grievances. Thankfully, this country has “at will” employees. Italy would be in even harder shape right now if they did not pass the Biagi laws a few years ago, which created temporary worker classifications, which aren’t protected from being fired after the probationary period (unlike their full-time workers).


And Syd, I really missed reading your political posts. At least there's been South Park, as you said. God bless Trey Parker & Matt Stone.

In spite of Thatcher's reforms, The UK has had a history of social democracy. To take just one example, the NHS is a direct result of this. Furthermore, the Labour party is in itself a social democratic party: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28UK%29

This is stuff about your own country that directly affects you and that you should know. On top of that, considering that the UK is a part of the EU even though they don't use the euro, you are still directly affected by them as well. This should be elementary school material for you. I expect Americans not to know basics about European government & politics, but I never thought I'd be using the knowledge I gained in getting an M.A. in Modern European history to teach an Irishman about his own country and that he should have started learning in first grade.

Why are you posting in a topic about American politics when you do not even know the basics about your own country's politics? I weep for the future of Western Civilization.

To take one example, Italy's debt is at 120% of their GDP, and most of their expenditures are for welfare programs. The bloated pensions come up often because they're simply too high for the government to pay. European countries' debts have been accumulating over those decades, and they've finally run out of money.

Yes, the Scandinavian countries are a major exception, which is a big reason why most of them are wisely not on the euro (and keeping their own currencies has protected them from eurozone problems, just like it has partially protected the UK). Their smaller populations are certainly a factor in this, minimizing the damage of the welfare state.

The current economic crisis began with US banking problems, but the European welfare state put their continent in a poor position to face the situation. Any attempt at austerity meets with stiff resistance from citizens & politicians who want to keep the large infrastructure of their welfare systems, even though they cannot restructure their debts without severely reducing their spending on socialist programs.

I don't contest that my politics influences my interpretation of events.

The beliefs of your own country's political parties are pretty basic, and are not graduate level material. I probably didn't learn about specific political parties in European countries until I took history courses about them in college. In America, learning about the existence & beliefs of the republican & democratic parties (as well as all their predecessors) begins in elementary school.

Regardless of the home rule you have in Northern Ireland, you are still part of the UK and the government in London still has ultimate federal authority. If you want to understand what is going on in your country's current events, you have to know at least some of what its politics are about. That includes what's happening in both Belfast & London for you.

With how bad the American educational system is in now, I don't understand how we can be that bad if your country apparently is skipping basics about your own politics. Having electives that early in your education is baffling to me. You need fundamentals first before a student can branch out into their own specific interests. Hell, even the universities here have "distribution requirements" or the like which make sure you have basic instruction in all major spheres of knowledge.

Alowishus wrote:

yet i am expected to be a fucking chieftain of knowledge while he is throwing out technical jargon i haven't even seen before

I don't expect you to be an expert, but if you are going to engage in a conversation about politics, I would think you would at least be aware of the basics of your own country. "Social democracy" isn't technical jargon, but a common, every day description of your country's and continent's system of government and political parties.

lavalarva wrote:

I'd be pissed too if someone tried to bring something like the free market in Canada.

I haven't been paying too much attention, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't your conservative prime minister, Harper, been able to improve your economy during this crisis? I have no idea how he's done it because it's difficult to get news about Canada here unless you seek it out, but I would assume it would be more free market oriented than socialist oriented. And as far as I know, you do have businesses that operate in a free market, right? It's not as expansive as the US of course, but you have companies competing to provide a product to your consumers, I believe. Otherwise, I have a lot to talk about with my Canadian uncle when I see him Saturday.



Edit:
Damn, sorry this was another long one. This was only three single sentence paragraphs when I envisioned it. Wasted almost half my lunch break on it, ugh.

Alowishus wrote:

Age 14 for electives isn't really that early.

Ah, ok, somehow I switched ages 11 & 14 while reading your post (probably because you made it while I was responding to your previous post, and I was rushing to get this done before the end of my lunch break). We start getting electives at age 14 as well, when we start high school. At my school at the time, it started with one elective. It can be different state to state though, as education is mainly a local, state responsibility here, with varying requirements across the borders.

Alowishus wrote:

Well i know why i am confused. I have been lectured that the UK is a liberal democracy and not a social democracy.... Hell if you said it was a constitutional monarchy then i would have know what you are talking about.

All three are accurate descriptions, different flavors of democracy. Although to be fair, social democracy is more of a political ideology. It's just that changes to governments that social democrats have made while in power in Europe have been institutionalized and lasting enough to make "social democracy" a descriptor in addition to liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy (in the case of the UK). Your lecturer is indeed correct in his description as well; no argument there.

I've been a bit of an asshole too, just couldn't help myself from laughing - I guess from the light mood I was in from returning to the board, or whatever. I typically try to stay away from ad hominem attacks, as they take away from the strength of your argument.

Heh, I forgot how funny that emoticon is.