Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)S
Posts
0
Comments
679
Joined
11 mo. ago

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • It's the choice between American or Chinese hegemony. For traditional reasons, the EU could be inclined to choose the USA.

  • Sorry for the misunderstanding. If it is either USA or China, and the USA is retreating and China is celebrating, what else do you mean?

  • For those who don't know:

    On 26 May 2019 Weber's European People's Party won the most seats in the European Parliament, thus making Weber the lead candidate to become the next President of the European Commission.[5][6] It was announced on 28 May that the new European Commission President would be picked at an EU summit in June; Weber was not nominated, with Ursula von der Leyen selected instead.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_Weber

  • Ukrain also objected to the mineral deal.

    The US wants to contain China. They currently don't look like it but they are the country of the playbook. They haven't started the tariff madness without a plan to decouple Europe from China. Otherwise the tariffs would be suicide.

  • As far as I know, the I is only locked out of the additional money that the EU is going to spend. All the regular 2% military spending is free to go to the I.

  • Which is of no consequence when you’re living in it.

    It’s not. Unless you’re someone with multiple properties trying to profit off it, then you want it to raise. Otherwise, everyone benefits from low prices.

    I agree with you that everybody profits because a liquid housing market will make life much easier.

    But people plan to sell their house, or appartment, either to have money to travel when they retire, or for their children to inherit, or for many other reasons.

    It can be argued that they already lost the money when they bought the house, so they shouldn't worry when prices come down now. But I am very confident that whichever party approves the laws that change the market will not be elected for decades.

    The limiting factor is not construction crews but plots and approvals.

    [citation needed]. There’s plenty of land left and right, it’s almost trivial to re-designate agricultural land as residental

    There was a quote some comments ago about the main factors to change for a better housing market.

    The designation of the land is the point. It is trivial but it doesn't happen.

    Actually I approve that it doesn't happen because agricultural land shouldn't be destroyed unnecessarily, especially when there is still hunger in the world. However, there are many areas with single family housing. Those could be repurposed.

    It's right that there are some logistics to settle. To me, they are small compared to the magnitude of the housing problem. If they are not approached then I think that's on purpose, with the main goal of keeping the housing market high.

  • The MIC is the military and the industry. If the M needs the increased capacity in Europe, the I has to accept.

  • If the choice is between USA and China, does Europe choose China? If there is a US Chinese war, is Europe fighting on China's side?

  • making it harder to enforce common standards for instance to prevent democratic backsliding

    After the election of Ursula von der Leyen as president of the commission, how can the EU be seen as a defender of democracy?

    It's the EU that needs to be more democratic before or if things should be further integrated.

  • These sorts of deals leave out US industrial complex. So they are not interessted.

    But the military, the M in MIC, is. The military needs to increase capacity and the easiest way is to make Europe produce their own weapons. They still can't build F35 and other things, so the I can still make enough money.

    The trade war the US started with China, would be a lot easier

    The USA decouples. There is no intention for an agreement.

    The US wants Europe to spend more money on US made weapons.

    That's what they say but it can't be the highest priority if they want to have the highest possible production capacities for a war.

  • The limiting factor is not construction crews but plots and approvals. If people could build, the market would quickly adjust. The problem is that the market is supposed to stay high.

    I forgot to reply to this:

    Also why should irrational investors deserve protection. “Socialism for the rich but not the poor”?

    Because every regular citizen who owns their house or appartment will lose half their wealth or more when the housing market goes down.

    Everybody who bought a house above construction costs will lose. People in poorer countries can afford houses because construction can be cheap. It's artificially increased and can be brought down in the same way that European farmers can compete with third world countries, by using automation and reducing manual interference.

    If it is not the circumstances, of course the problem must be the investors and their unreasonable ROI expectations. But it's the circumstances that limit supply and thus keep prices high. If established parties would suggest to change that they would massively lose voters.

    People who understand this, and see that the old parties don't change this, have strong incentives to vote for the AfD.

  • Yes, let's agree to disagree. Thanks for the conversation.

  • Thanks for the conversation.

    I may have used the wrong word, though. By judging I mean that somebody has to decide if an apartment is a luxery apartment that is not allowed to be built. If that's done by price, then you just don't allow the price to rise until there is an equilibrium of supply and demand, for all housing.

  • Are the suggestions bad on their own, or only because they are a tool to achieve other goals?

    Personally I think that the EU should not become a unified country. The proposal is halting the process and setting boundaries so that the countries continue to exist.

    What are the problematic parts?

  • Look at the separation of the sactuary in churches. Religion has always been primarily for the elite.

  • Why do they act now and not 20 years ago? The development was expected. Has the elite become more racist?

  • See the green parts? The ranting is to prevent them from turning yellow, or blue.

  • After seizing control of the US government

    Who controls the US government, Russia or the Heriatage Foundation? It can't be both. Or does Russia control the foundation?

  • The elephant in the room is China.

    If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.

    Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?

    The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.