Jump to content
DireWolfSpirit

International Thread 3

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Toth said:

I just found an interesting graph when looking at the workload and salary of teachers in international comparison. It is in German unfortunately, and also more than a little outdated, but it is interesting nonetheless when it comes to general policy:

arbeitszeiten-lehrer-vergleich-1.png

Green is the salary in 100 euros per year (after 15 years in the job), the red one is lessons per year and the grey one is yearly hours of presence at school due to regulation.

I was actually just wanting to know how Germany looks like in comparison and it kinda confirms my weird impression that the German Federal governments have a tendency to just throw money at their overworked teachers instead of adressing the problem of them getting more and more hours of work instead of, you know, hiring more to improve the general working conditions.

But... WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THE US?!? I'm barely operational with "just" 28 lessons per week, but... bloody hell, what's up with your hours?!?

Might be helpful if you posted a link to that graph rather than just talked about it. German teachers are state employees, BTW, so there isn't much the federal government can do to improve their situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Loge said:

Might be helpful if you posted a link to that graph rather than just talked about it. German teachers are state employees, BTW, so there isn't much the federal government can do to improve their situation.

Sorry, my bad. I meant state government. My mind somehow has state level actors linked with the word federalism, therefore my error. And the png didn't work? Ah, doesn't matter anyway... I'm too tired to think straight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

Thanks. Not an issue at all for mainlanders, but for tourists and researchers who were on the Island at the time, it's scary as hell. Being an Island that is a volcano and nothing else means pretty much no where to run and hide. Sounds like it's too dangerous for rescue crews to get to the Island tonight (it's 11PM now) and there's between 10 and 27 people still on the Island. I imagine this will be the scariest night ever for those people, and hopefully they survive. There's no contact with the Island so we don't know if anyone left there is alive.

I do wonder in the wash up of this event if there will be some hard questions asked. A geoscientist that was interviewed on the radio today said that they'd been measuring an increase in pressure on the island, so they must have known there was a mounting eruption risk. You can't properly predict eruptions, but you can surely estimate the rising risk of eruption when you start detecting pressure build up. There should be a point at which the Island becomes a no-go zone and it stays that way until it erupts. It's not a long dormant volcano that's suddenly come back to life. This thing is an active volcano and everyone knows it's going to erupt a few times in the span of a human life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read that Finland's next prime minister, Sanna Marin, is 34 years old - exactly 6 months and a day younger than me.  Way to make me feel bad about my life, Sanna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Loge said:

Haven't seen this mentioned so far: The Trump administration is blocking the nomination of new judges on the WTO's Apellate Body. That means it becomes disfunctional and the WTO loses its capability to settle disputes between member states.

 

Wow, that doesn't seem normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that a favour to Boris? Possibly in exchange for the NHS?

Or just pig-ignarance and posturing as usual?

Edited by Which Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2019 at 10:34 PM, Loge said:

Haven't seen this mentioned so far: The Trump administration is blocking the nomination of new judges on the WTO's Apellate Body. That means it becomes disfunctional and the WTO loses its capability to settle disputes between member states.

 

 

On 12/10/2019 at 10:54 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

Wow, that doesn't seem normal.

I actually have mentioned this some time ago. This has been a long term problem, and it is very serious for international trade. It also ironically hurts the USA a fair bit. Because the USA is taking a number of cases to the WTO which is expected to find in favour of the USA. New Zealand is a party to some of those cases in support of the USA. But the loser of every case at the first level is guaranteed a right of appeal if they choose to take it. And with no appellate body (today I believe it went down from three judges (barely functional) to one judge (non-functional) the WTO rule stipulate that the original position of the losing party remains in force until the appeal is heard. So the USA will win its case in the WTO, but nothing will change if an appeal is lodged. And if the USA tries to bully its way through then it will run roughshod over the rules based trading system, and, well, chaos and rising tension.

One of our senior diplomats just under a month ago was saying to our team that we're headed to a Thucydides trap situation, and this specific possibility of not having a functional appeals system is a significant step in that direction. With a bit of luck the war won't be a shooty one, but an economic one would still be bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bolivian rebels against the Facist usurpers are bracing for potential/likely military backlash :https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/24/bolivia-free-territory-chapare-coup-invasion/

Also, the fascists are very candidly asking for Israel's help in quelling the left-wing terrorism in the country.

Ignoring the fact that a main reason that they are in power is because of right-wing terrorism.

I am not surprised there's little or no calls for US to intervene in Bolvia in order to help restore Democracy.

After all if a dictatorship benefits powers in Europe and the US, it's a necessary evil. 

If it doesn't you're a heartless monster if you don't support whatever methods utilized to oust the government by foreign powers. 

 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2019 at 1:04 AM, Heartofice said:

So going back to the original point we were talking about, yes I would rather the US was the dominant global power and sometimes you need to do unsavoury things to keep it that way. Don’t be naive and think we are all living in a hippy commune. Dictators are going to be installed,  now do you want them to be under US control or Russia’s? You decide 

This is an old post that I've already replied to but re-reading this thread  I realized something I should have brought up in regards to the bolded. If the US had decided to overthrow and Institute a dictatorship in your country I don't think you’d really care if it helped the US secure more power on a global stage. Or really more realistically,  just secure more money for a select few private interest. 

Presuming you don't like how said dictator is running the country, I don't think you'd care if some fat Americans on the internet said the US backing said dictator is bad did not suffer US government reprisal. I don't think you'd care much for the fact the US has(at this moment at least), have elections

If so why? Again you put much stock in the Democratic nature of the US as being the key difference. The only way for it actively matter is if the majority of the public(assuming their actual opinions shaped America’s foreign policy greater than a few special interest groups),  agrees with me and see the type of US Imperialism you applaud as not only evil but unacceptable. As in they’d disagree with you. 

You personally would be granted no more social/political freedoms under a US backed dictatorship or a Russia backed-dictatorship. 

I remember you lambasting me for being against a US backed coup in Venezuela because of the Human rights abuses there.  Mass-human suffering to you at the behest of a dictator is a travesty that demands military action from foreign superpowers-unless said dictator is friendly to the US. I think it'd be appropriate you never mention any supposed human rights abuses by a regime the US or UK hopes to topple. 

Because that's not the issue for you. The issue is whether or not said regime is friendly enough to the US or Uk, or just powerful entities that control it. 

 I think you realize the odds of the US staging an outright coup in your country, is infinitely lower than doing it in some poor Latin-American country with Socialist leanings, that doesn't have the courtesy of a fully-stocked nuclear arsenal. You can comfortably wag your finger at the mere thought of not cheering on US Imperialism because you yourself don't have to worry that much about it not negatively impacting your country. Or at least you don't see it having a negative impact. 

You spoke from a position of privilege. The privilege of already being on the right side of the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

This is an old post that I've already replied to but re-reading this thread  I realized something I should have brought up in regards to the bolded. If the US had decided to overthrow and Institute a dictatorship in your country I don't think you’d really care if it helped the US secure more power on a global stage. Or really more realistically,  just secure more money for a select few private interest. 

Presuming you don't like how said dictator is running the country, I don't think you'd care if some fat Americans on the internet said the US backing said dictator is bad did not suffer US government reprisal. I don't think you'd care much for the fact the US has(at this moment at least), have elections

If so why? Again you put much stock in the Democratic nature of the US as being the key difference. The only way for it actively matter is if the majority of the public(assuming their actual opinions shaped America’s foreign policy greater than a few special interest groups),  agrees with me and see the type of US Imperialism you applaud as not only evil but unacceptable. As in they’d disagree with you. 

You personally would be granted no more social/political freedoms under a US backed dictatorship or a Russia backed-dictatorship. 

I remember you lambasting me for being against a US backed coup in Venezuela because of the Human rights abuses there.  Mass-human suffering to you at the behest of a dictator is a travesty that demands military action from foreign superpowers-unless said dictator is friendly to the US. I think it'd be appropriate you never mention any supposed human rights abuses by a regime the US or UK hopes to topple. 

Because that's not the issue for you. The issue is whether or not said regime is friendly enough to the US or Uk, or just powerful entities that control it. 

 I think you realize the odds of the US staging an outright coup in your country, is infinitely lower than doing it in some poor Latin-American country with Socialist leanings, that doesn't have the courtesy of a fully-stocked nuclear arsenal. You can comfortably wag your finger at the mere thought of not cheering on US Imperialism because you yourself don't have to worry that much about it not negatively impacting your country. Or at least you don't see it having a negative impact. 

You spoke from a position of privilege. The privilege of already being on the right side of the US.

Think you completely missed the point here.

If larger countries are always going to pick on the small ones, then would you rather it was the US, or Russia installing dictators?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Think you completely missed the point here.

If larger countries are always going to pick on the small ones, then would you rather it was the US, or Russia installing dictators?

To be honest. It's better to have the bad luck of living under a Russia backed dictator.

If you don't believe, see what happened to the people of Cuba after they dared to throw out their US backed dictators. This triggered several attempts at US backed counter revolution and of course complete economic strangling by the USA. Their situation became so bad that they had no other choice than going to the only other power at that time, and became a USSR backed dictatorship, which left the people in an equally bad situation (except better Healthcare)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kiko said:

To be honest. It's better to have the bad luck of living under a Russia backed dictator.

If you don't believe, see what happened to the people of Cuba after they dared to throw out their US backed dictators. This triggered several attempts at US backed counter revolution and of course complete economic strangling by the USA. Their situation became so bad that they had no other choice than going to the only other power at that time, and became a USSR backed dictatorship, which left the people in an equally bad situation (except better Healthcare)

Yeah, I don't live in Cuba. From my own personal point of view, as a westerner, I would rather it was the USA transmitting its soft power around the world, than China or Russia. Call me selfish or whatever, I don't really care. 

Unfortunately we live in a world where major powers use smaller ones for their own ends, and they don't do it in ways we like. That is just the way the world is. Would I rather it didn't happen? Sure. It is happening and will continue to happen. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I would rather it was the USA transmitting its soft power around the world, than China or Russia.

Honest question, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

America is the least worst of those options clearly. 

Is it? Maybe internally (maybe). But I'm not sure the historical record of the USA's foreign interventions bears this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Liffguard said:

Is it? Maybe internally (maybe). But I'm not sure the historical record of the USA's foreign interventions bears this out.

As a Brit, yeah I’d rather America was the one taking charge and not China, it’s better for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×