Are people stupid enough to fell in such an obvious trap?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
|OT| French Presidential election - 2012 edition
- Thread starter ComputerMKII
- Start date
- Status
Are people stupid enough to fell in such an obvious trap?
Aren't you the batshit insane advocate of an unbelievably fringe, inflation-centric economic ideology? Seems like the pot calling the kettle black.
As I said A lifestyle that was unsustainable and I have said in other posts how the eurozone was screwed because of a lack of a common economic policy before.
empty vessel
Member
No. If you want to say something substantive, you are welcome to do so.
I don't think that says what you think it says.
And that have anything to do with François Hollande how?
The funny thing is there's 2 kinds of conservatives and both are quite funny to watch even if they're both equally destructive.
Black Republican
Member
one more week
this is GREAT hahaha
Would actually be very funny if they lost because of this
I can't wait to watch the debate. I know Hollande has already won but the debate will be a nice entertainment.
I hope Sarkozy won't play the nice guy and will finish with a bang, implying how retarded a large chunk of France is to choose to vote against him ("Eh touche-moi pas tu me salis !") and for whoever faces him.
I hope Sarkozy won't play the nice guy and will finish with a bang, implying how retarded a large chunk of France is to choose to vote against him ("Eh touche-moi pas tu me salis !") and for whoever faces him.
From what I've just seen of him on Canal +, he'll keep pretending he didn't say what he has obviously said before, will dodge questions about people in his party not feeling his current strategy and outright question the validity of the questions sent at him when it's too dangerous for him to reply...
Like a wild dog chasin its own tail. France's right is fucked. Merci Sarko...
Hollande is talking right now on Dimanche+ and you're actually discribing him in the emission...
POLITICS! But honestly there's less wagling coming from Hollande... Maybe Sarkozy's ticks are fooling me!
Are you fucking kidding me?
He's dancing around the facts right now!
He was asked how we could afford to tax less on the gasoline, well he said basically nothing on how we could afford it.
He's talking about how the fiscal shield cost so much more than everything else Sarkozy did.
Which is actually false since it's been evaluated and didn't cost that much more than the ISF for example.
He just said he won't cut spending and will hire more people in the public sector.
Called it!
Now he's saying how the budget mustn't be in deficit while totally forgetting about how the deficit now is mostly the regions squandering their allocations (regions can't make a budget were they lost money and any deficit is given to the central state, now you know why the debt increased last year).
e: and now he's saying he'll cut the VAT increase and keep the taxes paid on our salaries (including the increase).
Once again if you work you'll be in a worse place than if you're given handouts.
Tribes of Trusty
Member
lol NS nearly accused ASL of saying he lodged Khaddafi in his courtyard. [/sarcasm]
Yes because our foreign policy really changed this last 30 years</sarcasm>
People are getting antsy in here. Yeah, his pogram is weak, I already acknowledge it in the past and there's a lot of shit that won't fly once in front of the issues at hand.
BBBBBUUUUUUUUUTTTTTTT, he seems more confortable dodging shit than Sarkozy who instead of being attacked only on his program (that also has holes in it and bears the weight of 5 years at not being so good) also has to dance around the fact that he's playing with ideas from the FN that just don't jive with what I think are the values of our republic.
And I'm expecting to pay higher taxes either way.
BBBBBUUUUUUUUUTTTTTTT, he seems more confortable dodging shit than Sarkozy who instead of being attacked only on his program (that also has holes in it and bears the weight of 5 years at not being so good) also has to dance around the fact that he's playing with ideas from the FN that just don't jive with what I think are the values of our republic.
And I'm expecting to pay higher taxes either way.
The fun facts is we'll be the only ones paying higher taxes while the poorer will live better with handouts and the richer 1% will still pay nothing at all.
As I said earlier, this election is done and over, people had a choice and they'll pay for like always.
Other late polls give a generally stable tendancy.
http://www.lepoint.fr/politique/ele...llande-4-sarkozy-0-27-04-2012-1455756_537.php
Hollande 54-55, Sarko 45-46. Debate or not, next week won't be a game changer.
http://www.lepoint.fr/politique/ele...llande-4-sarkozy-0-27-04-2012-1455756_537.php
Hollande 54-55, Sarko 45-46. Debate or not, next week won't be a game changer.
empty vessel
Member
What does this question have to do with the conversation? You asked me for support of my denial of the proposition that France's problems were caused by "a lifestyle that was never sustainable." This election has by and large been wasted because the problem has not been correctly identified or understood (and so the proposals are all off the mark). I don't think either Hollande or Sarkozy understand the problem and neither of them are going to set France on the right economic course:
WSJ said:
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120426-702698.html
Neither should be focusing on the deficit but on growth. France's primary problem right now is that the deficit is too small. Sarkozy, by putting forward spending cuts, is plainly saying that he intends to slow economic growth and increase unemployment over the next four to five years by reducing aggregate demand. This will not reduce the deficit but will increase it, and it is obviously bad for France. Hollande claims to support "pro-growth" approaches to reducing the deficit (the only way to really reduce a deficit caused by a slumping economy is paradoxically by spending more), but he doesn't seem to understand how France's lack of currency sovereignty and consequent vulnerability to the bond market--France's real problem--greatly limits his ability to do this successfully, especially in the current environment. France has put itself in handcuffs, and nobody is close to finding the key.
You said
When Ripclaw said
You claim that he was talking absolute nonsense, so in short by highlighting the whole text you disagree with everything he said, including the following :
Which you still have to prove that he knows less than you do on the matter.
For context this is your post :
And again Hollande's idea of growth is nothing like what the WSJ is advocating.
Nothing AT ALL.
And also there's a theory that there's a wall of debt beyond which no actions will take hold.
Why do think they made their estimates the way they did?
^about that, H. Van Rompuy just stated that we should develop a growth strategy... based on austerity.
Europe isn't out of crisis yet.
http://blogs.univ-poitiers.fr/o-bouba-olga/2012/04/30/pauvre-europe/
Europe isn't out of crisis yet.
http://blogs.univ-poitiers.fr/o-bouba-olga/2012/04/30/pauvre-europe/
Saw that too.
(The reason I keep linking to latribune is because they're not blocked at work, and they're better than lemonde, lefigaro or the shitty newspapers).
It still doesn't change anything they don't want to do it Keynes style which is what Hollande is pushing.
http://www.latribune.fr/actualites/...-la-valeur-ajoutee-de-francois-hollande-.html
What kind of moron say this things?
Speech delivered in Cambridge
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/presidentielle-2012/221146264/this-house-would-re-elect-sarkozy
What kind of moron say this things?
Speech delivered in Cambridge
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/presidentielle-2012/221146264/this-house-would-re-elect-sarkozy
http://www.latribune.fr/actualites/...-la-valeur-ajoutee-de-francois-hollande-.html
What kind of moron say this things?
Speech delivered in Cambridge
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/presidentielle-2012/221146264/this-house-would-re-elect-sarkozy
Isn't that a right wing newspaper?Hollande isn't going to make anyone flee.
Sarkozy only talks about immigration and borders, closing the borders that's going to be real good for the economy, but at least the FN voters will be reassured, thank god.
1) Latribune is not a right wing newspaper it's an economic newspaper, now if economic matters are not something the left have to deal with then I guess they should never get a position of office then.
It's pretty easy, the economy doesn't give a shit about political divide.
2) It's not talking about making anyone run away (I highlighted the other part because the notion that London being the 7th french town is funny, especially when you know that the speech was given by a french guy in English in a british college. I mean next we'll hear about some other guy from the other side of the world telling us what to do regarding how to build a bridge over the Rhone).
3) If you don't find it alarming that the leading candidate of an election has the economic knowledge of a 2 years old, I'm pretty sure you'll be pleasantly surprised with what's coming up. Equating a gain in productivity earned with a machine with the work of a worker is so incredibly stupid that it the amount of spinning to make it look like a good idea could probably power up a town for a year.
And you wonder why some people would prefer to not vote at all in this case?
Aaaaand Longuet is going back home.
http://www.lemonde.fr/election-pres...lies-socialo-communistes_1693665_1471069.html
Tactical, my ass. They're just breaking the country apart.
http://www.lemonde.fr/election-pres...lies-socialo-communistes_1693665_1471069.html
Tactical, my ass. They're just breaking the country apart.
As if we needed another reason to never get near these guys again
Let's also not act like similar tactics are not used everywhere
SOCIALO COMMUNISTS!!!1111
Man great the red scare is back.
That's not the same thing though, Longuet is literally saying the Socialist Party is responsible for WW2, while Sarkozy a president of the fifth Republic says dangerous stuff.
empty vessel
Member
Are you serious? That's like saying the Economist is politically neutral because it is a magazine about the economy. Just because a publication takes something as its subject does not mean it is not approaching it from a particular vantage point. I can't believe this even required stating.
RukusProvider
Banned
How is this going to effect black truffle pricing? My high end cuisine better not suffer the next time I'm out there.
And as always you have no idea of context here.
I followed their publications closely (along with lesEchos, leMonde and leFigaro....as well as 20minutes but that one's pretty shitty) and I can tell you they're far from being the infamous hand of capitalism in journalist form.
LeMonde is currently doing a campaign exclusively to route Sarkozy out of office with some pretty shitty pieces they've done in the last few years, it's reaching the level of Mediapart sometimes. I won't even accuse them of doing Hollande's biddings since they only care about their corporation anyway.
Heck LeFigaro is only useful to get the point of view opposite of Liberation (but it's better written at least) and if you seek an appartment in Paris.
Again LaTribune is a far more neutral newspaper than most and even they did a campaign for Hollande :lol.
In the end only the AFP seems interested in only dealing with facts currently and I guess that's why this campaign is even more shitty.
Yeah like no one made comments of the same order....
Well, Mélenchon was just commenting on the Buisson approved campaign of Sarkozy, he didn't pull shit out of his ass.
Actually the whole thing began with the front page of l'Humanité (which is a fucking shitty newspaper btw) where they put the image of Pétain against Sarkozy.
Kinda funny when you think about it, it's more something that you'd expect from Marianne.
empty vessel
Member
Not that I'd trust you as a judge of political neutrality (which does not exist--the closest you can get to it is political ignorance, which helps nobody), but you have said something quite different in this post than you did in the post to which I responded. You suggested in the first that the very fact that it is a business or financial paper demonstrated political neutrality--which is completely ridiculous. And then you practically all but said that anybody who does not read it should not be in office.
I agree that the economy does not give a shit about the political divide. That doesn't mean any given economist, newspaper editor, or business journalist doesn't.
As an economical newspaper, it deals with economy first and the rest goes if it fits.
Newspaper as a business is here to give people news and stuffs they want to read.
If I want to know wtf happens in the energy market, I don't give a shit that MLP doesn't want to vote, I want to know wtf happens between EDF, Veolia and co.
And sure as hell if the news is about theses companies I shouldn't expect to read the word Sarkozy or Parti Socialiste if the news is not about a link between the 2.
Alas with all the aforementioned newspaper, you can't get the fucking news without it being polluted by some shitty activism from a worthless journalist who knows nothing on the matter.
That doesn't happen on LaTribune most of the time and for that I'm ever so glad.
And yes if you're running for office to become the next president, you'll have to deal with the economy and the health of the companies in the country so it's not good, nay it's unacceptable that the runner doesn't his front from his back on the matter.
With the shitty job they've done in the last 30 years, I don't think we need to indulge ourselves into thinking that's less important than whether or not people are eating halal or another shitty subject.
ComputerMKII
Banned
The Liberal Democratic Party called to vote for a candidate this sunday: http://www.partiliberaldemocrate.fr...ppelle-a-voter-nicolas-sarkozy-au-second-tour
I'm disappointed. It's time they removed 'Liberal' from their name.
I'm disappointed. It's time they removed 'Liberal' from their name.
They could remove parti too, I mean I'm not even sure there's enough people to man that site....
el retorno
Member
Will there be anyway to watch the debate translated? Like the day after.
ComputerMKII
Banned
Probably.
What I mean when I say breaking the country apart : a mediapart journalist assaulted at the UMP meeting
(I was with the other guys, with a sign some people from the gaming side might like )
(I was with the other guys, with a sign some people from the gaming side might like
)What I mean when I say breaking the country apart : a mediapart journalist assaulted at the UMP meeting
(I was with the other guys, with a sign some people from the gaming side might like
I'll worry over freedom of press when we'll get actual press and not shitty stuffs from a corporation that prefers to tell people how to think instead of informing people.
And reading this piece of editorial I do hope people are not stupid enough to not see the whole position of Mediapart as doing anything but
since the begining of this campaign.
It's funny we didn't get to hear scoop from them on the matter of Lille's Carlton but they sure as hell can get intel on other stuffs that suits their needs.
Our journalists mostly see their job as commentators, not as fact-checkers. Some of them do, though, even if they work for left-wing papers. Mediapart, Désintox on libé and Décodeurs on Le Monde.
I'd like Le Figaro to do the same for a balanced view, but they say it's part of the "normal" work and we know the result. I'd rather read Le Point or La Croix.
- Status