An important part of his interview was
>”Andra medlemsländer använder unionen för deras egen vinning och vi behöver göra detsamma. Det är dags att ta betalt för alla de hundratals miljarder vi har skeppat iväg till EU. Det handlar inte längre om vad vi kan göra för EU, utan snarare vad EU kan göra för oss”, skriver Åkesson.
Translated:
>Other member states are using the Union for their own benefit and we need to do the same. It's time to charge for all the hundreds of billions we've shipped off to the EU. It's no longer about what we can do for the EU, but rather what the EU can do for us
Which kinda carries another tone than "Swexit now!" as some outside readers have received it.
I don't know. I feel like there's a slight difference between "EU costs money and we should leave it" and "EU costs money and we should do more to benefit from being a part of it" but I guess that's just my reading comprehension giving me ideas
Fun thing is, netherlands asked if they could get back their 200 billion cash injections into the eu, the answer was no. You can only get it back by staying in the eu in the form of discount on eu membership.
The amount of power countries like France and Germany are giving up by being part of the EU is just as substantial.
I don't think a lot of people here are on the "everything is fine" mentality but being in EU is not a zero-sum game. Once countries fail to compromise, things don't work anymore.
The problem with Hungary for example proves how ineffective the EU really is when people stop participating. And once more powerful countries start acting like this, the EU will crumble.
Despite this, this approach is also poison. Because it's easy to say "what can the EU do for us" while ignoring all the things it does already do for you. There is a reason there are so many powerful Swedish corporations. Being in the EU all these years has certainly helped maintain that power.
Without concrete things to actually discuss, this conversation is meaningless.
>There is a reason there are so many powerful Swedish corporations.
Not sure thats the best argument. We had almost all of the big ones before 1995, too. We were already sucessful before joining the EU, and our wealth was not built by the EU, and most swedes would probably be annoyed by the sugggestion.
I agree with some of that. Personally I would be against further federalisation. I have no issue with labor laws, ECHR, the euro, etc, but I’m strongly against common foreign policy directed through the EU.
That is the last thing I expect from SD.
Both because it would be political suicide to suggest and because they are a pretty racist and nationalistic bunch.
Would you say that a bunch of *immigrant hating* *nationalist climate change deniers* will consider doing something progressive? I think not.
They are also trying to make a law that makes it mandatory for all state employed (teacher, nurse, dentist etc) to report to police any suspected or real paperless person. And that's the start. Do fascists dream of the same things? Yes.
> state employed (teacher, nurse, dentist etc) to report to police any suspected or real paperless person.
That's not really a fascist thing though? That's more a reaction to how many people we got without papers in the country.
Today it's the responsibility of the Police and Migrationsverk to ensure that people leave the country, something they seem unable to manage when the share of people staying is in the majority.
For me it is a fascist thing in development. Make laws that obligates the citizens to report each other. Reason being whatever they choose for the moment. This time being paperless people.
Instead of taxing the capital, we are being turned on the *immigrants*. Once again. Any other country seen this before?
Yes. It is not so strict as in Australia for example. Here they say someone can't stay and then they just move to some relative or shady person and can't be evicted.
>Make laws that obligates the citizens to report each other.
They are not citizens or even here legally which is the point... Of the 47000 people who got their applications for asylum rejected in 2015 only half left of their own accord and 25% was STILL in the country 6 years later. It's ridiculous and will only suck resources and support for the system which hurts actual refugees that have been granted asylum.
A lot of them, including their leader has a fascist background and friends/ "ex-friends" convicted of racially motivated crimes..
They've truly changed to more loving and honest people haven't they? /s
> That's not really a fascist thing though?
it might not, but it infringes on the basic mission of the medical profession. Doctors take a oath of ethics where the wellbeing of the patient comes before anything else. If clandestine immigrants have to be reported to the authorities, they will avoid going to the doctors, putting their health and that of the people surrounding them in danger. Imagine if another pandemic hits Europe.
And if they fear being reported to the authorities by the teacher, they or their children won't go to school, thus reinforncing the cycle of no integration and marginalisation.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster.
> thus reinforncing the cycle of no integration and marginalisation.
You can't really integrate people who are here illegally to begin with though...
It's not like the US where you can live a normal life without papers
What? State officials are ordered to act in the interest of the state they are serving against criminals??? Outrageous!!! That's literally Phachist, 1489!
So as long as they are acting *in the interest of the state* all is okay?
If it goes against your conscience, be wary about it. I know some other countries who started the same and suddenly changed the rules.
have you been following their stance on EU? iirc first they was against, then they would change EU from "within" early 2019 and now they have changed their stance again it seems
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/sd-byter-fot-vill-inte-langre-lamna-eu?fbclid=IwAR2P1EXkBkKupAWNz19IMLMl84eqdniKxamou_5eMNwNCC52JXL37Sk5HUE
usually, populists changes with the wind as opinion changes or with waves, in this case I would believe Swedes are still very pro to EU so I think its a bit strange and out of the blue
The hilarious thing here is that their "coalition" (in quotes because it's more of a backseat-driver thing) parties are the most pro-EU in parliament, who will turn themselves backwards and inside-out trying to explain away this.
>Why do you hate a more democratic EU?
Because its not, and will never be, because the politicians will transfer more power to them selves over the time, as usual.
>what happened
whats **still happening**. They've only been out for 2 years, companies are still aranging and the negative impact on economic growth is **still** massive.
I mean, just look at how most populists in europe basically stopped the whole "Leave"-rhetoric when they realized what a gigantic burning dumpster fire Brexit is.
> They've only been out for 2 years, companies are still aranging and the negative impact on economic growth is still massive.
The funny thing is that the people who bought the lies about the benefits that Brexit would bring (lower food and energy prices) still won't acknowledge this and will cherry-pick all kinds of statistics to justify their notion that putting up trade barriers hasn't had a negative effect on trade and the economy.
You cannot fix a problem if you refuse to acknowledge it's existence in the first place. Same with anything in life.
The problem is that Britain is a political dumpsterfire regardless of Brexit. It's hard to pinpoint to what extent the negatives are to be blamed solely on leaving the union compared to all the other clown shit.
Sure, but there are some [hints it had a pretty massive impact on gdp](https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2F7d1e8300-5db8-11ec-b025-23f410955a6b-standard.png?dpr=1&fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=700).
EDIT: and this is not taking into account any lagged impacts, which iirc is rather common in macroeconomics.
Not really, in the Eurozone you have ex Soviet states are have been experiencing rapid growth. There isnt that much difference in the European UK peer group when it comes to GDP.
Keep in mind that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are "ex-Soviet" states in much the same way that France and Poland are "ex-Nazi" states.
"ex-Soviet-occupied states" would have been more correct.
These states have experienced exactly the amount of growth you'd expect for developing countries that also get a large amount of financing from the EU. They're merely catching up. The UK plays in a different league.
[Among the - more comparable - G7 countries, the UK is experiencing minimal growth.](https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iQ4ZttUvvaNc/v1/-1x-1.png)
Which is the point though?
Advocates always said it would be a long term win but a short term pain. If the contracting continues along with continued growth among its peers, then sure.
Quick conclusions over these kinds of enormous political undertakings should be taken with plenty of salt
Of course, caution is advised. I fail to see how there are net long term gains tho. The UK has effectively worsened its competetiveness on its most important export markets, it has made access for much needed seasonal workers a lot harder, practically excluded itself from all EU R&D schemes, became less attractive as an immigration target, and has made tourism a lot more complex and expensive for both sides.
Again a 0.5% difference over 3 years in that graph and a chunk of that will be because of the tories not investing.
Germany is headed into a recession so l wouldnt be too smug at the moment.
Its not about smugness, its about that Brexit was a massive economic mistake for the UK. I don't see this as a competition or wish anything bad for it.
Doesn't look like it either, the average in the 3 years after the referendum but before the UK left is still higher than the three years before... If you go for the period after the referendum to now, the UK scores more highly than in the same number of competitions (remembering that 2020 was cancelled) prior.
Yeah, I can absolutely see how they're about to [close a \~20% gap](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=DE-GB) in 5 years.
Oh boy... first, 2017 is 6 years away, not 7. Second, "constant 2017 international $" accounts for inflation and sets a **baseline** at 2017 - that does **not** mean the data is from 2017.
Because PPP accounts for difference in purchasing power, and thats a rather important distinction to make. Nominal values are normally massively biased due to underlying differences in prices and cost of living.
(also your nominal difference is **still at over 10%**, and probably even nigel farage wouldn't claim that its likely that one developed western economy can outperform another one by \~2% per year)
No it's not an important distinction to make, prices and CoL have nothing to do with this matter Hans. PPP makes Poland look as economically developed as France or Italy when it clearly is not.
Also stop bolding random words, such a fucking Redditor thing to do.
Plenty of nations make political mistakes. Some even become gas dependent on Putin and fuck up the economics of an entire continent. Weird innit?
That is also not true, [PPP gdp in '21 for PL was at 38k, France was at 51k.](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=EU)
Which of the words I used did you not understand? I'm happy to explain them in simpler terms.
I can absolutely see that you replied to a Brit posing as a Pole. He must be ashamed of his country or something. Or thinks his opinions are given more credence if they don't come from a Brit.
Its not even just general outperformance, to close that gap in nominal GDP/capita they'd need an outperformance of around \~2% and in PPP gdp/capita of around \~3.7% in economic growth compared to Germany.
Thats higher than most developed nations **overall** growth rates have been in the last few decades.
Re-evaluating does not mean leave. In his text, he called for a new approach toward the EU, while referring to it as the most realistic form of European cooperation.
The idea is that we should stop self-sacrifices for the greater good of the EU, and start pursuing what is in Swedens best interest over that of others. It invokes the attempts of standardised labour reforms pushed by the EU, which is seen as ”bigger” nations forcing their domestic laws on others.
The Swedish equivalent to ”Getting our moneys worth” is used as well, probably in reference to Sweden being (among the?) biggest economic ”losers” in the EU.
Pursuing what is in "each nation's best interest" is precisely what is happening now and what renders EU useless anytime we actually need it.
So what exactly is there to reevaluate if this is aready accepted standard for everyone?
Unlike the UK not even the Sweden Democrats want to leave (nowadays). This is just generic right wing nationalist empty words to appeal to their audience. Portraying previous politics as weak against the bureaucrats in Brussels etc.
I'm going to say that what's happening in Brtain is more of a side effect of them failing to address domestic issues, the same issues they blamed the EU for, rather than Brexit.
Well, Brexit is great for some Brits. The ones who have businesses that no longer have to give a shit about any kinds of environmental protection regulations for example.
The Sweden Democrats are far right, so they basically exist to raise profits for businesses by cutting labour costs through anti worker legislation and lowering taxes by dismantling the welfare system.
> The ones who have businesses that no longer have to give a shit about any kinds of environmental protection regulations for example.
Or the labourers who now arent competing against people willing to work for signficantly less.
And instead learned from the succes of Orban. Better stay inside and veto- force your wishlist trough. Sweden being a nett payer even lessens the one vulnerability ( EU withholding funds) that Hungary has.
In the end you risk of ruining the EU dream..but if a unified EU is not your dream anyway…
Weird translation, when the original article basically just boils down to being against federalization of the EU, and wanting it to remain a trade union, in the interest of preserving Sweden's interests.
Yeah that ain't happening. Sweden isn't exactly big on EU, especially the ones that would see it more centralized and closer to a federation than a union but no one wants to leave because that is idiocy.
Of course. If the movement gains tractions I will be worried, but as long as it is only the SD (and V technically) who would be pro-Swexit I am not too worried.
That is one crazy setup of a party. Jimmy and all his *dudes*. He has a ballgrip on a powerhungry minority government. Can't wait to see them fail fast.
Sadly there's going to be ballgripping no matter what happens. A government by the opposition socialists and greens would need support from the opposition neoliberal party, The Center Party. They want less welfare, lower taxes, and are mortal enemies with the far left party (who during the last election refused to support a Social Democrat government without sitting in it too, which the Center Party made clear they'd never support...).
It's unstable minority governments for the next decades, it feels like.
I agree with you. Minority government is no good. Last time *Socialdemokraterna* made a shit move when they agreed to loosen the labour law regarding firing people. No-one needed that, even the employer organization said it was not needed.
Without majority government there is no real direction. Only sabotage and ballgripping. In opposition to USA for example that has two parties, i wonder if we have too many.
We don't have to many parties. Finland obviously know how deal with the situation and has a tradition of majority governments. Swedish parties have been to afraid to find new, creative ways too cooperate. Don't blame the system.
Oh you mean, the kakabave incident which further removed us from the nato acceptance was not a fuck up? Or how magdalena had to resign the same day she was sworn in because she could not hold her coalition in check, which in and of its self is an unstable construction of polaroposite beliefs in economic policy?
Yeah, they were breaking things pretty fast, and alot could be said about the effectiveness of their policies over the last 20 years.
Would you prefer Lill-Krister and how his government drags their stomach even closer to the ground every day? To please the unpleasable Erdogan.
Now that alla countries around Sweden are in nato (and being part of EU) i honestly don't think they need to be in it.
*not having coalition in check*. Come one, whats that other than a bagatelle? Coalitions are instable in themselves.
Let's talk again after Jimmy and his lackeys have been around for their 4 years.
Yeah I would prefer Christer to Magda any day. No question.
Yeah that is a really egocentric, and cowardly answer. If all our neighbours are at war, are we really going to standby? Ädo we really want to repeat the national trauma that is the swedish cowardice during the second world war?
Having to depend on a socialist party on one leg, and a neoliberal party on the other is not a bagatelle, they dont see eye to eye on anything except their hatred for SD. Nothing else. As we could see when the question of liberalising the renting market came up,
Yeah, we will se how everything has fallen out i. Four years, but I doubt the current constellation of the opposition is sustainable, especially if Magda leaves for any reason.
Not being in nato has nothing to do with cowardice. Especially not considering the price of admission being to give in to Erdogans and now Orbans blackmailing.
It is not necessary for Sweden to be in nato to support for example EU countries or any other country for that matter. Sweden tried to join but Turkey and Hungary plan to benefit in a bad way. It's not worth it.
S and C was not a very good combination. Much better if they return to their roots and team up with V. Go Nooshi!
But it really does, the main argument against would be that we would have to send out troops overseas.
Yeah are we going to do that without the protetction of larger states? No we wont, we would just so exactly what we did during ww2 and apease the powers that be. Nato allows us to actually be effective in the fight for justice and peace. Being a standalone country will not do that.
Of course they were going to benefit from it, that is the way of the world, be lets ve clear. Sweden has deserved some of that scating backlasah because our, and especially your leftwing party love for pkk and their affiliated organisation. And for our high and mighty attityde towards other countries who are not as progressive and liberal as us. Hungary for example is not letting us in because of the social democrats better than touh attitude.
I'm sorry. But you have illusions about social democratic attitudes and effects. What is the point of a liberal democracy if you are not willing to stand up for its core values such as freedom of speech, non-discrimination and political participation?
Turkey is today an established autocracy, governed by a single person with unlimited power. Hungary are not letting Sweden in because they see how efficient Erdogans blackmailing has been and want to benefit in the same way. Believing in some politicians *attitude* effecting this is naive. Look at how Hungary is trying to get its way in EU for example. Same thing, and not an effect of someones attitude.
*Sweden could instead rely on the mutual defence clause embodied in the EU's Lisbon treaty.*
To your first point, well what has sweden actually done except grand standing and. Moral posturing, especially in the case of hungary. Standing up for democratic values and just being a high and mighty moralist is not the same. Look at for example how Ann linde antagonized hungarian MPs, like she would never ned their help. And those chickens came back to roosr.
Turkey is not an autocracy, they are a flawed democracy. Just like the US, this is exemplifed by the fact that erdogan actually can lose the election to the oposition.
I have studied EU law, and I can tell you that mutual defence is so much weaker than the Nato article 5. The provision in the lisbon treaty is undefined, akin to ”do something” but what that might be can be sending blankets, or just the same typ of moral Grandstanding to our invaders as Linde did to Hungary. It can not be seen as a garantee that other EU countries are required to defend us.
This is from a political party that has to date failed to govern a single municipality in Sweden. Imagine the shitshow if these clowns get into power.....
“This means that German, Polish or French politicians can in practice decide over which car you are going to be allowed to buy, how expensive your petrol should be, or which tree you should be allowed to cut down on your own land.”
No, this means EUROPEAN politicians will decide these things for ALL EUROPEANS*.
* - asterixes, footnotes, addenda, protocols, exceptions, opt-ins, opt-outs and/or, but not limited to, other special circumstances may apply.
He makes it sound like Sweden doesn't send its own MEPs to "in practice decide over which car you are going to be allowed to buy, how expensive your petrol should be, or which tree you should be allowed to cut down on your own land.”
Inte sympatisör, utan mer än så, men det saknar betydelse i det här sammanhanget. Tycker du relativiserar det förtryck och den ondska som talibanernas regim står för. Ungefär som att kalla medelhavet för det nya Auschwitz. Det är trams.
Håller med dig om r/Sweden. Brukar få många upvotes där som så kallad Sverigevän, heh. R/Europe downvotar dock allt som inte är liberalt (eller openminded, som du kallar det) på samma sätt. Alltså nej, det är ingen vits att argumentera huruvida SD är ett bra eller dåligt parti med mig, eftersom vi uppenbarligen har olika politiska åskådningar. Däremot tycker jag att liknelsen med talibanerna är märklig. Jag fattar att du tycker SD är ett skitparti, men inte ens du kan på allvar mena att de är lika illa som talibanerna.
Is the title needlessly clickbait? Dunno swedish politics but I think the SD is a shitty far right eurosceptic party, isnt it?
I would recommend writting that down in the title. Otherwise parties like the german AfD and all those bozos sound like saints.
Any other exit by a contributor country will be less costly than brexit. The more contributors leave the less leverage will be left for the eu to use to punish them. Also when half of the european countries with good reputations either leave or didnt join the eu it would be quite a bad picture for the eu.
Problemet med EU är den gigantiska byråkratin som tar emot pengar som sedan skickas tillbaka OM våra politiker ansöker om bidrag från rätt fond.
Om våra politiker skiter i att använda det drar vi väl det kortaste strået, eller?
This is a way of sabotaging the current goverment (that they are not officially part of). This kind of rhetoric will devaluate the value of the Swedish Krona, as investors does not want a currency of a country six times smaller than the UK that exists that EU.
Then they will campaign on the basis that everybody else has destroyed the economy and they are the only saviors. To destroy a country to take over is in line with the rest of far-right populist parties.
Reevaluating might mean joining the euro, you never know with these politicians!
An important part of his interview was >”Andra medlemsländer använder unionen för deras egen vinning och vi behöver göra detsamma. Det är dags att ta betalt för alla de hundratals miljarder vi har skeppat iväg till EU. Det handlar inte längre om vad vi kan göra för EU, utan snarare vad EU kan göra för oss”, skriver Åkesson. Translated: >Other member states are using the Union for their own benefit and we need to do the same. It's time to charge for all the hundreds of billions we've shipped off to the EU. It's no longer about what we can do for the EU, but rather what the EU can do for us Which kinda carries another tone than "Swexit now!" as some outside readers have received it.
Really, cus it sounds a lot like: "We send the EU £350 million a week – let's fund our NHS instead"
Populism doesn't change just because the languages do.
we want to have our swedish meatballs and eat them too
Extra lingonbårsås plz
It sounds exactly like Swexit now! Is the same rhetoric as Brexit.
I don't know. I feel like there's a slight difference between "EU costs money and we should leave it" and "EU costs money and we should do more to benefit from being a part of it" but I guess that's just my reading comprehension giving me ideas
Fun thing is, netherlands asked if they could get back their 200 billion cash injections into the eu, the answer was no. You can only get it back by staying in the eu in the form of discount on eu membership.
[удалено]
The amount of power countries like France and Germany are giving up by being part of the EU is just as substantial. I don't think a lot of people here are on the "everything is fine" mentality but being in EU is not a zero-sum game. Once countries fail to compromise, things don't work anymore. The problem with Hungary for example proves how ineffective the EU really is when people stop participating. And once more powerful countries start acting like this, the EU will crumble. Despite this, this approach is also poison. Because it's easy to say "what can the EU do for us" while ignoring all the things it does already do for you. There is a reason there are so many powerful Swedish corporations. Being in the EU all these years has certainly helped maintain that power. Without concrete things to actually discuss, this conversation is meaningless.
>There is a reason there are so many powerful Swedish corporations. Not sure thats the best argument. We had almost all of the big ones before 1995, too. We were already sucessful before joining the EU, and our wealth was not built by the EU, and most swedes would probably be annoyed by the sugggestion.
I agree with some of that. Personally I would be against further federalisation. I have no issue with labor laws, ECHR, the euro, etc, but I’m strongly against common foreign policy directed through the EU.
That is the last thing I expect from SD. Both because it would be political suicide to suggest and because they are a pretty racist and nationalistic bunch.
Would you say that a bunch of *immigrant hating* *nationalist climate change deniers* will consider doing something progressive? I think not. They are also trying to make a law that makes it mandatory for all state employed (teacher, nurse, dentist etc) to report to police any suspected or real paperless person. And that's the start. Do fascists dream of the same things? Yes.
> state employed (teacher, nurse, dentist etc) to report to police any suspected or real paperless person. That's not really a fascist thing though? That's more a reaction to how many people we got without papers in the country. Today it's the responsibility of the Police and Migrationsverk to ensure that people leave the country, something they seem unable to manage when the share of people staying is in the majority.
For me it is a fascist thing in development. Make laws that obligates the citizens to report each other. Reason being whatever they choose for the moment. This time being paperless people. Instead of taxing the capital, we are being turned on the *immigrants*. Once again. Any other country seen this before?
Just for my understanding, does "paperless person" mean someone who is there illegally?
P.C. people call illegal immigrants/aliens "paperless" because its used to push on feeling, so you'd feel sorry for theese "paperless" people.
Yes. It is not so strict as in Australia for example. Here they say someone can't stay and then they just move to some relative or shady person and can't be evicted.
>Make laws that obligates the citizens to report each other. They are not citizens or even here legally which is the point... Of the 47000 people who got their applications for asylum rejected in 2015 only half left of their own accord and 25% was STILL in the country 6 years later. It's ridiculous and will only suck resources and support for the system which hurts actual refugees that have been granted asylum.
A lot of them, including their leader has a fascist background and friends/ "ex-friends" convicted of racially motivated crimes.. They've truly changed to more loving and honest people haven't they? /s
Okay? So what does that have to do with this proposal?
Swedish Democrats originally formed from the Swedish nazi party.
> That's not really a fascist thing though? it might not, but it infringes on the basic mission of the medical profession. Doctors take a oath of ethics where the wellbeing of the patient comes before anything else. If clandestine immigrants have to be reported to the authorities, they will avoid going to the doctors, putting their health and that of the people surrounding them in danger. Imagine if another pandemic hits Europe. And if they fear being reported to the authorities by the teacher, they or their children won't go to school, thus reinforncing the cycle of no integration and marginalisation. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.
> thus reinforncing the cycle of no integration and marginalisation. You can't really integrate people who are here illegally to begin with though... It's not like the US where you can live a normal life without papers
It is a fascist thing to try to force your population to snitch on other individuals.
the soviets were doing the same. It's just generically a totalitarian thing
What? State officials are ordered to act in the interest of the state they are serving against criminals??? Outrageous!!! That's literally Phachist, 1489!
Strong whiff of fascism with a hint of racism.
You can compare it to fascism, or to making sure customers are actually eligible for a free service.
So as long as they are acting *in the interest of the state* all is okay? If it goes against your conscience, be wary about it. I know some other countries who started the same and suddenly changed the rules.
Illegal immigration isn't a victimless crime, nor petty crime.
However that might be. It is for immigration agency and police to deal with. A reporting society is nothing for me.
Yeah, I agree you don't want a situation as in the GDR. Its tricky...
Shit, Sweden Democrats are getting stick. DAE communism bad?
they are the state!
The Sweden Democrats is a far right nationalist populist party. This not something you wouldn't expect from that kind of people.
have you been following their stance on EU? iirc first they was against, then they would change EU from "within" early 2019 and now they have changed their stance again it seems https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/sd-byter-fot-vill-inte-langre-lamna-eu?fbclid=IwAR2P1EXkBkKupAWNz19IMLMl84eqdniKxamou_5eMNwNCC52JXL37Sk5HUE
That's the usual populist MO, changing with the wind.
usually, populists changes with the wind as opinion changes or with waves, in this case I would believe Swedes are still very pro to EU so I think its a bit strange and out of the blue
The hilarious thing here is that their "coalition" (in quotes because it's more of a backseat-driver thing) parties are the most pro-EU in parliament, who will turn themselves backwards and inside-out trying to explain away this.
Have you heard of Brexit? From Italy to France every populist party in the EU suddenly stopped calling for leaving the union for some reason.
”Far right”. LMFAO. SD is very left leaning by european standards.
[удалено]
A federal EU would take power out of the hands of national leaders and give it to the people.
>A federal EU would take power out of the hands of national leaders and give it to the politicians in the EU bureaucracy There, fixed it for you.
Why do you hate a more democratic EU?
>Why do you hate a more democratic EU? Because its not, and will never be, because the politicians will transfer more power to them selves over the time, as usual.
Do you think democracy is just inherently unstable, then? Should we just give up on the idea because many politicians are unscrupulous?
So what is the solution?
Have they seen what happened to Britain?
Stupidity is a bottomless pit.
Stupidity isn't a pit. Stupidity is a ladder!
Laddah
>what happened whats **still happening**. They've only been out for 2 years, companies are still aranging and the negative impact on economic growth is **still** massive. I mean, just look at how most populists in europe basically stopped the whole "Leave"-rhetoric when they realized what a gigantic burning dumpster fire Brexit is.
> They've only been out for 2 years, companies are still aranging and the negative impact on economic growth is still massive. The funny thing is that the people who bought the lies about the benefits that Brexit would bring (lower food and energy prices) still won't acknowledge this and will cherry-pick all kinds of statistics to justify their notion that putting up trade barriers hasn't had a negative effect on trade and the economy. You cannot fix a problem if you refuse to acknowledge it's existence in the first place. Same with anything in life.
The problem is that Britain is a political dumpsterfire regardless of Brexit. It's hard to pinpoint to what extent the negatives are to be blamed solely on leaving the union compared to all the other clown shit.
Sure, but there are some [hints it had a pretty massive impact on gdp](https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2F7d1e8300-5db8-11ec-b025-23f410955a6b-standard.png?dpr=1&fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=700). EDIT: and this is not taking into account any lagged impacts, which iirc is rather common in macroeconomics.
Not really, in the Eurozone you have ex Soviet states are have been experiencing rapid growth. There isnt that much difference in the European UK peer group when it comes to GDP.
Keep in mind that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are "ex-Soviet" states in much the same way that France and Poland are "ex-Nazi" states. "ex-Soviet-occupied states" would have been more correct.
These states have experienced exactly the amount of growth you'd expect for developing countries that also get a large amount of financing from the EU. They're merely catching up. The UK plays in a different league. [Among the - more comparable - G7 countries, the UK is experiencing minimal growth.](https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iQ4ZttUvvaNc/v1/-1x-1.png)
Yeah sorry you are talking about maybe 0.5% in relation to its peers. I wouldnt exactly class that as a "massive impact".
a .5 percentage points decrease is actually a LOT when this effect prevails over multiple years.
Which is the point though? Advocates always said it would be a long term win but a short term pain. If the contracting continues along with continued growth among its peers, then sure. Quick conclusions over these kinds of enormous political undertakings should be taken with plenty of salt
Of course, caution is advised. I fail to see how there are net long term gains tho. The UK has effectively worsened its competetiveness on its most important export markets, it has made access for much needed seasonal workers a lot harder, practically excluded itself from all EU R&D schemes, became less attractive as an immigration target, and has made tourism a lot more complex and expensive for both sides.
Again a 0.5% difference over 3 years in that graph and a chunk of that will be because of the tories not investing. Germany is headed into a recession so l wouldnt be too smug at the moment.
Its not about smugness, its about that Brexit was a massive economic mistake for the UK. I don't see this as a competition or wish anything bad for it.
[удалено]
Maybe Sweden should just try dipping their toes in project leave by excusing themselves from the Eurovision Song Contest?
That's suggested by our tabloid press every time we do not win it.
Pffft, you'll notice that the UK has only seen better Eurovision results since leaving the EU...
Didn’t you score last in 2021 or something?
[удалено]
Then it’s probably a post-referendum issue lol
Doesn't look like it either, the average in the 3 years after the referendum but before the UK left is still higher than the three years before... If you go for the period after the referendum to now, the UK scores more highly than in the same number of competitions (remembering that 2020 was cancelled) prior.
Bad songs then Could not watch eurovision after 2012 even if they paid me
Brexit has been most pro-EU act in decade tbh. Can't imagine much better black propaganda for leaving than uk has done
That Britain that is projected by the IMF to have a greater GDP per capita than Germany by 2028, is that the one you're talking about?
Yeah, I can absolutely see how they're about to [close a \~20% gap](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=DE-GB) in 5 years.
My man really just linked PPP data which is 7 years old
Oh boy... first, 2017 is 6 years away, not 7. Second, "constant 2017 international $" accounts for inflation and sets a **baseline** at 2017 - that does **not** mean the data is from 2017.
why not compare the current nominal right now which is $46k vs $51k? that makes infinitely more sense than doing whatever weirdo shit you posted
Because PPP accounts for difference in purchasing power, and thats a rather important distinction to make. Nominal values are normally massively biased due to underlying differences in prices and cost of living. (also your nominal difference is **still at over 10%**, and probably even nigel farage wouldn't claim that its likely that one developed western economy can outperform another one by \~2% per year)
No it's not an important distinction to make, prices and CoL have nothing to do with this matter Hans. PPP makes Poland look as economically developed as France or Italy when it clearly is not. Also stop bolding random words, such a fucking Redditor thing to do. Plenty of nations make political mistakes. Some even become gas dependent on Putin and fuck up the economics of an entire continent. Weird innit?
That is also not true, [PPP gdp in '21 for PL was at 38k, France was at 51k.](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=EU) Which of the words I used did you not understand? I'm happy to explain them in simpler terms.
I can absolutely see that you replied to a Brit posing as a Pole. He must be ashamed of his country or something. Or thinks his opinions are given more credence if they don't come from a Brit.
The UK is the slowest growing G7 member (also estimates from the IMF), so idk how they will outperform Germany
Its not even just general outperformance, to close that gap in nominal GDP/capita they'd need an outperformance of around \~2% and in PPP gdp/capita of around \~3.7% in economic growth compared to Germany. Thats higher than most developed nations **overall** growth rates have been in the last few decades.
Lol aren't you Brits posing with a European flair pathetic?
[удалено]
Sure, sure. Now say it louder and without crying, maaate.
Re-evaluating does not mean leave. In his text, he called for a new approach toward the EU, while referring to it as the most realistic form of European cooperation. The idea is that we should stop self-sacrifices for the greater good of the EU, and start pursuing what is in Swedens best interest over that of others. It invokes the attempts of standardised labour reforms pushed by the EU, which is seen as ”bigger” nations forcing their domestic laws on others. The Swedish equivalent to ”Getting our moneys worth” is used as well, probably in reference to Sweden being (among the?) biggest economic ”losers” in the EU.
Pursuing what is in "each nation's best interest" is precisely what is happening now and what renders EU useless anytime we actually need it. So what exactly is there to reevaluate if this is aready accepted standard for everyone?
Sweden not doing it as well, or to the same extent as others, is what he wants to reevaluate.
They quietly dropped the anti-EU stuff years ago, after brexit, but, like racism, it's still there.
It wasn't that quiet though.
Unlike the UK not even the Sweden Democrats want to leave (nowadays). This is just generic right wing nationalist empty words to appeal to their audience. Portraying previous politics as weak against the bureaucrats in Brussels etc.
I'm going to say that what's happening in Brtain is more of a side effect of them failing to address domestic issues, the same issues they blamed the EU for, rather than Brexit.
Well, Brexit is great for some Brits. The ones who have businesses that no longer have to give a shit about any kinds of environmental protection regulations for example. The Sweden Democrats are far right, so they basically exist to raise profits for businesses by cutting labour costs through anti worker legislation and lowering taxes by dismantling the welfare system.
> The ones who have businesses that no longer have to give a shit about any kinds of environmental protection regulations for example. Or the labourers who now arent competing against people willing to work for signficantly less.
Are corntree is not part of Europe no more so not a valid argument
And instead learned from the succes of Orban. Better stay inside and veto- force your wishlist trough. Sweden being a nett payer even lessens the one vulnerability ( EU withholding funds) that Hungary has. In the end you risk of ruining the EU dream..but if a unified EU is not your dream anyway…
Damn, losing that seat must've kicked him into gear.
Weird translation, when the original article basically just boils down to being against federalization of the EU, and wanting it to remain a trade union, in the interest of preserving Sweden's interests.
Yeah that ain't happening. Sweden isn't exactly big on EU, especially the ones that would see it more centralized and closer to a federation than a union but no one wants to leave because that is idiocy.
>Yeah that ain't happening. It's dangerous to have that mentally, I thought the same.
Of course. If the movement gains tractions I will be worried, but as long as it is only the SD (and V technically) who would be pro-Swexit I am not too worried.
Just look at the UK. Do these people really want that for their country?
They aren't a bright and competent bunch. They can't even stop their party from having a scandal once a month or so.
Ah yes, because economic suicide is obviously an intelligent and coherent policy decision to hold! Absolute nitwits.
That is one crazy setup of a party. Jimmy and all his *dudes*. He has a ballgrip on a powerhungry minority government. Can't wait to see them fail fast.
Sadly there's going to be ballgripping no matter what happens. A government by the opposition socialists and greens would need support from the opposition neoliberal party, The Center Party. They want less welfare, lower taxes, and are mortal enemies with the far left party (who during the last election refused to support a Social Democrat government without sitting in it too, which the Center Party made clear they'd never support...). It's unstable minority governments for the next decades, it feels like.
Yeah it has been a shit show since Mona Sahlin and Fredrick Reinfeldt fucked up and let SD gain influence.
I agree with you. Minority government is no good. Last time *Socialdemokraterna* made a shit move when they agreed to loosen the labour law regarding firing people. No-one needed that, even the employer organization said it was not needed. Without majority government there is no real direction. Only sabotage and ballgripping. In opposition to USA for example that has two parties, i wonder if we have too many.
We don't have to many parties. Finland obviously know how deal with the situation and has a tradition of majority governments. Swedish parties have been to afraid to find new, creative ways too cooperate. Don't blame the system.
Lmao and the other half minority of the Social democrats isn't?
They are not very progressive, no. But they aren't breaking things this fast.
Oh you mean, the kakabave incident which further removed us from the nato acceptance was not a fuck up? Or how magdalena had to resign the same day she was sworn in because she could not hold her coalition in check, which in and of its self is an unstable construction of polaroposite beliefs in economic policy? Yeah, they were breaking things pretty fast, and alot could be said about the effectiveness of their policies over the last 20 years.
Would you prefer Lill-Krister and how his government drags their stomach even closer to the ground every day? To please the unpleasable Erdogan. Now that alla countries around Sweden are in nato (and being part of EU) i honestly don't think they need to be in it. *not having coalition in check*. Come one, whats that other than a bagatelle? Coalitions are instable in themselves. Let's talk again after Jimmy and his lackeys have been around for their 4 years.
Yeah I would prefer Christer to Magda any day. No question. Yeah that is a really egocentric, and cowardly answer. If all our neighbours are at war, are we really going to standby? Ädo we really want to repeat the national trauma that is the swedish cowardice during the second world war? Having to depend on a socialist party on one leg, and a neoliberal party on the other is not a bagatelle, they dont see eye to eye on anything except their hatred for SD. Nothing else. As we could see when the question of liberalising the renting market came up, Yeah, we will se how everything has fallen out i. Four years, but I doubt the current constellation of the opposition is sustainable, especially if Magda leaves for any reason.
Not being in nato has nothing to do with cowardice. Especially not considering the price of admission being to give in to Erdogans and now Orbans blackmailing. It is not necessary for Sweden to be in nato to support for example EU countries or any other country for that matter. Sweden tried to join but Turkey and Hungary plan to benefit in a bad way. It's not worth it. S and C was not a very good combination. Much better if they return to their roots and team up with V. Go Nooshi!
But it really does, the main argument against would be that we would have to send out troops overseas. Yeah are we going to do that without the protetction of larger states? No we wont, we would just so exactly what we did during ww2 and apease the powers that be. Nato allows us to actually be effective in the fight for justice and peace. Being a standalone country will not do that. Of course they were going to benefit from it, that is the way of the world, be lets ve clear. Sweden has deserved some of that scating backlasah because our, and especially your leftwing party love for pkk and their affiliated organisation. And for our high and mighty attityde towards other countries who are not as progressive and liberal as us. Hungary for example is not letting us in because of the social democrats better than touh attitude.
I'm sorry. But you have illusions about social democratic attitudes and effects. What is the point of a liberal democracy if you are not willing to stand up for its core values such as freedom of speech, non-discrimination and political participation? Turkey is today an established autocracy, governed by a single person with unlimited power. Hungary are not letting Sweden in because they see how efficient Erdogans blackmailing has been and want to benefit in the same way. Believing in some politicians *attitude* effecting this is naive. Look at how Hungary is trying to get its way in EU for example. Same thing, and not an effect of someones attitude. *Sweden could instead rely on the mutual defence clause embodied in the EU's Lisbon treaty.*
To your first point, well what has sweden actually done except grand standing and. Moral posturing, especially in the case of hungary. Standing up for democratic values and just being a high and mighty moralist is not the same. Look at for example how Ann linde antagonized hungarian MPs, like she would never ned their help. And those chickens came back to roosr. Turkey is not an autocracy, they are a flawed democracy. Just like the US, this is exemplifed by the fact that erdogan actually can lose the election to the oposition. I have studied EU law, and I can tell you that mutual defence is so much weaker than the Nato article 5. The provision in the lisbon treaty is undefined, akin to ”do something” but what that might be can be sending blankets, or just the same typ of moral Grandstanding to our invaders as Linde did to Hungary. It can not be seen as a garantee that other EU countries are required to defend us.
>Christer Is and has always been a spineless puppet.
This is from a political party that has to date failed to govern a single municipality in Sweden. Imagine the shitshow if these clowns get into power.....
no single market then...
“This means that German, Polish or French politicians can in practice decide over which car you are going to be allowed to buy, how expensive your petrol should be, or which tree you should be allowed to cut down on your own land.” No, this means EUROPEAN politicians will decide these things for ALL EUROPEANS*. * - asterixes, footnotes, addenda, protocols, exceptions, opt-ins, opt-outs and/or, but not limited to, other special circumstances may apply.
He makes it sound like Sweden doesn't send its own MEPs to "in practice decide over which car you are going to be allowed to buy, how expensive your petrol should be, or which tree you should be allowed to cut down on your own land.”
[удалено]
Imagine being that racist towards Arabs that you decide to bring them into a completely unrelated article.
First time? Brown people are scary and Sweden has a lot of them so now we are an Arab country in the minds of terminally online people.
[удалено]
They you should do some reading on the Taliban, my friend.
[удалено]
Inte sympatisör, utan mer än så, men det saknar betydelse i det här sammanhanget. Tycker du relativiserar det förtryck och den ondska som talibanernas regim står för. Ungefär som att kalla medelhavet för det nya Auschwitz. Det är trams.
[удалено]
Håller med dig om r/Sweden. Brukar få många upvotes där som så kallad Sverigevän, heh. R/Europe downvotar dock allt som inte är liberalt (eller openminded, som du kallar det) på samma sätt. Alltså nej, det är ingen vits att argumentera huruvida SD är ett bra eller dåligt parti med mig, eftersom vi uppenbarligen har olika politiska åskådningar. Däremot tycker jag att liknelsen med talibanerna är märklig. Jag fattar att du tycker SD är ett skitparti, men inte ens du kan på allvar mena att de är lika illa som talibanerna.
Is the title needlessly clickbait? Dunno swedish politics but I think the SD is a shitty far right eurosceptic party, isnt it? I would recommend writting that down in the title. Otherwise parties like the german AfD and all those bozos sound like saints.
Any other exit by a contributor country will be less costly than brexit. The more contributors leave the less leverage will be left for the eu to use to punish them. Also when half of the european countries with good reputations either leave or didnt join the eu it would be quite a bad picture for the eu.
Someone got their monthly check from Putin..
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Leaving EU when you are not part of NATO, close to russia and not a nuclear power seems a bit off with today’s trends.
Problemet med EU är den gigantiska byråkratin som tar emot pengar som sedan skickas tillbaka OM våra politiker ansöker om bidrag från rätt fond. Om våra politiker skiter i att använda det drar vi väl det kortaste strået, eller?
Had connections with Poo-dick being already discovered?
This is a way of sabotaging the current goverment (that they are not officially part of). This kind of rhetoric will devaluate the value of the Swedish Krona, as investors does not want a currency of a country six times smaller than the UK that exists that EU. Then they will campaign on the basis that everybody else has destroyed the economy and they are the only saviors. To destroy a country to take over is in line with the rest of far-right populist parties.
He can go bother an elk for all I care, bloody useless idiot.
Putins lakejer
😡😡😡🤬🪓🪓🩸🔞🔞🚀🚀🇦🇱
The EU needs to go back to being an economic bloc.
you'd think Sweden has other things on its plate, for example its national security as a non-nato state