text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
But notice, so what this means is having the eco-fiscal policy means that all of these countries have a limited amount of money. They can't spend to get out of crisis. They have to have the same fiscal policy for all countries. This is bad for small countries more than for the big ones. |
But secondly, now this also means that you blame the EU for like the European Central Bank for the bad stuff that happens because notice that all politicians now have the incentive to blame the European Central Bank for everything bad that's happening, right? |
Notice, like this is important for the youth for multiple reasons. Number one, this gives you less unity in times of crisis, which is important to get out of the crisis. Secondly, like you can get, like, you can get the feeling the EU is less democratic, that it's made for the wealthy countries and everything else. |
But why is this, what are the impacts of this? Number one, people tend to vote for more, like, anti-EU politicians and everything else. Secondly, it's hard to get compromise on many important things which are important to crisis and everything else. |
You also get like, less stable EU which is important to get out of the crisis and everything else, but also finally you can get more things such as Brexit and everything else. This is something that shakes the union. It's very bad. |
Notice that this debate takes place in wealthy and good countries and places like the EU. We think it's very bad for that. In every other aspect of the debate, it's much a wash. Thank you. Enjoy. |
</mo> |
<gw> |
Okay, I'm going to do my two. I'm going to first respond to CO, then I'm going to explain why we also think we take it above OO, and lastly, I'm going to explain why we think that we make a more significant contribution to the debate than OG. |
Let's begin with CO and importantly, the thing about long-term political budgeting. Crucially, as they explained, if politicians don't want to do these projects because they have nothing to gain, then they're very unlikely to exist to begin with and are likely very, very rare. This means this is, to begin with, a very ... |
Because they have nothing to gain. Even if a budget is large and larger than it would be in a crisis, it is never infinite. Politicians are still prioritizing where they dedicate the budget and what they want to budget more or less, and they will always prioritize what they have to gain from and what will gain them som... |
This means that they are very rarely going to be dedicating significant amounts of the budget to these sorts of long-term projects. At the end of the day, you can't lose what you never had, and you can't cut what you never budgeted to begin with. If any gets cut here, it is very small and the impacts are insignificant.... |
Next, the only issue of the ECB and euro instability. ECB already applies universal policies on the monetary stage, meaning already states can say, oh, the ECB is applying to us a monetary policy that is relevant to a different country within the EU and that is why we are currently suffering and we're unhappy about thi... |
We don't know why suddenly giving them also the fiscal is significant because given especially that the vast majority of the time, these are excuses being used by politicians who are already anti-EU trying to gain public traction. This means they don't need another excuse. One of these is sufficient, especially given t... |
They're also controlling us fiscally. Now they get way more angry than they used to be about the fact that they're telling us how curved our bananas can be. Now let's move on to opening opposition. What do we think we get from opening opposition? First, get this idea that, oh, democratic independence and people need to... |
We think that this is less important than the debate for a number of reasons. But to begin with, they have a limited ability to control it. A, because they have limited knowledge of these sorts of policies and what they would like to prefer and they are not voting based purely on this and they are not understanding ful... |
Very often politicians don't even state what their explicitly exactly what their monetary policy looks like. But it's sorry, fiscal policy looks like. Second, even if they had stated their fiscal policy during the election, this is not their crisis fiscal policy. The election happened pre-crisis and voters don't elect ... |
So, they didn't express any preference for this specific issue. Third, the majority would simply prioritize exiting the crisis themselves because this has a significantly greater effect. And fourth, because self-determination, which is what you're looking for, people being able to decide upon their own fate, is depende... |
Therefore, an economic crisis harms people's self-determination significantly more than who is making the decision to get out of the crisis. So long as we are getting out of the crisis faster, that is what is best for their independence. Next, we're told, and they state this again to us in our POI that governments are ... |
The as on to respond to this, this is simply irrelevant to our case. We're probably happy with you to give us this rebuttal to OG but we don't care if governments would most of the time make decent policies. What we care about is that A, the differences in policies that they would make from the banks are probably insig... |
So, let's move on and why we think that we contribute significantly more than OG to this debate. But lastly, but first, yes, let's take opening. |
<poi> |
Central banking, unpopular decisions like decreasing the availability of stimulus checks, the cynicism CG states about government will cross the flight to the bank and will double because they're less proximate to people; your own analysis refutes itself. |
</poi> |
But precisely because they're less proximate to people, then it's a lot harder to harbor public anger towards them. People very rarely know who they even are or what they stand for or understand that it is a central bank making decisions. The average person on the street has no idea that the central bank even determine... |
What they do know is politicians make decisions; it is reported on in all the media. Everybody sees it. Everybody is discussing it. The opposition party has a very large incentive to say that the decision that they have made is very bad and that what they are doing is wrong, and it's a lot more likely that the public n... |
Also, specifically on the issue of corporations trusting in the banks as opposed to government. Corporations simply, if they are the same, I don't know, white privileged, conservative people that are managing the bank, which because largely the same people would be succeeding in both fields, they also are just more lik... |
We just think that these people that are approximate to the banks trust them and the people who aren't approximate to the banks don't see them and don't notice as much and don't have the same reason to distrust. Okay, so why do we think we take it above OG? OG say themselves at the beginning of their framing that nothi... |
The best reason to give it in cases where the government does cooperate and set policies based on recommendations by the bank and why we should still have the motion is, I quote, why not? So we show a significant improvement in the stability and recovery simply by changing the actor who is enacting the policy to one wh... |
Both of these prevent reactionary behaviors such as people stopping their spending because they believe they won't have money tomorrow or withdrawing from their savings accounts because they think that their interest rate is bound to change and they're worried that they're going to lose all their money. Or corporations... |
Or people not buying because they're afraid. All of these things are very, very significant. And they cause the market to fall further and the crisis to get worse, not better. Regardless of the policies being enacted. We think this is likely a large number of the cases that happen in the world. Because most of the time... |
There's a greater room for variance. People can either send nothing or all of their money at once based on what they think is about to happen. Companies can leave entirely. We think these are greater impacts and happen in all cases. Please propose. Thank you very much for that speech. |
</gw> |
<ow> |
Okay. Georgia knows about sports. I know about economics. Let's do this. What are the responses why you get and why they don't matter in this debate? |
First, they tell us about the long-term projects. Oh, look, they don't have these incentives in the status quo to do it in time of crisis. They wouldn't do it anywhere or that would be significant. Like, notice that in order to realize that this is simply not true, you just have to live in reality. In times of crisis, ... |
Secondly, you probably need to spend at least somewhat a political capital to actually cancel a project. So when do you cancel a project? When you have a higher priority. Now, the government teams want to in times of crisis to block off the limit to your budget. |
So, what are you going to cut first? You're going to cut first, the things that are somewhat of a priority and those are these things that you need in the long term, like Georgia tells you, you need them to actually prosper. You need them to build out the infrastructure, you need that in order to keep your companies al... |
So that's the thing that you're going to cut; you're not going to cut them, you're not going to cut any of that. You notice that we don't even have to, have to do that much analysis because OG proves us that politicians are short-termists. We say that when we limit them, they just become more short-termists. |
Okay, what else do they tell us? Then the closing team tells us, oh look, the ECB does monetary policy but fiscal policy would not change that much in the way that people view it. Notice, what is monetary policy? Setting interest rates, currency selling, and buying. What a connection. |
Like and even since the connection is not that strong, at least in the way to the everyday citizen, it's still a major talking point for the people that hate the EU and so on. But what is fiscal policy and why is it so much closer to people? Fiscal policy limits how much you can spend. |
That means how much money in total goes to your hospitals, how much goes to roads, how much goes to your education, how much your teachers are paid, why it will be a roaring cry. If you want to kill the EU, this is a good motion to do it. Congratulations. |
Like notice, can you imagine how powerful a tool that could be? If they could say both politicians in power could say, look, we would live good lives but they don't give us enough money to pay our teachers well, to pay our everyday citizens, to give healthcare and so on, and for, and how frustrated the people would fee... |
How the Bureau is doing that? You're going to get, we're not going to say everyone's going to leave the EU. Some of them probably will. The countries that were in the status quo, it's unstable. And even if you all stay in the EU, unity is so much more important when you have all these nationalistic anti-EU politicians.... |
You get a consensus on how to behave against Russia, energy supply, all of these things, sanctions, no consensus. Do you get like how do you form relief funds? All of that. When you have all these people, which means you get first much worse policy. Second, you get much more instability. |
Which even by itself is bad since it means that more investors will be dropping the euro. It means that it will be harder to borrow European country and so on. Which means all of these things make it so much worse. Which means that we get a lot worse lives for all these people for 500 million people that live in the Eu... |
This is very important since in most countries on this planet, the politicians have vast influence on the central bank where we're talking about Serbia. We're talking about Russia, China, Central Asia, South America. So this debate, 70% of this debate to 80% happens actually in the European Union. |
So that’s why this is a major stakeholder and that's why it's so important. Especially when the others don’t manage to prove their significant impacts. And what is that, even the politicians, even if it's a reasonable amount or whatever. |
I'm going to give you right now, reasons why it probably will be a lower estimate. Contrary to three reasons, I'm going to give you more. Like firstly, these people working in central banks, they have a bias towards something. They like it's mainstream economics and the way they have a bias to reduce spending. |
Secondly, there are targets of lobbying often; like this is not a perfect system even in very rich countries. Which makes it far more likely that companies and individuals are going to lobby for lower taxes, less spending in order to preserve their own wealth. |
Thirdly, very often after their potential bank jobs, they often go into the private sector to work at companies that have a vested interest in them reducing spending. So that's why you're probably going to get worse off. |
Okay, let's see what's in the CG brings us, CG brings us more trust into the government. In most of the world, these things are viewed by people and the institutions as most of the same. Even in these countries like notice that for all the reasons we give you, you're probably not going to trust the central bank so much... |
So we all know this is true. Plus many other things affect how these things change like supply chain changes, their corporations, I think things change and so on. I'm going to give you a why to OG. |
<poi> |
So during the COVID crisis, the ECB spent a bunch of money on quantitative easing because they knew spending was needed. |
They're not inherently opposed to it. |
</poi> |
Thank you, Martha. Thank you. Thank you. Great, great, great. You know what? Even though that for many countries, it's very dubious if it, you know. Oftentimes, there are problems with allocation, problems with all these different things and oftentimes in the past, the ECB has not spent that much. |
Oftentimes, there was pressure for austerity for things that didn't work. This what Georgia tells you, this is going to fuck over, not small countries, like physically small underdeveloped countries that need to build up more in order to build up their infrastructure. |
Countries like Greece, like Bulgaria, like the Czech Republic, like so on, like Croatia. Those are the countries that are going to have their spending limited more for all the reasons Georgia tells you. Sometimes, even if you prove that sometimes central banks behave reasonably, we see that probably sometimes, like in ... |
And notice that many of our, like the majority of our case stands even if they're completely rational, completely they give reasonable because politicians are still going to blame them because they're going to say that they are regulating all that. That's how we crash actually Europe. |
That's how we get less European unity. We don't get enough spending in underdeveloped European countries that need to prosper because they need all these things. So, if you want to ruin the lives of 400 to 500 million people, congratulations, opening government. You found a great way to do it. Is Russia paying you? Be ... |
</ow> |
<PM> |
Everything is a mental illness, nothing is. We think this delegitimizes the way people perceive illnesses and harms the most vulnerable. Two things in my speech, First of all, why is it likely to harm people in a way that affect me? Why does this delegitimize people who do have illnesses? Why does this make poor people... |
<poi> |
So, there is a premise that you don't analyze. Why does people saying this will lead to negative outcomes to people who have actual problems in their head because presumably they can opt out, not care, and they can just continue with their lives. |
</poi> |
Of course, they can't opt out. I just told you it's an everyday life. The people around them are saying it's your family doesn't take you seriously and or often because they think, oh, this is what OCD is for like four to 5 years. I've seen many people say they are OCD. Now, my son is saying it as well. Well, it's just... |
<poi> |
In the decades before this popularization, people stigmatized mental health as well. |
</poi> |
no, because if you stigmatize mental health then this can't exist in the first place. This narrative exists on both sides. When a mental health starts becoming an if, like, the thing that people care about. Notably, you can only talk about things like toxic and OCD and depression when you know that they exist and you o... |
</PM> |
<LO> |
Panel, I have a confession to make. In the state of school, people often call me as someone who does have ADHD and someone who often actually involves in like over compulsive behavior. However, what the alternative is, is how they portrayed me in high school. Then, they called me weird, lost, and aloof, and I think tha... |
Second of all, what happens if this is not the popular terms that we use, right? First of all, we use it only most extreme cases, right? You use ADHD only when you see that someone is like truly, truly suffering from this, right? Second of all, you use other types of hyperboles to explain some of the behaviors which ar... |
Third point in faming and then I promise, I'm going to get into arguments, right. How we actually explain what these terms means, right? And I do believe there's two levels on this, right? First of all, when we say that someone has ADHD, we acknowledge that there is a psychological explanation behind the behavior. We a... |
I think, secondly, right? When this is more common, people see it as more normal, right? If we label a bunch of people as having ADHD, we are now starting to perceive ADHD as something which is quite common in our society, right? That means to some extent that we have less stigmatized those that do have it and be, they... |
With all this being said, what are the harms of this policy? First harm, as I already said, this actually stigmatizes, that, astigmatizes people who do have ADHD and who basically who suffer anyway, right? So notice that, bunch of times, people who have, so if you are, if you're alternative is, you will only portray pe... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.