BruceVC

Firstly I don't blindly trust my government because it all it members are human and they aren't usually brightest minds in my country. Also they are there to represent my interest (and interest of other people in Finland) and if they aren't open and give reasons for their decision I and other people of Finland can't review and determine if their actions were actually in our best interest as they should. And without that knowledge I can't do educated decision in next elections if I continue to give my support for them or do I seek new representatives for my interests. Also blind trust for government opens doors for corruption and other things that people who have power but no supervision do and in democratic societies people are supervisors of their government, all their power should come from will of people. Not blindingly trust in government is even more important when it comes to EU, because EU represent all it member nations and not only Finland so representatives there less likely represent my interest than they do in Finnish government. Also nature of EU's governance allows even more corruption and misuses of power than government of Finland. Although on bright side our representatives in our local governments work as partial supervisors over EU's governance which make it easier to supervise such multinational institution, but existence of EU make it even more important that people in Finland supervise our own government and demand them to do their jobs and supervise over EU's governance and keep us in the loop. Also it is important to keep our representatives in European Parliament responsible of their actions and give reasons for Parliaments actions and supervise European Commission. If people don't question their governments and keep up how their interest are handled by them our democratic systems lose their foundation. It would be like company that don't question actions of their employees. It is not fear that they can sue, it is actual fact that TTIP's current revision would give corporations power sue countries and ECB or Commission or any other institution but that new international trade court, which will be established to handle those suits, will have power to say anything about it if agreement would come in effective in its current form. Whole purpose of that agreement is to create new rules in trade between USA and EU and those new rules will overwrite current ones to make trade easier and more free. Also it is not USA who has ability to sue, but US companies that make invests in EU (this of course also means that EU companies can sue USA, but I write these concerns from Finnish perspective naturally). And as I pointed out those concerns in my previous post were from out Foreign Trade minister, who is the accountable Finnish representative in negotiations about the agreement (so I am not sure that are you saying that I should trust or not trust my government in this matter? Because now your statements are contract each other ). People don't need to necessary know how any specific company will work in Finland, but they need to know when some international agreement will change how they can govern themselves. And also need to have knowledge of new rules so that they can judge how those will effect their everyday lives, companies, etc.. / Hold on...maybe I'm misunderstanding you....are you telling me Finnish citizens get to scrutinize government decisions? In my country people like me help people make the right decision....think about it Elerond wouldnt it be better not having to think about a solution when I can just tell you the right answer.....then you don't have to worry about making the wrong decision ?

Baro when I think of the Republican debate I imagine a pack of feral, snarling wolves fighting in some arctic featureless plain, the wind is howling and visibility is limited ....they tear into each other, its brutal and savage...no mercy is given but finally one wolf emerges as leader...blood covering its mouth When I think of Sanders and Clinton I imagine two cuddly bear cubs rolling down a hill in some Alpine valley, its summer and the entire valley is covered in flowers. The bear cubs don't really fight each other but merely play, they don't want to destroy each other. Finally one cub emerges as victor ...( and bear cubs are soooooo cute )

That's what the people of Flint did. Do you know how they were rewarded? Well in the case of the USA the state governments can make certain mistakes

Yes. Do you have a point to make about the lack of transparency on these trade agreements that impact almost everyone on this forums or are you just triggered by Assange? Okay I watched the entire video so I would understand your concern...a couple of considerations There are trade blocks throughout the world that are designed to only benefit its members ...like BRICS There is constant scrutiny of USA companies by the EU ...like the whole tax issue around Google in the UK. So the idea that somehow the USA is going to be able to abuse the EU through this agreement just doesnt make sense ..the EU is well aware of how to grow there economy The idea by that Journalist that " large global corporations " will be able to run rampant in poor countries that will have no rights is really 1970's " Confessions of an Economic Hitman " rhetoric. Nowadays large corporations have to jump through numerous hoops to integrate Finally the average person on the street doesn't need to know the contractual agreement between a multinational and a government ....people need to learn to trust there governments Hopefully this will alleviate your concerns ? Agreement and how it is prepared and negotiated are very questionable and agreement actually has impact on average person on street so they should have ability say about it, at least if we want to continue to call ourself as democratic society. Here is some examples of questionable things in agreement's current form: That it threatens self-determination right of EU member countries, because it includes things like establishing separate trade court in which US companies can sue countries over their changing laws and making court decisions that they feel to hamper their investments (like for example those actions that UK take against Google) . And members of this court consist from arbitrators that companies themselves pick. (Although this at least something that those who negotiate on behalf of EU didn't accept and it is under further negotiations, but their counter proposal of court that consist from judges from EU, USA and third world, this proposal has yet to go in negotiation round). Another things is harmonization of standards, because it can heavily hamper how countries can limit things that are dangerous for health and/or environment. Especially when currently most of harmonization would follow US standards instead of EU's. Free movement of investments and protections for investments. There is already quite big problem because companies move their profits in tax havens inside of EU and free movement of investments from EU to USA would make situation even worse than it is now. Protections for investments lets companies hide their real owners which gives them to slip from their responsibilities and it would make tax evasion even easier for them, which is step to opposite direction than where EU is currently going. And finally people should never trust their governments and always question their actions and ask rationale behind them, because we are democratic societies after all. P.S. Those questionable things are from Finland's foreign trade minister, who is pro EU, pro USA, pro Nato and pro Free Trade liberal conservative. Although she estimated that trade deal will not be struct during Obama administration and they mostly start from beginning if USA's next president is republican. I appreciate your post but this is one of those rare times I am going to disagree with you Firstly its not the sign of a Democratic society to not trust your government? Do you not believe that the Finnish government actually wants the best for your people ? Why would you assume you can't trust your government... I agree that in some countries you absolutely can't trust the government but not the EU? Then that whole video is a combination of global economic reality and fear mongering, so at the moment basically every single country in the world has elements of global multinationals. This is a major foundation of a global world ...this is a good thing and something that third world countries are desperate for, investment. Now give me an example of why the average person in the street needs to understand the terms and conditions of how HSBC would operate in Finland.....why should you need to know? Most people wouldn't understand it and once again the various governments in the EU and HSBC own legal departments are very pedantic around the agreements and what the company can do Then this whole fear of the USA being able to sue the likes of the EU and the EU actually agreeing to this is ....just absurd. The EU consists of the likes of ECB, the European Commission and the individual finance ministers of some of the most prominent and successful economies in the world....why would these people agree to something that would undermine the EU economy?

Yes. Do you have a point to make about the lack of transparency on these trade agreements that impact almost everyone on this forums or are you just triggered by Assange? Okay I watched the entire video so I would understand your concern...a couple of considerations There are trade blocks throughout the world that are designed to only benefit its members ...like BRICS There is constant scrutiny of USA companies by the EU ...like the whole tax issue around Google in the UK. So the idea that somehow the USA is going to be able to abuse the EU through this agreement just doesnt make sense ..the EU is well aware of how to grow there economy The idea by that Journalist that " large global corporations " will be able to run rampant in poor countries that will have no rights is really 1970's " Confessions of an Economic Hitman " rhetoric. Nowadays large corporations have to jump through numerous hoops to integrate Finally the average person on the street doesn't need to know the contractual agreement between a multinational and a government ....people need to learn to trust there governments Hopefully this will alleviate your concerns ?

They haven't acted very likable way in last decade. Like for example censoring and blocking social media platforms and apps. Using violent methods to stop protests Jailing political opposition Instigate violence against their minority population Questionable actions when it comes to ISIS etc. Okay I suppose that makes sense....but if you exclude the last reason all those points apply to countries like Russia and China who seem to very popular on these forums to some members ? I would guess that is because they work as opposition for western politics and criticizes western leadership therefore they score points from those who don't like current western politics and decisions by western leaders for one reason or another. Where Turkey is seen as western puppet that just behaves badly, so they just score those negative points. Does anyone support China? Can't recall anyone regularly doing that. There isn't much dislike of Turkey, it's dislike of Erdogan/ AKP who happens to be its leader. That's different from, for example, the generalised dislike of Russia which is seated in old Anglo/ Euro orientalist stereotypes developed and actively nurtured since the time of Ivan the Righteous; that's a healthy dose of paranoia and propaganda leavened by hatred of anyone baulking strategic interests. Those were all in evidence even when that sot Yeltsin was in charge, and the west loved him. The view of Turkey has changed mostly over the past decade, up until then it was largely seen as a model for 'westernised' secular muslim nations- with problems such as an over powerful military (seen by some as a plus), bad relations with Greece/ Kurds and the Cyprus situation. The only one of those to go has been the powerful military, sadly replaced by monomaniacal neo-Ottomanism and religious conservatism; and those last two are far more dangerous to the outside than a military that might decide to coup. Kind of ironic, but Erdogan clearly models himself on/ admires Putin. No thats not the issue the West has with Russia....thats the old concern After the USSR collapsed Russia suffered due to Yeltsin and corruption ...yes Putin was needed to restore the balance But its his paranoia that caused this issue...Georgia, Ukraine ....a distrust of NATO and a real belief in somehow restoring the Russian empire even if a country prefers the West You can't just annex any country you want...sorry

But all of these points are irrelevant to the issue at hand. The Swedish justice system could interrogate Assange in London, which is the current praxis. The only interesting point is that an emphasis has been placed on getting him extradited before proceeding with the trial, which has no precedent and is completely unnecessary. Everything points to that certain people in the Swedish justice system have taken unprecedented steps towards getting their hands on him, without getting a conviction. That is the only interesting and relevant issue in this entire story. He might be guilty of rape, and might not be, he might be an ****, might not be, but that is kind of beside the point. No its not as simple as that, the Ecudorian embassy denied the initial attempt by Swedish lawyers to interview him in the embassy ..so they are also complicating the issue http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-sweden-assange-prosecutor-idUSKCN0VI0V0

Lolwut? Cost of Russian oil is ~ 10-14 US dollars per barrel. Do you meant they restore their 700% profit level? Every Oil producing country needs a minimum selling price to make oil production sustainable and to effectively contribute towards the economy. Russia needs the oil price to be between $90-105 to contribute towards growth https://www.rt.com/business/197380-oil-price-russia-100-budget/ Nothing can fix this and Putin needs to take a large share of responsibility for not diversifying the Russian economy

They haven't acted very likable way in last decade. Like for example censoring and blocking social media platforms and apps. Using violent methods to stop protests Jailing political opposition Instigate violence against their minority population Questionable actions when it comes to ISIS etc. Okay I suppose that makes sense....but if you exclude the last reason all those points apply to countries like Russia and China who seem to very popular on these forums to some members ? I would guess that is because they work as opposition for western politics and criticizes western leadership therefore they score points from those who don't like current western politics and decisions by western leaders for one reason or another. Where Turkey is seen as western puppet that just behaves badly, so they just score those negative points. Yes good observation, I agree. People will align with Russia because its seen as " anti-western" and standing up to " Western imperialism "

I'm not asking you that and I'm not trying to catch you ..I just want to know if you like and or respect him? So let me get my point, in London he was fighting extradition to Sweden. He had hundreds of supporters and people who paid his legal fees...then he decided to skip bail and went to hide out in the Ecuadorian embassy. His argument was Sweden would send him to the USA where he would be tortured and suffer indescribable punishment But he really did was Insult the entire Swedish legal system by suggesting they would pander to any American request. He also also called the Swedish legal system liars as the rape charges were just fabrications He insulted the entire USA legal system by telling everyone he would be tortured...can you imagine a reality under the Obama government where such a high profile person would be tortured? And he has made NO effort to actually address the rape charges.... So why would you respect him or take what he says seriously?

They haven't acted very likable way in last decade. Like for example censoring and blocking social media platforms and apps. Using violent methods to stop protests Jailing political opposition Instigate violence against their minority population Questionable actions when it comes to ISIS etc. Okay I suppose that makes sense....but if you exclude the last reason all those points apply to countries like Russia and China who seem to very popular on these forums to some members ?

KP can I ask you a question? I may not agree with it but I understand your view on the negative aspect of big business but do you like or respect Julian Assange ?

Soooooooo...who is in love or plans to spoil there respective partners? I enjoy the day if you want to put effort in but its not mandatory, I just like hearing romantic stories

Guys I am sorry to ask what may sound like a silly question but why does no one seem to like Turkey?

Something else to consider it was officially announced at Davos by various Chinese ministers that China is undertaking a huge and complicated economic project. They are going to change there economy from export driven to consumer based, it makes sense for them but this will take 3-5 years....if successful. So we can't expect too much from them The Chinese came to Africa and said " we want to build real friendships with Africa in a mutually beneficial way...we won't dictate to Africa like the West has done"...what a load of BS !!! They just aren't public about what they expect African leaders to do And now the South African economy is under massive pressure and stress because of our China\BRICS relationship It always disappoints me how many African leaders assume countries like China must offer a better economic partnership than the West

I have to be honest it still doesn't make sense to me? The Chinese don't care about human rights abuses or leaders who commit genocide, they are only normally concerned when it may impact there own economic trajectory. So you could argue they want to build Oil relationships but there is an oversupply at the moment and they can buy oil from non-Opec members like Russia So why would they now get involved militarily in a hellhole like the ME?

But why would China deciding to become militarily involved in the ME mean there may be increased chance of WW3? The Chinese would be assisting the Russain\USA coalition so where is the issue...what am I missing?

But China could give Russia billions if they wanted to even with the credit rating companies like Moodys scoring the Russians credit rating junk....the Chinese are a strange nation..I am often confused by what motivates them?

What superior definition of "crash" are you using? In my experience 1929, 1987 and 2008 are all considered "crashes". Sure this can be debated but this is a good link that answers your question about 1929 vs 1987 http://www.worststockmarketcrashes.com/crash-of-1987/comparing-the-1929-crash-to-the-1987-crash/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/08/27/ben-bernanke-the-2008-financial-crisis-was-worse-than-the-great-depression/#31600c9877c0 But thats the interesting thing about 2008....Ben Bernanke was a student of the 1929 Great Depression....and the Fed under his direction did the opposite what happened in 1929 He pumped large amounts of money into the financial sector to prevent the likes of AIG from going insolvent ..in 1929 the various banks were left to crash or survive and many went bankrupt So they did learn lessons from 1929

I want in on what they're paying you. Do you honestly consider 2008 a crash of the worlds economy? It was bad I won't deny it but it wasnt a crash...1929 was a crash

Russia has a cheek, maybe they should worry about trying to get there economy out of recession instead of criticizing Merkel Criticizing leadership of those countries that have given Russia economical sanctions is actually one the ways Medvedev tries to to get Russia out of the regression. As if they get people question their leaders in immigration issues they can use that to make them to question sanctions against Russia. Good points ...but even if the West drops sanctions the Russian economy needs the oil price to get back to a level where its profitable for them in order to end there recession Also most investors won't go back into Russia until there overall economy is more healthy...so its interesting to think what the Russians believe will fundementally change if sanctions are dropped?

Here's what I said 25 pages ago On the plus side we're due for another market crash and I don't see the left as it exists now surviving that. What do you think would be the cause of another market crash? Do you mean like 2008....which wasn't a crash but a serious slowdown and period of financial negative contagion But people like Ben Bernanke prevented a real crash like in 1929 through difficult but prudent fiscal policies http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/27/news/economy/ben-bernanke-great-depression/index.html

You right, I do believe he is a good guy who wants to do good things. And he has done many good things, I can list them if you want to discuss them? But don't you think using the word evil is hyperbole.....its just seems extreme? What would you call using the IRS to shut down political organizations whose aims are opposed to his? I disagree. Completely and emphatically. Not one this has that man accomplished that I would call completely good especially since so much of it was done by ignoring or subverting the law. I can't help but notice you never comment on the problems I bring up that the Obama administration has either created in whole or exacerbated. It doesn't matter. We are not going to come to any kind of agreement on this. There is no accomplishment you are going to mention that I won't find fault with and no over-reach or abuse that I could being up that you won't gloss over or ignore. You and I will find no common ground here. Okay this IRS issue, I have heard about it but its not something that is a constant discussion on the various international media networks I watch So maybe just give me a summary...what political organisations have been shut down?