Author Topic: Politics (Read 393891 times)

atomic7732 · « **Reply #120 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:22:05 PM »

Quote from: Bla on December 09, 2011, 02:46:17 PM

Interesting. How are you going to simulate it?

No idea.

Bla · « **Reply #121 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:25:41 PM »

Quote from: smjjames on December 09, 2011, 03:07:41 PM

@Bla: It's not neccesarily that the candidates are rich, there is A LOT of fundraising involved.

But what if they can't raise funds? Then they've already been sorted out before the election.

It is very typical that the rightists get a lot of funds from corporations because they want to give benefits to the corporations, the known ones in form of tax cuts, and then there is the lobbyism... An election involving fundraising is biased, although it is true you don't need to be rich.

Does anyone know what specific corporations supported the last George Bush's election campaign (with source pl0x)?

smjjames · « **Reply #122 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:35:24 PM »

Quote from: Bla on December 09, 2011, 03:25:41 PM

Does anyone know what specific corporations supported the last George Bush's election campaign (with source pl0x)?

Oil companies I'm sure.....

Yes our system isn't perfect and it doesn't help that the Republican party is unravelling.

Bla · « **Reply #123 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:38:24 PM »

I once heard that it was an oil company and a weapons factory, but I don't know if it is actually true. If it were, that makes the Iraq war... An interesting incident...

smjjames · « **Reply #124 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:43:05 PM »

Given that he is from Texas, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few oil company supporters.

deoxy99 · « **Reply #125 on:** December 09, 2011, 03:47:15 PM »

Quote from: deoxy99 on December 09, 2011, 03:20:03 PM

Also, I hate the Electoral College, because you aren't voting directly (a true democracy makes you vote directly) for a president, and the electors can also just vote for what they want, and you can win with only 25% of the votes from people. So abolish it now.

In case you couldn't see it.

Bla · « **Reply #126 on:** December 10, 2011, 08:41:16 AM »

United Russia (the conservative government) has apparently cheated in the Russian election. Despite them cheating, they go back from 64.4% to 49.5%.
I read that tens of thousands of people are going to demonstrate in major cities today, 30,000 in Mowscow alone, and that the government has sent 50,000 soldiers to ensure that the demonstrations are peaceful in Moscow. The protestors want a new, fair election. What do you think will happen?
The Communists went up from 11.5% to 19% of the votes, despite the cheating. I wonder what they would had gotten if the election was fair...

Here's an article I just read on our national news channel:
The election is a failure for Putin
5^th December 2011 09:43
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and the ruling party United Russia suffered a major defeat in Sunday's parliamentary elections.

Putin had said before the election that he hoped to get 60 percent, and now it seems that the party gets just below 50 percent of the votes. The party, however, retains a slim majority in parliament.

The whole party which Vladimir Putin is heading is in decline and disintegrates quietly, says DR News Russia employee Matilde Kimer from Moscow.

United Russia is the most unpopular party, although it has received almost half of the votes.

Corruption scandals and abuse of power
- Among people, the party is described as a place for thieves and bandits. It has become muddy in corruption scandals and cases of abuse of power. People are afraid to talk about the party, and you can not find anyone who will say something nice, says Matilde Mimer.

Several thousand cases of electoral fraud have been reported. There are the very traditional ones, where employers associated with Putin's party ask or force their employees to vote for United Russia.

More colorful cases have also been reported. A voter has documented on YouTube that they used invisible ink in the ballot box. He has filmed his ballot where you can see his mark disappear after 30 seconds.

- In the Republic of Chechnya in southern Russia, 97 percent of voters officially cast their vote. It is unrealistic, and furthermore, they all voted for United Russia, said Matilde Kimer.

Source: http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Udland/2011/12/05/094329.htm

I personally think that the Communists will eventually benefit from it. When the government has first made the people their enemy at this level, I think it will be hard for them to make a comeback.

atomic7732 · « **Reply #127 on:** December 10, 2011, 12:04:26 PM »

I am disgusted at what is happening in the world. $:-\$

smjjames · « **Reply #128 on:** December 10, 2011, 12:16:56 PM »

Theres also the fact that Putin is a former KGB man and it looks like old habits die hard over there in Russia. They've been thumping their chests pretty hard over the defense thing that Europe is setting up. Still, their concerns are legit, even if its something they don't actually have to worry about.

Bla · « **Reply #129 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:57:33 PM »

So inspired by this interesting document
http://www.cepr.net/documents/social_exclusion_2006_08.pdf
I thought I'd make a small scatter plot of (almost) ALL the world's countries:
GDP pr. capita versus gini coefficient
Real GDP growth (2010) versus gini coefficient

Gini coefficients are from several recent years, and so are GDP pr. capita. And economic growth averaged out over a few recent years would certainly make the statistics better.

smjjames · « **Reply #130 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:07:30 PM »

You probably should name some countries from different regions (such as sub-saharan Africa, SE Asia, the Middle East, etc) as well as naming the major players to make the scatterplots easier to understand and give reference points.

Also, who is the lone dot all the way to the right on the first one, US I think?

Bla · « **Reply #131 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:10:38 PM »

Good idea, although my intention was to learn more about exactly how the equality affected the economy without taking natural ressources and other things into account.

The dot on the far right is Luxembourg. I'll try to name a few.

smjjames · « **Reply #132 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:18:49 PM »

I wonder why they are shown to have such a high GDP on that chart. The reason for doing the scatterplot is fine, but having a scatterplot without points of reference or labels for various points is like making a pie chart without a key or labels.

atomic7732 · « **Reply #133 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:23:24 PM »

An idea might be labeling major countries, some of the extreme countries, and then coloring every point by the continent the corresponding country is on.

Bla · « **Reply #134 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:26:11 PM »

Steel and industry, and banking like Switzerland, I think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Luxembourg

I don't think pie charts are good for showing trends. I tried some trend lines to show a trend, but their coefficients of determination were all pathetic, like I expected. Ofc countries will group together, like most of mainland western Europe in bottom right, sub-Sahara Africa on the far left, etc.

My point wasn't to compare and show to you how wealthy and how equal the individual countries were.

I'll put a more labeled first chart up soon.

smjjames · « **Reply #135 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:31:11 PM »

I was just using pie charts as an example of what I was talking about as far as the lack of information to understand the scatterplot.

Also, there is an awesome site, which I forget the name of, that has world maps shown in poportion to various data and they have scatterplots as well as progression lines. They have maps for all kinds of data and there is even an app onsite which allows you to view graphs and create your own based on the data

Bla · « **Reply #136 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:36:54 PM »

I just think, for my intention at least, the axes were enough to understand the chart.

vh · « **Reply #137 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:40:55 PM »

so this graph shows that in poor countries, rich people are very rich in comparison to relatively poor people and in rich countries, rich people aren't as rich in comparison to relatively poor people. Therefore, the solution to the everything is to make everyone rich. Tada.

Darvince · « **Reply #138 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:19:14 PM »

wtf Namibia...

smjjames · « **Reply #139 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:05:09 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambia

They have LOTS of problems, it's not any one single cause, but the AIDS epidemic definetly doesn't help. Basically they are just in a really bad situation.

deoxy99 · « **Reply #140 on:** January 03, 2012, 07:48:26 PM »

Quote from: mudkipz on January 03, 2012, 01:40:55 PM

so this graph shows that in poor countries, rich people are very rich in comparison to relatively poor people and in rich countries, rich people aren't as rich in comparison to relatively poor people. Therefore, the solution to the everything is to make everyone rich. Tada.

Or to make everyone poor. That's why socialism works!

However, in socialism, you don't make everyone rich or poor, you make them... the same.

smjjames · « **Reply #141 on:** January 03, 2012, 08:45:47 PM »

Quote from: deoxy99 on January 03, 2012, 07:48:26 PM

Quote from: mudkipz on January 03, 2012, 01:40:55 PM
so this graph shows that in poor countries, rich people are very rich in comparison to relatively poor people and in rich countries, rich people aren't as rich in comparison to relatively poor people. Therefore, the solution to the everything is to make everyone rich. Tada.
Or to make everyone poor. That's why socialism works!

However, in socialism, you don't make everyone rich or poor, you make them... the same.

How exactly would you do that though? Make all wages the same?

deoxy99 · « **Reply #142 on:** January 03, 2012, 10:15:39 PM »

Yes. And tax everyone the same. Basically give and take the same money from everyone.

Bla · « **Reply #143 on:** January 03, 2012, 11:02:49 PM »

Quote from: mudkipz on January 03, 2012, 01:40:55 PM

so this graph shows that in poor countries, rich people are very rich in comparison to relatively poor people and in rich countries, rich people aren't as rich in comparison to relatively poor people. Therefore, the solution to the everything is to make everyone rich. Tada.

They show that there is no correlation between wealth and income equality or economic growth and income equality.

So how do you make everyone rich? Economic growth is what makes a country rich.

smjjames · « **Reply #144 on:** January 19, 2012, 07:19:50 AM »

Well, well, well, looks like Rick Perry is dropping out of the race, and right on the day of the CNN debate. He's had poor support anyways....

I would have posted on that thread about the rick perry ads, but I thought here would be more appropriate, *shrugs*

FiahOwl · « **Reply #145 on:** January 25, 2012, 05:48:05 PM »

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '55699'.

Bla · « **Reply #146 on:** January 30, 2012, 12:57:25 PM »

Albert Einstein on socialism. Very interesting.

http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism

Bla · « **Reply #147 on:** January 31, 2012, 01:37:05 PM »

Nawt amused. $:-\$
It feels creepy already to see advertisements for Unity pop up all over the internet from the day after you download the free version.

Companies will now have access to your personal information
"Unfortunately we can not sell you a flatscreen on hire. You live in the Northwest Quarter and suffer from progressive arthritis, so our credit rating agency believes that it is too risky to lend you money."

The message is now illegal to get if you're shopping in Fona. But the EU Commission's proposal for a new personal data regulation will make it possible, says associate professor at Aalborg University, Charlotte Bagger Tranberg, who have written doctoral dissertation on privacy, and EU law:

- It will mean that people who actually can pay are left out because they live in the wrong area.

Today, it is Personal Data Protection Act which sets limits on what information about customers' comings and doings companies can keep and make use of. Before companies are allowed to bring customer databases in use, they must first report it to the Data Protection Agency.

Must protect the business from expenses
But it costs too much in administration. So believes the European Commission, who last week presented proposals for a new privacy regulation to save EU businesses for approx. 2.3 billion euros a year.

The Commission's Reform of the rules for personal data must also ensure that they are more uniformly enforced in all EU member states.

- The reform will make life easier and less costly for businesses. A strong, clear and consistent legal framework at EU level will help to harness the potential of the digital single market and promote economic growth, innovation and jobs, says EU justice commissioner, Viviane Reding.

Denmark can not stand outside
But the price for harmonization of data protection rules throughout the EU is, according to Charlotte Bagger Tranberg, that the Danish privacy legislation becomes inoperative. And thus a part of the protection of personal information that it currently provides, she explains:

- If the regulation is adopted, then the Personal Data Protection Act repealed. And so it is simply the text of the regulation which is directly applicable Danish law.

Notwithstanding the legal reservations, Denmark can not stand outside the EU Commission's privacy regulation, if adopted by a majority of EU countries. The regulation must be adopted by a new provision on personal data, which Denmark ratified the Lisbon Treaty."

Source: http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Indland/2012/01/31/161516_1_1.htm
(Translated a bit fast, so sorry if it's not that good)

smjjames · « **Reply #148 on:** January 31, 2012, 06:01:27 PM »

What the heck does living in the northwest quarter (actually, northwest quarter of what? Dennmark? the EU?) have to do with anything? Still, I don't understand how living in the wrong region would affect somthing like your example. Insurance stuff, sure, but flatscreens?

Maybe that isn't the best example for them to use, although I get the point.

As for the ads for unity, you've probably got a tracking cookie, and I've had the unity player for a long time and have had no issues with ads for unity.

Bla · « **Reply #149 on:** February 01, 2012, 08:08:42 AM »

Northwest quarter: I'm pretty sure it refers to the northwestern part of Copenhagen (Denmark capital), like NÃ¸rrebro, which are somewhat poor areas compared to other parts.
Living in that area could affect you like in this example because if people in that area are poorer or more often unable to pay for the flatscreen they buy on hire, the businesses might not make (as much or any) profit from serving people in that area, and so they could choose not to serve people from that area. Which would be very discriminating. And the same about the disease. Geographical areas, personal problems, all sorts of things can show up on graphs as being more profitable or less profitable, and why even bother with the less profitable districts/groups of people/whatever...

As for the ads for Unity, yes, it probably does. I just think it's a bit creepy the way businesses handle CRM. The way they collect all sorts of information about people, put the people in a box, make advertisements for those stereotypes. But it's not like I think it threatens me in any way.

In general, let's just get rid of stupid corporate propaganda advertisements! They only encourage people to spend more money on things they don't need. If they actually needed them, they would not need an advertisement to convince them. Replace them with information databases, like on the internet, where you can find anything you need, written in an objective and informative way, with pros and cons for the item (and not just some ultra-exaggerated pros spiced up with music and other capitalist tricks), so people are not encouraged to waste Earth's resources and our work which could had been spare time.