TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- European Politics Thread: Netherlands, France, Germany, Great Britain, and Narnia 2017
Pages (13): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 »

European Politics Thread: Netherlands, France, Germany, Great Britain, and Narnia 2017

The PDD is a bit dead, and there's a yuge thread about Donald Trump already, so I figured the CORe could have a thread about all the important European elections that will (have) take(n) place in 2017.

Today the Dutch went to the polls and we're all wondering if Geert Wilders will be Europe's next Trump. Then we'll worry about Marine Le Pen in France and Frauke Petry in Germany. And then probably Voldermort in Narnia or something, there are way too many countries in Europe to keep track of.

Anyway, have your say: Will centrists in Europe go the way of the dodo, or will the continent stop the populist wave?

For the record, I'm betting Rutte, Macron, and Merkel will end the year being the leaders of their respective countries. Let's see how dumb these people will make me look in a few months

The Dutch Greens kicked ass today. Go figure.

Also, there's a Dutch Party For Animals. And I thought Canada's Rhinoceros Party was wacky.

quote:

Originally posted by Sykonee The Dutch Greens kicked ass today. Go figure. Also, there's a Dutch Party For Animals. And I thought Canada's Rhinoceros Party was wacky.

Green like Democrats did. Left Greens also, but not as much as CDA and D66 gained together.

Left government party PVDA got their ass kicked like never before.
SP, also left, didn't benefit from their loss and lost one seat.

https://lfverkiezingen.appspot.com/nos/widget/main.html


In Holland we even take care of floating voters, which in Dutch more is like hovering Floating Voters Picture

God damn Party for Animals doubled, morons they are, just like the green left voters. Already said to a colleague the day before yesterday. If someone sees we have a Party for Animals they for sure will have a laugh, I for sure would.
Green Left wants to make driving cars even more expensive with taxes. They don't realize that when the 40 years old NATO Awacs planes take off and fly over our country, all we try to do with cars to save nature is done for nothing as it's effect is just 0.001% or something.
Same way that 90% of the energy is used by industry, so all you do at home to save energy has just 1% effect on the total or a lot less.

I think many surrounding countries are relieved with the outcome of our elections though. In my area which is at the south there are many PVV voters. PVV voters are not the smartest. Some just voted PVV in order to give a signal that things should change. PVV doesn't have solutions to offer.

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-M Green Left wants to make driving cars even more expensive with taxes. They don't realize that when the 40 years old NATO Awacs planes take off and fly over our country, all we try to do with cars to save nature is done for nothing as it's effect is just 0.001% or something. Same way that 90% of the energy is used by industry, so all you do at home to save energy has just 1% effect on the total or a lot less.

Is this actually true? Because if so it's an amazing bottom line of what the fuck is wrong with humans, "progressives" in the pocket of big corps in this case. NATO is kind of touchy subject I feel, but why the fuck would you fly a plane that does that much polluting today?

All jet aircraft emit a huge amount of pollution. I have read, which is probably not strictly accurate, that if you fly to another country once a year for your holiday, you've created as many emissions as a year driving a car.

Aviation is just 2% of overall CO2 emissions, what am I missing? Is this NATO plane included in that 2%? If the other 98% is created by mostly industry than it's even more alarming.

still scary.

Actually this is fucking wrong, "Agriculture, Forestry, etc" should be lumped in with industry I think. That's 45% percent of mostly scary shit.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid what am I missing?.

Cow farts.

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-M Green Left wants to make driving cars even more expensive with taxes. They don't realize that when the 40 years old NATO Awacs planes take off and fly over our country, all we try to do with cars to save nature is done for nothing as it's effect is just 0.001% or something. Same way that 90% of the energy is used by industry, so all you do at home to save energy has just 1% effect on the total or a lot less.

I'm with you that GroenLinks is not an ideal party to be in power, but are you sure about your statistics there? They seem, um, a bit off.

An AWACS Boeing E-3 puts out as much carbon dioxide in one hour as 2 average passenger cars do in a year, but there's only 16 of them, and they're not all in the air all the time...

The Netherlands has 11 million cars. Lets say they're twice as efficient as the average car, but that's still 2.75 million flying hours. There's only 9000 hours in a year...

If the 16 planes were all flying all the time, that's roughly 150,000 flying hours... So, the NATO planes (flying all the time, which is not possible) are only 5% of the total car emissions (optimistically).

Obviously flying is absolutely horrible for the environment, much worse than driving, but driving is still a significant element. Driving, flying, electrical production (all those coal mines aren't helping), and agriculture (all those wonderful Dutch cows...) are all significant elements, and we should work to reduce emissions in each area where possible - including limiting the use of petrol-using cars.

Also, they're trying to upgrade the AWACS engines, hopefully it'll happen soon.

RIP PvdA, what a beating

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-M

Hey, isn't South Holland something like Wilders country? What's the reaction in Limburg been?

Fucking coal mines.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid Aviation is just 2% of overall CO2 emissions, what am I missing?

Being charitable, I don't think Trance-MB literally means AWACS generate as much emissions as the entire car-driving Dutch populace. What he probably means is that despite all the efforts invested in making driving more efficient, the environmental benefits a single person makes by driving a more efficient car in a year are immediately wiped out every time someone flies a jet aircraft somewhere.

He's basically moaning that the Green party are taxing him more for what is ultimately a completely insignificant carbon footprint compared to the big boy emitters of industry, commercial transport, agriculture and military.

Yeah I understand what he's saying now. And I would generally side with him in most bullets under this topic I think. Humans have to think bigger picture.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid Yeah I understand what he's saying now. And I would generally side with him in most bullets under this topic I think. Humans have to think bigger picture.

What does that mean, though?

That means its pretty stupid to target civilians for emission taxes and such.

Not really. If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance of avoiding worldwide environmental catastrophe, we need to be squeezing every possible source of environmental damage.

I find it's quite a common refutation of environmentalist policies to just point out some ostensible hypocrisy or the grand hopelessness of it all. The real motivation is invariably the desire to carry on being as selfish and consumptive as one wants.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Not really. If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance of avoiding worldwide environmental catastrophe, we need to be squeezing every possible source of environmental damage. I find it's quite a common refutation of environmentalist policies to just point out some ostensible hypocrisy or the grand hopelessness of it all. The real motivation is invariably the desire to carry on being as selfish and consumptive as one wants.

Couldn't agree more.

I'm trying to invent cars that run on pollution

If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance, the main culprits are not regular people living their everyday lives, by a long shot, if I'm reading all this information correctly. If you target them mainly it's just not a good precedent nor a smart one. Its weak policy. That's like putting 3 horse and 4 birds in a cage and putting a shitting tax on the birds.

quote:

Originally posted by Lews I'm with you that GroenLinks is not an ideal party to be in power, but are you sure about your statistics there? They seem, um, a bit off. An AWACS Boeing E-3 puts out as much carbon dioxide in one hour as 2 average passenger cars do in a year, but there's only 16 of them, and they're not all in the air all the time... The Netherlands has 11 million cars. Lets say they're twice as efficient as the average car, but that's still 2.75 million flying hours. There's only 9000 hours in a year... If the 16 planes were all flying all the time, that's roughly 150,000 flying hours... So, the NATO planes (flying all the time, which is not possible) are only 5% of the total car emissions (optimistically). Obviously flying is absolutely horrible for the environment, much worse than driving, but driving is still a significant element. Driving, flying, electrical production (all those coal mines aren't helping), and agriculture (all those wonderful Dutch cows...) are all significant elements, and we should work to reduce emissions in each area where possible - including limiting the use of petrol-using cars. Also, they're trying to upgrade the AWACS engines, hopefully it'll happen soon.

No, none of the 16 Awacs will get new engines. Even complaining about the noise for as long as I can't remember at the town right next to the base didn't make them upgrade. They measured 106db at the schoolyard. I read it takes 54 Boeing 747's to reproduce the noise of a single Awacs during take off.

The base is very close to the Dutch border and actually in Germany in Geilenkirchen, so Groen Links probably doesn't know. I think about 2600 flights a year are allowed, which is average 12 take offs a day.

https://www.google.nl/maps/place/NA...960556!4d6.0425
They leave some nice marks in the sky which you can see with the naked eye (also when they are not in take off).



They also don't fly over the rest of Holland, just over this area in the south.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Being charitable, I don't think Trance-MB literally means AWACS generate as much emissions as the entire car-driving Dutch populace.

Yeah, that's what I meant Jack. If they want to make things better, or faster better, as things already get better because of improving techniques, they should focus on things which make significant changes. Led lights and solar cells at home are nice, but those are still just a minor changes. Using the car as another cash cow is ridiculous as public transport over here already is at it's maximum capacity in a very developed and dense network.

Driving a car in Holland average costs 49 Euro-cent/km. They want to add 15 cent/km during working hours and 3 cent/km outside on top of that.
Holland already is about the most expensive country to drive a car. To compare, a Ford Mustang 2.3 costs here �55k, in Belgium and Germany �35k. A Mustangs 5.0 costs �112k !!! vs �40k in Belgium and Germany. Look at the US price and you're gonna feel sorry for us...
One liter gasoline costs �1.65 (65%=tax) and road tax about �900 a year for a 1600 kg car.

Looking at the average car here, which is small and light and because of that have small engines, (average 1-1.4 liter I think) I don't think there is a lot to gain compared to the current situation.
For years hybrids got subsidized (low tax when buying, no road tax) but because only business people drove them it was useless, as all hybrids used their petrol engine at the highways instead of the electro motor. Millions of Euro's thrown away for only benefit on paper.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Hey, isn't South Holland something like Wilders country? What's the reaction in Limburg been?

Well, you mean the south of Holland as South Holland (Zuid-Holland) is the province holding The Hague and Rotterdam

Yes it has become Wilders country over here so I guess many are disappointed. But next to liberals (VVD) also still many are democrats, CDA as we, me included, have a farmers background, which is fading though. The closest city, in which I also work, always was very left (SP) but now like in all bigger cities PVV has taken over the first place. So the national outcome does not reflect the votes from Limburg.
But don't forget, PVV is the second biggest party now and many do agree with their ideas, but like in my case just not enough to vote for them. I bet if Erdogan had shut his mouth PVV even would have gotten more votes in the rest of the country.
The Turkish party DENK (Think) got 3 seats. The only positive thing is that many Muslims still did not vote for them. I don't like it when Turks which are born here and when referring to "My president" or even worse "My country" are referring to Erdogan and Turkey.
Compared to Turkey Holland for sure is a much much much much nicer country to live in, so I'm for a one passport policy which would prevent Turks who are born here to vote for Turkey. Force them to choose, than we will see if they really love Turkey as much as they think they do.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance, the main culprits are not regular people living their everyday lives, by a long shot, if I'm reading all this information correctly. If you target them mainly it's just not a good precedent nor a smart one. Its weak policy. That's like putting 3 horse and 4 birds in a cage and putting a shitting tax on the birds.

Yes, because clearly the only policy politicians (and us) are recommending is a tax on personal vehicles, nothing else.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance, the main culprits are not regular people living their everyday lives, by a long shot, if I'm reading all this information correctly. If you target them mainly it's just not a good precedent nor a smart one. Its weak policy. That's like putting 3 horse and 4 birds in a cage and putting a shitting tax on the birds.

If you'd done even 30 seconds of research rather than taking as gospel the bullshit that Trance-MB chats, you'd know that the GroenLinks party aren't just foisting all their policies on normal people. They have a whole bunch of policies targeting many different areas. But that does not change the fact that normal people should be targeted by environmentalist policies, because we simply do not have any comfort room on this issue.

More generally, I think it's misguided to mentally separate the behaviour of normal people from all these evil corporations or whoever you think should be targeted. It's normal people who do the bulk of air travel. It's normal people who eat the bulk of industrially farmed food. It's normal people who use much of the electricity created by dirty power stations. And it's normal people who buy most of the mass-produced shit churned out by all those factories.

quote:

Originally posted by wotyzoid If you look at the scale of what is required to stand a chance, the main culprits are not regular people living their everyday lives, by a long shot, if I'm reading all this information correctly. If you target them mainly it's just not a good precedent nor a smart one. Its weak policy. That's like putting 3 horse and 4 birds in a cage and putting a shitting tax on the birds.

Exactly, 90% of all energy is used by industry.
Everybody just gets the feeling you're really contributing a lot, while in fact it's just very minor.
Awareness is good, but use it in a good way.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.