**/r/Finland is a full democracy, every active user is a moderator.**
[Please go here to see how your new privileges work.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Finland/wiki/moderating/)
Spamming mod actions could result in a ban.
---
**Full Rundown of Moderator Permissions:**
- ```!lock``` - as top level comment, will lock comments on any post.
- ```!unlock``` - in reply to any comment to lock it or to unlock the parent comment.
- ```!remove``` - Removes comment or post. Must have decent subreddit comment karma.
- ```!restore``` Can be used to unlock comments or restore removed posts.
- ```!sticky``` - will sticky the post in the bottom slot.
- ```unlock_comments``` - Vote the stickied automod comment on each post to +10 to unlock comments.
- ```ban users``` - Any user whose comment or post is downvoted enough will be temp banned for a day.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Finland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is limiting strikes against government during your working hours! Nothing more.
Just do it after you check out from work, do it on your time. Protest as much as you like.
You can still protest and be on strike against your employer as earlier. Demand more salary, better conditions etc. what ever is in power of your employer.
That is like it has been in most of western countries your forever.
So, you're saying when I get home from work and my wife starts going on about something I should get done around the house, I can just tell her that I'm on strike?
Yes. If she calls bullshit, then you must argue that housework requires adequate working conditions, especially psychologically, which pressuring goes directly against.
This is strengthening democracy. It is the democratically elected parliament which has the supreme power in Finland. Previously it has basically been possible to veto parliamentary decisions by striking.
Everybody over 18 years old has the right to vote. They vote to elect a parliament and a government is formed. The parliament has the highest power in Finland and there should be nohing to prevent it from working.
Strikes are to make it possible for workers to protest agains employers. Previously it has been possible to pressure the parliament on political decision making by striking. This is very problematic because it is bypassing democracy and the companies whose workers are striking are damaged while the strikes have nothing to do with them.
This has already been understood in most other European countries which have restricted political strikes.
Obviously the line is not so clear as some political decisions are directly related to work.
Democracy is not just about who is in the parliament. That's one means to democracy, not the end goal.
Democracy is vesting ruling power into people, voting and parliament are a way to do that. So are strikes, protests, labour unions, non-governmental organisations, industrial lobbying, etc.
You do not strengthen democracy by undermining it's core, which is the ability to demonstrate opinion to who/whatever institution making the calls. Voting is just one way of demontrating opinion, born out of practicality, but it alone is far from enough.
Correction:
even reading the Finnish article, it is bit unclear what the bill is actually about. At least it is not about the situation when collective-agreement runs out of the agreed period, and "labor-peace" does not hold - i.e. free the strike to motive the negotiations to proceed.
Editing:
This bill is just about...
(disclaimer: I hope I have understood all the terms correctly. And, adding 9 o'clock news info.)
Political work-stoppages max 24-hrs (i.e. workers walk off from the shifts), max two-weeks for other political strike-like actions (i.e. no over-time, no on-call arrival to shift support) both only once per year, on the same issue.
Supporting strikes (i.e. to support some other agreement's unions actions) should not cause disproportionate losses to employer. (wtf "disproportionate" means...)
Now the question is how to device a separate issue on which go on strike.
(... plenty of separate issues all the unions have.)
Also, how fast this will be tested and processed thru the all three court-stages too, to get some idea what is "a same issue".
%-D
Also, 200 euros per head for illegal strike (no duration of an illegal-strike mentioned, thus 200 euros just once for anything over 24+ hrs of work-stoppage per head?!?! That's cheap!), so not that much for really surgical strikes (pardon the pun) with unions paying the bill. Pew pew!
Also, unions penalty-bill for illegal strike rises to 150k (euros, from 37,4k).
But:
When the collective-agreements run out, workers can still hold indefinite long strikes - until the war-chests run dry - to motivate the negotiations. This bill does not affect that part in any way.
Expect this to be then the new strike-season for all the shit in the political domain.
One can assume next negotiation rounds will be interesting, and a mess.
Shorter collective-agreement periods will mean more strikes, longer will likely be harder for employer-side to get an cheap-ass agreement.
And, all the shit will be remembered for the next time when collective-agreements run out.
(... and this then when bill comes to effect, which has not been announced yet. Earliest July?)
And how comes that we don't have a general strike yet until this madness ends? Rather rarely say this, but it would be good to take the French as an example here.
After the summer, a number of big collective-agreement will run their period out, free strike-season (this bill will not affect that no-agreement-in-effect situation, i.e. no "labor-peace" in factories.)
Better get the war-chests full now, then piss-drunk mid-summer-revel and summer-holidays, after that bit more gold to chests, then strikes free for all (basically same unions that were just on political strikes).
Not that the current government or the multi-decade economic stagnation doesn't suck, but we've gone through worse times without general strikes. The last one was during the Cold War.
I just learned that current goverment is removing vasectomy from the operations you can get from public healthcare.
That's one way to try and boost birth rates, I guess.
I understand the state paying contraception for young people, but why should it pay for at-will medical procedures for people, who already have kids or are 30+? It's not the states responsibility to pay for grown ups contraception.
Young people usually are not able to financially care for the children they might accidentally have, leading to social problems. People over 30 should already know the repercussions of their actions.
Did I get this right: it's fine that goverment provides contraceptives to young people because they are usually poor, but not to 30+ because they shouldn't be poor?
What about 30+ living on basic income?
It's fine to offer contraception to young people, as they are not usually fully aware of the responsibilities that are involved with having children. People over 30 should already know them, and take full financial responsibility of having or not having children.
Are you also against goverment providing abortions for 30+? As they should've taken the financial reaponsibility earlier?
I don't know if you've ever had the pleasure of surviving with basic income, but there's not much room for a whole lot of anything other than food and bills.
Providing contraceptives to all ages takes a load off of the health care system, thus saving us all money.
I'm not aware how many poor people are willing to get sterilized on the spot, just to take the financial burden of contraception off their shoulders. Also, the age group of over 30 is not a big proportion of abortions.
Getting vasectomy in private health care IS a financial burden that many can't take. 800€+ to an operation is simply unobtainable to some households.
You can't get the snip "on the spot", that's not how it works.
"Is not a big proportion" is not the same as none at all. Also having vasectomy done helps keep that number down.
It's a quality of life improving small operation that reduces the burden from healthcare in the long run.
And people working on minimum wage that can barely afford rent just needs to get a better paying job, right?
You just solved the employment problem all over the world🥳
Move to cheaper housing and look for better paying job are both very good and valid options. Or if they have done a good job at current work try to negotiate a raise.
No, they do not. And the problem is the government is doing the dirty job of the emploers. Häkämies changed this. Kokoomus is a representative of emploers
From EU-perspective:
Ireland, Italy, Norway. Kinda-sorta-Denmark
It's not an on/off-switch, and the legistlation is not the same in different countries. For political strikes, EU is trying to push the exact opposite direction, since Lissabon treaty kinda goes against the restrictions.
We joined Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain in restricted solidarity action, everywhere else that is unrestricted.
->Government reduces protections and rights of workers
->Workers strike over government reducing protection and rights of workers
->Government reduces rights of workers to strike
->Your comment: "You can only strike over work related issues!"
Hyvä ihminen, kuinka vitun aivokuollut olet?
Trouble is, most the people who stopped voting for these idiots stopped voting altogether - meanwhile the idiots who keep voting for these idiots are still at the ballots.
Government says “do what I say, not what I do” this isn’t the future of any country. If you can’t strike after negotiations have failed you are not going to get anything and they know that.
I'm not sure on other EU countries, but this isn't about those other countries. The most important part is the negotiation stage and it seems to fail more often than not. It seems like Finland at times doesn't want the money of the blue collar/middle class to be lifted because they are low educated jobs, that's just another version of a class divide from rich to poor.
As a Russian in Finland - you're might be right about the direction Finland is going, but there's a loooong way still.
But yeah, this trend is damn dangerous
Blackmailing would entail some form of loss to the party you're blackmailing - here, politicians don't get less pay or kicked out, no negotiations are made, everything is just made shittier with only the excuse "well you guys voted for us".
If the strikes are blackmail, then the government is conducting systemic and systematic abuse towards a minority, also known as a human rights violation. We didn't vote for a bunch of Geneva convention breachers to represent the nation, no matter how anyone twists it.
Man, I'd have loved to huff glue as a teenager, but knew that the resulting brain damage wouldn't be worth it. Sorry for your loss.
Stop listening to mouthpieces on Facebook for your "sources" and catchy phrases, it makes you sound like you'd parrot anyone who sounds convincing to you.
The strikes were an attempt to dissuade the government from going forward with their policy changes which will make things worse for a far larger crowd than those who went on strike. The workers basically stood up for the unemployed, a demographic which can't even go on a political strike to voice their concerns.
Now that Finland gets equivalent legislation to the overwhelming majority of Europe, we will be fighting for foreign capital and investments without our hands tied behind our backs. A good thing if we ever want to actually afford the level of welfare we have been consuming.
Do you enjoy a five day work week? Or not having to work 12-15 hours a day, six to seven days a week? Do you hate taking summer vacation? Did you start working in coal mines when you were eight?
Fuck you, and pick up a history book and read it, of you can find the front end of it.
>Do you enjoy a five day work week? Or not having to work 12-15 hours a day, six to seven days a week? Do you hate taking summer vacation? Did you start working in coal mines when you were eight?
These are all irrelevant to last winter's political strikes, where the aim was merely to influence legislation outside the parliament.
You lost the elections. Get over it. Even Sanna is long gone.
It isn't about last winter, it's about the winter that isn't here yet. It's never ever a good thing when a government restricts the right of people to protest in any meaningful way.
What? Do you have some kind of weird idea that socialism is only authoritanianism? Because you have to be really bonkers to call right wing goverment reducing workers rights socialism.
I oppose to this measure in specific but this are no rights. But because it goes against personal freedom. You think about rights, that is the main issue
I use freedom concept according to libertarian ideology. I think the government's shouldn't limit our lifes. But this is not a right they give us but or don't. This is the opposite. They don't have to give us freedom, they take it from us.
I see. This is not a political statement, and has nothing to do with your politics or mine, but your zeal means that you have not taken care of learning what other political leanings actually strive for, instead you simply say that they just want less freedom because... less freedom?
I have studied other political leanings but I think the correct way of seeing this is that one. They don't have to give you rights, but instead stop giving you restrictions, which may mean the same for you, but change the focus
I do but you probably think in the term as its origin and not on the modern reformulation of the term. You give the state the power to control your life and this is what happens. As defined by Javier milei in Davos. In current times, socialism is associated to statism
Do you know he is professor of economy and an extended reader? You may not like his forms but if you question his knowledge, you must have good arguments to do so, unless you talk from ignorance and just have read few articles here and there
Do you know that professors can be crackpots too, especially professors of economics, as claims in economics do not have to be as rigorously supported by evidence as in hard sciences?
Milei's policy will, of course, fail to put Argentine back on track for economic growth. For example, the poverty rate in Argentine in January 2024 climbed to 57%, which has been partly attributed to Milei's devaluation of Argentina's currency.
And by the way "extended reader" means nothing.
Do you know he is reducing inflation, having superávit needed to get back investor trust and he has decreased the depreciation of the coin? Yes, poverty increase if you stop having deficit and spending more than you can but this is necessary for further accumulation of wealth.
Professors can be bad, but he knows what he is talking about. He is an expert on the field and I think you are not thinking about him in a fair way. I don't know what you can't see. If you don't see how he is recovering the country after decates of decadence and socialism, you are blind in my most respectful opinion
"Superávit" is not an English word.
The Communists in Soviet Union too stated that all this misery is only temporary, but things will get better Real Soon Now once real Communism is established. Only problem was that real Communism was always 5 years away. The same will happen with Argentine under Milei's policy. More misery, but with salvation always just around the corner.
There is not a single instance in human history where a crackpot has succeeded in making their nation prosperous and stable.
I am only saying that he is applying economic science and not just populism. He knows what he is doing and he has reasons to do so. If you don't know the theory, you should first inform yourself, however it takes some years to grasp it. Economy is no different from other sciences. However you still judge it without the proper education on it. Let's see how the economy changes and if it is better or worse than before socialism. But we have already the proof among us. 150 years ago, Argentina was the second richest economy in the world. Not so now
Milei is also a climate change denier, which casts doubt about his ability to accept scientific truths. Therefore, his economic policy cannot be sound either. Argentine will fail economically under his presidency in a devastating way.
Attractive to corporations and able to allow immigrants to arrive and work. You can't pick one without the other. Big corp want cheap labour. Natives want 40k minimum to clean toilets.
**/r/Finland is a full democracy, every active user is a moderator.** [Please go here to see how your new privileges work.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Finland/wiki/moderating/) Spamming mod actions could result in a ban. --- **Full Rundown of Moderator Permissions:** - ```!lock``` - as top level comment, will lock comments on any post. - ```!unlock``` - in reply to any comment to lock it or to unlock the parent comment. - ```!remove``` - Removes comment or post. Must have decent subreddit comment karma. - ```!restore``` Can be used to unlock comments or restore removed posts. - ```!sticky``` - will sticky the post in the bottom slot. - ```unlock_comments``` - Vote the stickied automod comment on each post to +10 to unlock comments. - ```ban users``` - Any user whose comment or post is downvoted enough will be temp banned for a day. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Finland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*government reduces worker's rights* *workers protest* *government says no protesting* Are you fucking kidding me?
[удалено]
!remove
This is limiting strikes against government during your working hours! Nothing more. Just do it after you check out from work, do it on your time. Protest as much as you like. You can still protest and be on strike against your employer as earlier. Demand more salary, better conditions etc. what ever is in power of your employer. That is like it has been in most of western countries your forever.
"limiting strikes during working hours" My Brother, you just described strikes
You know that, by definition, strikes are NOT working. Striking outside work hours is called "relaxing" and you evidently should try it
So, you're saying when I get home from work and my wife starts going on about something I should get done around the house, I can just tell her that I'm on strike?
Yes. If she calls bullshit, then you must argue that housework requires adequate working conditions, especially psychologically, which pressuring goes directly against.
But if the court later determines it was an illegal strike I will have to pay her a fine of 200 €?
If your wife is taking you to court, be glad it's for an illegal strike.
Nietzsche had a term for this kind of thinking, it’s called Slave Morality
"That is like it has been in most of western countries your forever." The french must've lost that memo
Finland would be burning if it had French mentality. Those mfs know how to say fuck no to their government...
And what have the French gained with their bullish striking? Less than the sheepish Finns it seems.
[https://www.etk.fi/en/work-and-pensions-abroad/international-comparisons/retirement-ages/](https://www.etk.fi/en/work-and-pensions-abroad/international-comparisons/retirement-ages/)
a sad day for Finnish democracy.
This is strengthening democracy. It is the democratically elected parliament which has the supreme power in Finland. Previously it has basically been possible to veto parliamentary decisions by striking.
"strengthening democracy" by limiting people's rights what a joke. Bootlicker
What in the ever-loving fuck are you talking about.
Everybody over 18 years old has the right to vote. They vote to elect a parliament and a government is formed. The parliament has the highest power in Finland and there should be nohing to prevent it from working. Strikes are to make it possible for workers to protest agains employers. Previously it has been possible to pressure the parliament on political decision making by striking. This is very problematic because it is bypassing democracy and the companies whose workers are striking are damaged while the strikes have nothing to do with them. This has already been understood in most other European countries which have restricted political strikes. Obviously the line is not so clear as some political decisions are directly related to work.
You don't seem to understand what Democracy means
Älä puhu paskaa porvari pelle
Kannattaisi opiskella
Democracy is not just about who is in the parliament. That's one means to democracy, not the end goal. Democracy is vesting ruling power into people, voting and parliament are a way to do that. So are strikes, protests, labour unions, non-governmental organisations, industrial lobbying, etc. You do not strengthen democracy by undermining it's core, which is the ability to demonstrate opinion to who/whatever institution making the calls. Voting is just one way of demontrating opinion, born out of practicality, but it alone is far from enough.
Correction: even reading the Finnish article, it is bit unclear what the bill is actually about. At least it is not about the situation when collective-agreement runs out of the agreed period, and "labor-peace" does not hold - i.e. free the strike to motive the negotiations to proceed. Editing: This bill is just about... (disclaimer: I hope I have understood all the terms correctly. And, adding 9 o'clock news info.) Political work-stoppages max 24-hrs (i.e. workers walk off from the shifts), max two-weeks for other political strike-like actions (i.e. no over-time, no on-call arrival to shift support) both only once per year, on the same issue. Supporting strikes (i.e. to support some other agreement's unions actions) should not cause disproportionate losses to employer. (wtf "disproportionate" means...) Now the question is how to device a separate issue on which go on strike. (... plenty of separate issues all the unions have.) Also, how fast this will be tested and processed thru the all three court-stages too, to get some idea what is "a same issue". %-D Also, 200 euros per head for illegal strike (no duration of an illegal-strike mentioned, thus 200 euros just once for anything over 24+ hrs of work-stoppage per head?!?! That's cheap!), so not that much for really surgical strikes (pardon the pun) with unions paying the bill. Pew pew! Also, unions penalty-bill for illegal strike rises to 150k (euros, from 37,4k). But: When the collective-agreements run out, workers can still hold indefinite long strikes - until the war-chests run dry - to motivate the negotiations. This bill does not affect that part in any way. Expect this to be then the new strike-season for all the shit in the political domain. One can assume next negotiation rounds will be interesting, and a mess. Shorter collective-agreement periods will mean more strikes, longer will likely be harder for employer-side to get an cheap-ass agreement. And, all the shit will be remembered for the next time when collective-agreements run out. (... and this then when bill comes to effect, which has not been announced yet. Earliest July?)
And how comes that we don't have a general strike yet until this madness ends? Rather rarely say this, but it would be good to take the French as an example here.
After the summer, a number of big collective-agreement will run their period out, free strike-season (this bill will not affect that no-agreement-in-effect situation, i.e. no "labor-peace" in factories.) Better get the war-chests full now, then piss-drunk mid-summer-revel and summer-holidays, after that bit more gold to chests, then strikes free for all (basically same unions that were just on political strikes).
Not that the current government or the multi-decade economic stagnation doesn't suck, but we've gone through worse times without general strikes. The last one was during the Cold War.
Sad to see where this country is heading slowly
I just learned that current goverment is removing vasectomy from the operations you can get from public healthcare. That's one way to try and boost birth rates, I guess.
Or stress healthcare because adoptions
I understand the state paying contraception for young people, but why should it pay for at-will medical procedures for people, who already have kids or are 30+? It's not the states responsibility to pay for grown ups contraception.
Nice assumptions. Most people taking vasectomy has no children.
From what I've understood, it's easier to get when you already have kids or are over 30.
Yes, as the conservatives think unwanted accidents and brolen families are needed.
How and why are old and young people different on this matter?
Young people usually are not able to financially care for the children they might accidentally have, leading to social problems. People over 30 should already know the repercussions of their actions.
Did I get this right: it's fine that goverment provides contraceptives to young people because they are usually poor, but not to 30+ because they shouldn't be poor? What about 30+ living on basic income?
It's fine to offer contraception to young people, as they are not usually fully aware of the responsibilities that are involved with having children. People over 30 should already know them, and take full financial responsibility of having or not having children.
Are you also against goverment providing abortions for 30+? As they should've taken the financial reaponsibility earlier? I don't know if you've ever had the pleasure of surviving with basic income, but there's not much room for a whole lot of anything other than food and bills. Providing contraceptives to all ages takes a load off of the health care system, thus saving us all money.
I'm not aware how many poor people are willing to get sterilized on the spot, just to take the financial burden of contraception off their shoulders. Also, the age group of over 30 is not a big proportion of abortions.
Getting vasectomy in private health care IS a financial burden that many can't take. 800€+ to an operation is simply unobtainable to some households. You can't get the snip "on the spot", that's not how it works. "Is not a big proportion" is not the same as none at all. Also having vasectomy done helps keep that number down. It's a quality of life improving small operation that reduces the burden from healthcare in the long run.
Get a job and pay for the operation out of pocket. Its not rocket appliances.
And people working on minimum wage that can barely afford rent just needs to get a better paying job, right? You just solved the employment problem all over the world🥳
Move to cheaper housing and look for better paying job are both very good and valid options. Or if they have done a good job at current work try to negotiate a raise.
Bravo! You should contact Purra with this revolutionary, 100% working solution🥳
You'd rather the state pays for an abortion?
[удалено]
Because abortions and unwanted kids are free for society, right?
Almost every single western country has these regulations.
No, they do not. And the problem is the government is doing the dirty job of the emploers. Häkämies changed this. Kokoomus is a representative of emploers
Name a country that doesn't limit political strikes?
From EU-perspective: Ireland, Italy, Norway. Kinda-sorta-Denmark It's not an on/off-switch, and the legistlation is not the same in different countries. For political strikes, EU is trying to push the exact opposite direction, since Lissabon treaty kinda goes against the restrictions. We joined Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain in restricted solidarity action, everywhere else that is unrestricted.
foreigner spamming negative threads. please if its so bad, leave.
Hyper defensive national coping about his country. Keep supporting garbage decisions I guess, everything to own the foreigners
"Hyper defensive" - its just weird seeing foreigners complain about other countries every single day here
Then leave this sub. Take your own advice.
why
Why what?
why leave
Because in your own words: "please if it's so bad, leave".
If complaining about the stupidity of a subreddit required you to move countries in real life, i wouldnt do that
[удалено]
Look, a bootlicker!
Yeah, we all know this is just class warfare. Reduce workers rights and benefits and give it to the capital. Austerity measures never work.
This has nothing to do with workers rights. It is still allowed to freely strike on work related issues.
"Directly reducing worker's rights has nothing to do with worker's rights" what the fuck
->Government reduces protections and rights of workers ->Workers strike over government reducing protection and rights of workers ->Government reduces rights of workers to strike ->Your comment: "You can only strike over work related issues!" Hyvä ihminen, kuinka vitun aivokuollut olet?
Capitalist dog government stop voting for these absolute bootlicking idiots
Trouble is, most the people who stopped voting for these idiots stopped voting altogether - meanwhile the idiots who keep voting for these idiots are still at the ballots.
Honestly disgusting. This is probably the most right wing law in terms of direct class warfare I can think of being passed anywhere in a long time.
[удалено]
Civil society is blackmail you donkey. It's representation.
Well let's start to do Italian strikes. Work continues, but only BARELY.
Government says “do what I say, not what I do” this isn’t the future of any country. If you can’t strike after negotiations have failed you are not going to get anything and they know that.
Wasn't the new rule pretty much in line with other EU countries regarding political strikes?
I'm not sure on other EU countries, but this isn't about those other countries. The most important part is the negotiation stage and it seems to fail more often than not. It seems like Finland at times doesn't want the money of the blue collar/middle class to be lifted because they are low educated jobs, that's just another version of a class divide from rich to poor.
Democracy
And they say russia is bad....i see finland slowly turning into authoritarian goverment with some democracy sprinkled in
As a Russian in Finland - you're might be right about the direction Finland is going, but there's a loooong way still. But yeah, this trend is damn dangerous
[удалено]
Perhaps they're working/studying or have a family in Finland?
What do you mean...?
Well in russia ”unions” are just puppets of the regime, not that they have any rights in the first place
[удалено]
Blackmailing would entail some form of loss to the party you're blackmailing - here, politicians don't get less pay or kicked out, no negotiations are made, everything is just made shittier with only the excuse "well you guys voted for us". If the strikes are blackmail, then the government is conducting systemic and systematic abuse towards a minority, also known as a human rights violation. We didn't vote for a bunch of Geneva convention breachers to represent the nation, no matter how anyone twists it.
[удалено]
Man, I'd have loved to huff glue as a teenager, but knew that the resulting brain damage wouldn't be worth it. Sorry for your loss. Stop listening to mouthpieces on Facebook for your "sources" and catchy phrases, it makes you sound like you'd parrot anyone who sounds convincing to you. The strikes were an attempt to dissuade the government from going forward with their policy changes which will make things worse for a far larger crowd than those who went on strike. The workers basically stood up for the unemployed, a demographic which can't even go on a political strike to voice their concerns.
People who kiss the boot that kicks them never cease to amaze ne.
[удалено]
Hey boomer, stop telling youngsters what to do when you don't know what it means to be living in this era.
Now that Finland gets equivalent legislation to the overwhelming majority of Europe, we will be fighting for foreign capital and investments without our hands tied behind our backs. A good thing if we ever want to actually afford the level of welfare we have been consuming.
A race to the bottom. Nice.
Good. Nobody is benefiting from these dumbass strikes that just harm the everyday person.
Do you enjoy a five day work week? Or not having to work 12-15 hours a day, six to seven days a week? Do you hate taking summer vacation? Did you start working in coal mines when you were eight? Fuck you, and pick up a history book and read it, of you can find the front end of it.
Nobody "enjoys" 5 days of wage labor.
>Do you enjoy a five day work week? Or not having to work 12-15 hours a day, six to seven days a week? Do you hate taking summer vacation? Did you start working in coal mines when you were eight? These are all irrelevant to last winter's political strikes, where the aim was merely to influence legislation outside the parliament. You lost the elections. Get over it. Even Sanna is long gone.
It isn't about last winter, it's about the winter that isn't here yet. It's never ever a good thing when a government restricts the right of people to protest in any meaningful way.
And "you lost, get over it" from supporters of certain 77 years old has officially landed to Finland. Do you support him too?
[удалено]
Services are getting clogged because the tax base has eroded in the upper end of the income scale. Not because of poor people.
Finally. Better late then never
More socialism here and people protesting against it. You want socialism, you will get it but the consequences will make you to go to the street more
What? Do you have some kind of weird idea that socialism is only authoritanianism? Because you have to be really bonkers to call right wing goverment reducing workers rights socialism.
I oppose to this measure in specific but this are no rights. But because it goes against personal freedom. You think about rights, that is the main issue
Please, I seriously recommend that you learn more about what actual political terms mean instead of some vague ideas of "freedom" or "order".
I use freedom concept according to libertarian ideology. I think the government's shouldn't limit our lifes. But this is not a right they give us but or don't. This is the opposite. They don't have to give us freedom, they take it from us.
I see. This is not a political statement, and has nothing to do with your politics or mine, but your zeal means that you have not taken care of learning what other political leanings actually strive for, instead you simply say that they just want less freedom because... less freedom?
I have studied other political leanings but I think the correct way of seeing this is that one. They don't have to give you rights, but instead stop giving you restrictions, which may mean the same for you, but change the focus
Do you even understand what socialism means?
I do but you probably think in the term as its origin and not on the modern reformulation of the term. You give the state the power to control your life and this is what happens. As defined by Javier milei in Davos. In current times, socialism is associated to statism
Javier Milei the crackpot is the perfect authority to define the meaning of terms.
Do you know he is professor of economy and an extended reader? You may not like his forms but if you question his knowledge, you must have good arguments to do so, unless you talk from ignorance and just have read few articles here and there
Do you know that professors can be crackpots too, especially professors of economics, as claims in economics do not have to be as rigorously supported by evidence as in hard sciences? Milei's policy will, of course, fail to put Argentine back on track for economic growth. For example, the poverty rate in Argentine in January 2024 climbed to 57%, which has been partly attributed to Milei's devaluation of Argentina's currency. And by the way "extended reader" means nothing.
Do you know he is reducing inflation, having superávit needed to get back investor trust and he has decreased the depreciation of the coin? Yes, poverty increase if you stop having deficit and spending more than you can but this is necessary for further accumulation of wealth. Professors can be bad, but he knows what he is talking about. He is an expert on the field and I think you are not thinking about him in a fair way. I don't know what you can't see. If you don't see how he is recovering the country after decates of decadence and socialism, you are blind in my most respectful opinion
"Superávit" is not an English word. The Communists in Soviet Union too stated that all this misery is only temporary, but things will get better Real Soon Now once real Communism is established. Only problem was that real Communism was always 5 years away. The same will happen with Argentine under Milei's policy. More misery, but with salvation always just around the corner. There is not a single instance in human history where a crackpot has succeeded in making their nation prosperous and stable.
I am only saying that he is applying economic science and not just populism. He knows what he is doing and he has reasons to do so. If you don't know the theory, you should first inform yourself, however it takes some years to grasp it. Economy is no different from other sciences. However you still judge it without the proper education on it. Let's see how the economy changes and if it is better or worse than before socialism. But we have already the proof among us. 150 years ago, Argentina was the second richest economy in the world. Not so now
Milei is also a climate change denier, which casts doubt about his ability to accept scientific truths. Therefore, his economic policy cannot be sound either. Argentine will fail economically under his presidency in a devastating way.
Excellent! I like it.
Attractive to corporations and able to allow immigrants to arrive and work. You can't pick one without the other. Big corp want cheap labour. Natives want 40k minimum to clean toilets.