Perfect irony

The economic fall of #Greece after (which came because of) the introduction of that miserable common currency (the €) had been predicted, by statisticians, using a tool called #Benford’s law, also called the first-digit law, an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford’s_law

This law does not proove, but rather suggests that falsification of statistical reporting takes place. The bookkeeping the #Greek government turned into the EU, before the imposition of the currency, threw up red flags with statisticians that suggested the EU look into it. They either did and failed to find the truth, or they didn’t because it would throw off their plans for the future of the EU. Either way, an offense worthy of dismissal, wouldn’t you say?

Now, regarding the title of this post: Benford’s law has been applied to the reporting of all EU countries, and where some passed the test with flying colours, in particular #Austria (spiritual home of a certain school of economic thought) and #Belgium (venue of the real and proverbial seat of the EU: Brussels) both failed the test, and appear likely to be hiding something in their reporting. Wouldn’t it be lovely of Belgium, the home of the European government collapsed economically as a direct result of the #Euro? It would be horrible for the citizens, of course, but it would also be laugh out loud hilarious!

Advertisements

Referendums in Europe

BTW, if you can find a video by Matt Carthy MEP, view it, the guy’s brilliant, #UKIP has found a worthy spiritual successor. This is a very good one by @mattcarthy https://twitter.com/mattcarthy/status/915600381924790277?s=09

Spain had no moral right to declare this expression of the people illegal. They certainly had no democratic right to do so; a government (even a #junta) only ever has the right to listen to the people. Never any other right.

#Referendums in #Europe are a tragic cause: just look at the last 3 referendums held in the Netherlands.

  1. European constitution: rejected by a majority, so it was renamed and imposed anyway.
  2. IJburg (an artificial island in a river at Amsterdam to create more housing), rejected by 60%, but by way of a dirty trick (an advisory, not a binding referendum), the regime managed to have its way and cause all the environmental damage that 60% voted against.
  3. association treaty with the Ukrayne: the majority voted against, a blow to the prestige of PM Mark Rutte who was the serving president at the time (a rolling fuction, the person & country gets changed), so they desperately went searching for an underhanded means to,push it through anywau.

So, to sum up: #referendums (a #democratic tool) have no place in Europe, because there is no #democracy here.

Further proof: when, much to the displeasure of the political caste, the people had gathered enough autographs to enforce a referendum about the association treaty with the Ukrayne, the scumbags took to campaigning to influence the outcome of the referendum. That failed, so they did the next best thing and igored the outcone, tried to weasel their way anyway.

Don’t blame the Germans (novel idea)

Don’t blame the Germans for attrocities committed during/by Hitler’s regime. Because they were committed by the regime, not the people. People may have voted for Hitler, but one in power, they had no more influence on him, than did Americans who naively voted for hope and change.

Besides, it can reasonably be argued that Chamberlain started WW2, by declaring war on Hitler over the invasion of Poland – which was a bad thing, of course, but the war led directly to the invasion of all countries in the later eastern block, including Poland – which imho was worse than a (brief?) period of Hitler ruling over Poland with an Iron Cross.
Under communist rule (also socialists, remember that), Poland’s inhabitants suffered tremendously, but neighbouring countries’ inhabitants suffered equal amounts.
So what benefit had come to Poland from Chamberlain’s war over the invasion of it? They ended up occupied by a hostile foreign nation anyway, and the fighting againsttheoccupier perhaps also led to casualties.
Who knows, if after Poland, Hitler would have ordered the invasion of more countries? It would be an interesting object of study, and also for an alternative history-tale.

Imagine: a present without NATO – meaning of course, also a present without islamic counterterrorism. Since NATO was founded after the occupation of the eastern block by Stalin’s troops, in Europe; the occupation of Arabian countries by pro-western dictators, which led to 9/11.

Who will hand out IDs?

Since it’s none of the state’s business who I am, or where I go to/have been to, the state has nothing to do with handing out proof-of-Identification. To be able to enter my own home, unless I built a lock into my door, that worked that way.
Basically, every lock does, but carrying a mechanical or electrical key is enough evidence of identity for the vast majority of people, or typing a code into a key pad is.
So why would I not be allowed anywhere near my own home without a piece of paper or plastic with my photo+name on it? And why are those passports designed so dumbly? Because the old design for a passport, did not have a rigid plastic card built into them, so they were too easy to forge.
So nowadays, the owner (assuming that’s the person who’s picture+name is on it, not the government) can not reliably travel to another country with a passport.
Because the brittle plastic card in it (used to display your photo, name, date of birth, etc.) has a tendency to break when you sit on it, or whatever, making it harder for you to leave or get home, and since that is supposed to be the purpose of a passport, that is something the government fails at again, and this time, it isn’t even one of their permissable roles; it’s just an annoyance/hindrance, that serves no real purpose.

“But if you let just anybody into the country,”

Then what? Would you get upset if you lived in, say, Amsterdam, and the house next to yours got bought & inhabited by someone from the city of Deventer? Different city, different province, even! But because its the same country you suddenly don’t mind. But if those people moved out of the city of Bottrop, Germany, suddenly it is an issue worth getting upset about. Germany is a country immediately next to the Netherlands, they actually share a border. How is moving out of Germany different from moving out of Overijssel (the province where the city of Deventer is located)? Of course, people get really upset if it’s people from, say, Arabia or Africa, those are even worse than Germany (or Belgium, France, the UK – they Brexited the EU, proof they don’t even want to be our friends anymore!)

“They would use all sorts of government (taxpayer funded) services.”

So? Just abolish government / remove those services from the claws of government, where they don’t belong, anyway.

“Well, people from Overijssel pay the same taxes as we do.”
So, shared #victimhood is your criterion for acceptance? So Stockholm of you, dude!
I would get upset, if they started paying taxes here: more loot for the evil institution, that is against my interests.

What is the only legitimate purpose of an ID? Proof of identity when signing a contract, you don’t need a government registration for that!

Looming #demographic crisis in #Europe

#European #populations are aging fast, meaning the large wellfare states are becoming unaffordable. Fools blame the European people for that, as if the people have any influence on how the country runs us!
I simply refuse to comdemn any children to this certain future of:

  1. Poverty
  2. Despair
  3. Opression
  4. Victimization by politicians

So don’t bring up the fashionable complaint of muslims immigrating into society being the only way to be able to continue to afford the costly (politically-propelled) welfare-state, which is another political monstrosity forced down our throats, which we cannot get rid of, without abolishing the whiole ridiculous concept of the state.

The problem is, that the “civillized” states of western Europe are democracies (as hinted at in https://ludwigvanel.wordpress.com/2017/06/23/representative-repressive/ democratic derives from the Greek words demos – meaning as much as “people” – and cratos – “power”, so #democracy in the modern interpretation means power OVER the people. Never ever TO the people, oh no: that’s why every time there’s a #referendum here in the Netherlands, it’s never binding, only advisory; in case (in each and every one) the people want something else from what the government wants.
The only kind of proper democracy is #statelesness.

The totalitarian justification

The French did miss out on a brilliant opportunity regarding the EU by not voting for Le Pen. On the other hand it should not (no doubt it will, but it should not. It simply can’t) be taken as agreement with #Macron’s views of the #EU. There is no way that the conclusion can be drawn that the people wanted to stay in the EU. The French government, like all western-style “#democracies” is #totalitarian. So given all the aspects of life the government interferes with, it is inpossible to point to one single aspect and say that the election proved that this is what the people want.
Even with referenda it would be difficult. If the people would consider what the consequences of a certain vote for a referendum would be, they may imagine consequences ifthey vote yes, that bear no relation with reality. So, they may be spooked into voting “no”, though they may prefer to vote “yes”.
In the mean time, the #French did not do the rest of the citizens in Europe a favor by voting for the pro-European Macron. Which proves that there is no unity among the citizens of Europe, so: ditch the #EU already, the U is horribly out of place