Federated Republic of Sean is a user on retro.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

My programming language is better than yours Show more

re: [thread], pol Show more

re: [thread], pol Show more

re: [thread], pol Show more

re: [thread], pol Show more

re: [thread], pol Show more

@Wolf480pl @cjd @freakazoid @dazinism The balkanization of Balkan could be viewed more directly as evidence that people *believe* ethnostates to be more stable. But as social constructs are built on feedback loops, that may very well turn out to mean that they are, in fact, more stable. ๐Ÿ˜€

As I understand it though, the main problem with Yugoslavia was that the unifying force and idea was a personality cult around Tito, and the disintegration following his death was slower than might have been expected. A multi-ethnic state forged without force and with a more sustainable unifying idea than one person would stand a better chance.

@clacke @cjd @freakazoid @dazinism
But to have a unifying force, don't you need common values? And once you have common values, doesn't it become a single culture?

@Wolf480pl
I'm a bit pessimistic on the future of the EU because the US, with a single common language and national back story, still at some point it almost disintegrated and was only saved by a brutal show of force. Also the north and south have gravitated into the blue team and the red team who still fight like cats and dogs.
@clacke @freakazoid @dazinism

@cjd
IMO EU isn't supposed to be a single state. I'd rather it be an economical (and maybe millitary) alliance, aggregating the bargaining power of member states against giants like US, Russia, and China.

Haven't dug into it, but it looks like most of the major issues stem from the freedom of movement assumption. Now, I still think freedom of movement is a nice thing, but maybe we need to revisit its pros and cons, or tweak it a bit.
@clacke @freakazoid @dazinism

@Wolf480pl @dazinism @clacke @cjd Whether or not it's supposed to be a single state, it is. They have a parliament that passes far-reaching laws. They have a single currency and each member is allowed to issue debt that is considered (whether or not it's justified) to have the backing of the entire union. They have few to no internal border controls and strong(ish) external border controls. They are far more of a state than the US was under the Articles of Confederation.

@freakazoid @cjd @clacke @dazinism
>They have a single currency

That's Eurozone, not the whole EU. Many EU countries do not have Euro as their currency.

> They have a parliament that passes far-reaching laws.

Which then need to be ratified by each member state's own parliament before they enter into force.

>They have few to no internal border controls and strong(ish) external border controls.

That's Schengen Area, not EU. It mostly overlaps, but there are countries outside of EU which are in Schengen, and EU members which are not in Schengen.

@Wolf480pl @dazinism @clacke @cjd I can't find evidence of a ratification process beyond passing the Council (55% of states representing 65% of the population) and Parliament. Members get latitude in how they actually implement legislation via their own internal legislation, but that's the most I can find. It's more authority than the central government had under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles required unanimity.

...

@cjd @clacke @dazinism @Wolf480pl The fact that the Eurozone, EU, and Schengen are not the same thing just means it's a dysfunctional state, not that it's not a state ;-)

I think we can at least agree that they're in an unstable region of configuration space right now, and something needs to change. I think that restricting internal freedom of movement or trade would be economically devastating and essentially take Europe out of the running as a world power.

@freakazoid @dazinism @clacke @cjd

With regard to freedom of movement - I don't know enough about economics to be able to assess how bad it'd be to restrict it.

As for freedom of trade - I think you're the first one here to suggest restricting it, and I think you can have freedom of trade without being a single state, and with each member having their own currency.

Also, I don't think being able to pick and choose some of the EU-related treaties without accepting other ones would necessarily be an unstable configuration.

And even if some models are impractical to implement in EU right now, I'd like to explore the configuration space in an abstract way, to see what configurations are theoretically possible.

@Wolf480pl @cjd @clacke @dazinism AFAICT the instability comes from having a common currency without automatic wealth transfers, which can result in deflation and potentially default within individual member states.

One can definitely have freedom of trade without a common currency, but having your own currency means you can do the equivalent of enacting tariffs by devaluing your currency. With restrictions on tariffs, the likely outcome is competitive devaluation.

@freakazoid @dazinism @clacke @cjd

Hm... in Poland we recently had deflation for a moment. But we're not in Eurozone. We still have our own currency... so why are we not devaluing our currency to create the effect of tarrifs? (if we did that, we'd have inflation, right?)

Federated Republic of Sean @freakazoid

@Wolf480pl @cjd @clacke @dazinism It's an interesting question. The NBP seems unwilling to drop their benchmark interest rate below 1.5% for whatever reason. Poland has a significantly lower debt to GDP ratio, including for private debt, than even Germany, so maybe they didn't consider a couple years of deflation to be that big a problem?

1.5% is still a pretty low rate historically, though; it was a record low for the NBP. And the Zloty did drop 11% against the dollar during that period.

ยท Web ยท 0 ยท 2

@freakazoid @dazinism @clacke @cjd
hm, so low interest rates cause currency to devalue?

@Wolf480pl @cjd @clacke @dazinism Actually I guess it was about 27% against the dollar, but it was relatively stable against the Euro, so it seems like things in Poland may have been affected more by what was going on with the rest of Europe than anything else.

Devaluation is hard to define with modern fiat currencies. Lowering interest rates has the effect of discouraging holding of it, plus the way central banks lower rates is by increasing the supply, usually by buying government debt.

@dazinism @clacke @cjd @Wolf480pl If you define the value of a currency by CPI, then by definition it wasn't devalued. But CPI looks at a specific set of prices. It appears to have been declining food and energy prices that caused Poland's deflation, not declining wages. Unemployment appears to have peaked in Poland just before the inflation started and has declined ever since. Which may actually be the reason the NBP didn't feel the need to lower rates further.