Iniciar uma discussão

1. • eu
   • 11 novembro 2016

    # 261

   Aquilo era uma peça de comédia, obviamente não se pode generalizar a partir daqueles... espécimes.
2. • ramos1999
   • 11 novembro 2016 ^editado

    # 262

   em França continuam manifestações de pessoas que vivem junto dos emigrantes acabados de chegar, ruído,ruas sujas,medo de sair a noite (19H)quando tem acampados em pleno Paris 3000 migrantes HOMENS não se ve uma unica mulher ,as mulheres tem medo de andar na rua nestes espaços e os politicos não fazem nada para resolver esta situação miseravel,fui o outro dia trabalhar perto e nunca vi tanta miseria junta,ruas com urina e excrementos em todos os cantos,,jovens sem fazer nada ao alto a olhar para as pessoas e um gajo nem sabe se vai ser assaltado ou não ,quando esta nas estatisticas que os assaltos aumentaram em flecha nessas zonas imagino os habitantes que ja se queixaram,,ninguem que faça nada que sera uma vitoria para a Le Pen ,ja tem quem se manifeste com a instalação destes acampamentos perto de casa pois o governo instala-os e depois abandona-os e no fim temos duas culturas totalmente diferentes a quererem se matar uma a outra!!se è para acolher então que acolham ou então que os recambiem,,cada vez acredito mais que a extrema direita vai ganhar pois ja nos estão a apresentar os mesmos politicos de sempre o Sarkozy e Hollande sendo a unica diferente a Le Pen e a unica a falar no problema migratorio que vive a europa e que os outros dizem que vai tudo bem e não existe nenhum problema!
   
   http://www.leparisien.fr/versailles-78000/versailles-les-anti-migrants-manifestent-au-chateau-11-11-2016-6317547.php

   Concordam com este comentário: Joao Dias
3. • ramos1999
   • 12 novembro 2016 ^editado

    # 263

   https://www.facebook.com/www.JOE.co.uk/videos/774886846008717/
4. • branco.valter
   • 12 novembro 2016

    # 264

   History tells us what may happen next with Brexit & Trump
   
   It seems we’re entering another of those stupid seasons humans impose on themselves at fairly regular intervals. I am sketching out here opinions based on information, they may prove right, or may prove wrong, and they’re intended just to challenge and be part of a wider dialogue.
   
   My background is archaeology, so also history and anthropology. It leads me to look at big historical patterns. My theory is that most peoples’ perspective of history is limited to the experience communicated by their parents and grandparents, so 50–100 years. To go beyond that you have to read, study, and learn to untangle the propaganda that is inevitable in all telling of history. In a nutshell, at university I would fail a paper if I didn’t compare at least two, if not three opposing views on a topic. Taking one telling of events as gospel doesn’t wash in the comparative analytical method of research that forms the core of British academia. (I can’t speak for other systems, but they’re definitely not all alike in this way).
   
   So zooming out, we humans have a habit of going into phases of mass destruction, generally self imposed to some extent or another. This handy list shows all the wars over time. Wars are actually the norm for humans, but every now and then something big comes along. I am interested in the Black Death, which devastated Europe. The opening of Boccaccio’s Decameron describes Florence in the grips of the Plague. It is as beyond imagination as the Somme, Hiroshima, or the Holocaust. I mean, you quite literally can’t put yourself there and imagine what it was like. For those in the midst of the Plague it must have felt like the end of the world.
   
   But a defining feature of humans is their resilience. To us now it seems obvious that we survived the Plague, but to people at the time it must have seemed incredible that their society continued afterwards. Indeed, many takes on the effects of the Black Death are that it had a positive impact in the long term. Well summed up here: “By targeting frail people of all ages, and killing them by the hundreds of thousands within an extremely short period of time, the Black Death might have represented a strong force of natural selection and removed the weakest individuals on a very broad scale within Europe,“ …In addition, the Black Death significantly changed the social structure of some European regions. Tragic depopulation created the shortage of working people. This shortage caused wages to rise. Products prices fell too. Consequently, standards of living increased. For instance, people started to consume more food of higher quality.”
   
   But for the people living through it, as with the World Wars, Soviet Famines, Holocaust, it must have felt inconceivable that humans could rise up from it. The collapse of the Roman Empire, Black Death, Spanish Inquisition, Thirty Years War, War of the Roses, English Civil War… it’s a long list. Events of massive destruction from which humanity recovered and move on, often in better shape.
   
   At a local level in time people think things are fine, then things rapidly spiral out of control until they become unstoppable, and we wreak massive destruction on ourselves. For the people living in the midst of this it is hard to see happening and hard to understand. To historians later it all makes sense and we see clearly how one thing led to another. During the Centenary of the Battle of the Somme I was struck that it was a direct outcome of the assassination of an Austrian Arch Duke in Bosnia. I very much doubt anyone at the time thought the killing of a European royal would lead to the death of 17 million people.
   
   My point is that this is a cycle. It happens again and again, but as most people only have a 50–100 year historical perspective they don’t see that it’s happening again. As the events that led to the First World War unfolded, there were a few brilliant minds who started to warn that something big was wrong, that the web of treaties across Europe could lead to a war, but they were dismissed as hysterical, mad, or fools, as is always the way, and as people who worry about Putin, Brexit, and Trump are dismissed now.
   
   Then after the War to end all Wars, we went and had another one. Again, for a historian it was quite predictable. Lead people to feel they have lost control of their country and destiny, people look for scapegoats, a charismatic leader captures the popular mood, and singles out that scapegoat. He talks in rhetoric that has no detail, and drums up anger and hatred. Soon the masses start to move as one, without any logic driving their actions, and the whole becomes unstoppable.
   
   That was Hitler, but it was also Mussolini, Stalin, Putin, Mugabe, and so many more. Mugabe is a very good case in point. He whipped up national anger and hatred towards the land owning white minority (who happened to know how to run farms), and seized their land to redistribute to the people, in a great populist move which in the end unravelled the economy and farming industry and left the people in possession of land, but starving. See also the famines created by the Soviet Union, and the one caused by the Chinese Communists last century in which 20–40 million people died. It seems inconceivable that people could create a situation in which tens of millions of people die without reason, but we do it again and again.
   
   But at the time people don’t realise they’re embarking on a route that will lead to a destruction period. They think they’re right, they’re cheered on by jeering angry mobs, their critics are mocked. This cycle, the one we saw for example from the Treaty of Versaille, to the rise of Hitler, to the Second World War, appears to be happening again. But as with before, most people cannot see it because:
   
   1. They are only looking at the present, not the past or future
   
   2. They are only looking immediately around them, not at how events connect globally
   
   3. Most people don’t read, think, challenge, or hear opposing views
   
   Trump is doing this in America. Those of us with some oversight from history can see it happening. Read this brilliant, long essay in the New York magazine to understand how Plato described all this, and it is happening just as he predicted. Trump says he will Make America Great Again, when in fact America is currently great, according to pretty well any statistics. He is using passion, anger, and rhetoric in the same way all his predecessors did — a charismatic narcissist who feeds on the crowd to become ever stronger, creating a cult around himself. You can blame society, politicians, the media, for America getting to the point that it’s ready for Trump, but the bigger historical picture is that history generally plays out the same way each time someone like him becomes the boss.
   
   On a wider stage, zoom out some more, Russia is a dictatorship with a charismatic leader using fear and passion to establish a cult around himself. Turkey is now there too. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia are heading that way, and across Europe more Trumps and Putins are waiting in the wings, in fact funded by Putin, waiting for the popular tide to turn their way.
   
   We should be asking ourselves what our Archduke Ferdinand moment will be. How will an apparently small event trigger another period of massive destruction. We see Brexit, Trump, Putin in isolation. The world does not work that way — all things are connected and affecting each other. I have pro-Brexit friends who say ‘oh, you’re going to blame that on Brexit too??’ But they don’t realise that actually, yes, historians will trace neat lines from apparently unrelated events back to major political and social shifts like Brexit.
   
   Brexit — a group of angry people winning a fight — easily inspires other groups of angry people to start a similar fight, empowered with the idea that they may win. That alone can trigger chain reactions. A nuclear explosion is not caused by one atom splitting, but by the impact of the first atom that splits causing multiple other atoms near it to split, and they in turn causing multiple atoms to split. The exponential increase in atoms splitting, and their combined energy is the bomb. That is how World War One started and, ironically how World War Two ended.
   
   An example of how Brexit could lead to a nuclear war could be this:
   
   Brexit in the UK causes Italy or France to have a similar referendum. Le Pen wins an election in France. Europe now has a fractured EU. The EU, for all its many awful faults, has prevented a war in Europe for longer than ever before. The EU is also a major force in suppressing Putin’s military ambitions. European sanctions on Russia really hit the economy, and helped temper Russia’s attacks on Ukraine (there is a reason bad guys always want a weaker European Union). Trump wins in the US. Trump becomes isolationist, which weakens NATO. He has already said he would not automatically honour NATO commitments in the face of a Russian attack on the Baltics.
   
   With a fractured EU, and weakened NATO, Putin, facing an ongoing economic and social crisis in Russia, needs another foreign distraction around which to rally his people. He funds far right anti-EU activists in Latvia, who then create a reason for an uprising of the Russian Latvians in the East of the country (the EU border with Russia). Russia sends ‘peace keeping forces’ and ‘aid lorries’ into Latvia, as it did in Georgia, and in Ukraine. He annexes Eastern Latvia as he did Eastern Ukraine (Crimea has the same population as Latvia, by the way).
   
   A divided Europe, with the leaders of France, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and others now pro-Russia, anti-EU, and funded by Putin, overrule calls for sanctions or a military response. NATO is slow to respond: Trump does not want America to be involved, and a large part of Europe is indifferent or blocking any action. Russia, seeing no real resistance to their actions, move further into Latvia, and then into Eastern Estonia and Lithuania. The Baltic States declare war on Russia and start to retaliate, as they have now been invaded so have no choice. Half of Europe sides with them, a few countries remain neutral, and a few side with Russia. Where does Turkey stand on this? How does ISIS respond to a new war in Europe? Who uses a nuclear weapon first?
   This is just one Arch Duke Ferdinand scenario. The number of possible scenarios are infinite due to the massive complexity of the many moving parts. And of course many of them lead to nothing happening. But based on history we are due another period of destruction, and based on history all the indicators are that we are entering one.
   
   It will come in ways we can’t see coming, and will spin out of control so fast people won’t be able to stop it. Historians will look back and make sense of it all and wonder how we could all have been so naïve. How could I sit in a nice café in London, writing this, without wanting to run away. How could people read it and make sarcastic and dismissive comments about how pro-Remain people should stop whining, and how we shouldn’t blame everything on Brexit. Others will read this and sneer at me for saying America is in great shape, that Trump is a possible future Hitler (and yes, Godwin’s Law. But my comparison is to another narcissistic, charismatic leader fanning flames of hatred until things spiral out of control). It’s easy to jump to conclusions that oppose pessimistic predictions based on the weight of history and learning. Trump won against the other Republicans in debates by countering their claims by calling them names and dismissing them. It’s an easy route but the wrong one.
   
   Ignoring and mocking the experts , as people are doing around Brexit and Trump’s campaign, is no different to ignoring a doctor who tells you to stop smoking, and then finding later you’ve developed incurable cancer. A little thing leads to an unstoppable destruction that could have been prevented if you’d listened and thought a bit. But people smoke, and people die from it. That is the way of the human.
   
   So I feel it’s all inevitable. I don’t know what it will be, but we are entering a bad phase. It will be unpleasant for those living through it, maybe even will unravel into being hellish and beyond imagination. Humans will come out the other side, recover, and move on. The human race will be fine, changed, maybe better. But for those at the sharp end — for the thousands of Turkish teachers who just got fired, for the Turkish journalists and lawyers in prison, for the Russian dissidents in gulags, for people lying wounded in French hospitals after terrorist attacks, for those yet to fall, this will be their Somme.
   
   What can we do? Well, again, looking back, probably not much. The liberal intellectuals are always in the minority. See Clay Shirky’s Twitter Storm on this point. The people who see that open societies, being nice to other people, not being racist, not fighting wars, is a better way to live, they generally end up losing these fights. They don’t fight dirty. They are terrible at appealing to the populace. They are less violent, so end up in prisons, camps, and graves. We need to beware not to become divided (see: Labour party), we need to avoid getting lost in arguing through facts and logic, and counter the populist messages of passion and anger with our own similar messages. We need to understand and use social media. We need to harness a different fear. Fear of another World War nearly stopped World War 2, but didn’t. We need to avoid our own echo chambers. Trump and Putin supporters don’t read the Guardian, so writing there is just reassuring our friends. We need to find a way to bridge from our closed groups to other closed groups, try to cross the ever widening social divides.
   (Perhaps I’m just writing this so I can be remembered by history as one of the people who saw it coming.)
   
   https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714?inf_contact_key=8c16632de1fe6967ef8db5ef7f42dbf56d7ba245203212d0cf70250e77536db0#.efhasnd3g
5. • branco.valter
   • 12 novembro 2016

    # 265

   Donald Trump: I may not repeal Obamacare, President-elect says in major U-turn
   
   Getting rid of the healthcare plan was among billionaire businessman's biggest campaign promises
   
   http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-obamacare-repeals-latest-policies-quote-replacement-president-elect-a7412621.html
6. • eu
   • 12 novembro 2016

    # 266

   Colocado por: branco.valterDonald Trump: I may not repeal Obamacare, President-elect says in major U-turn
   

   
   Ainda bem que algumas asneiras que andou a dizer durante a campanha não passaram de bulshit...
7. • J.Fernandes
   • 12 novembro 2016

    # 267

   Já que alguém tem de ser o advogado do diabo, aqui vai um artigo de um autor com quem genericamente me identifico ideologicamente, que é da opinião que entre dois males, Hillary acabaria por ser um mal maior:
   
   http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell110816.php3
8. • eu
   • 13 novembro 2016

    # 268

   Artigo interessante.
   
   Só daqui a 4 anos é que saberemos afinal qual era o menor dos males. O Trump tanto se pode revelar uma agradável surpresa como um desastre total, não só para os EUA, como para todo o mundo...
   
   Esperemos para ver...

   Concordam com este comentário: 21papaleguas
9. •  
     Luis K. W.
   • 13 novembro 2016

    # 269

   Colocado por: J.FernandesSerá que os milhões de empregos criados nos últimos anos são, no geral, muito pior pagos que em décadas anteriores, não permitindo um nível de vida como no tempo dos seus pais, isto é, ter casa própria, um ou dois carros, boas pensões de reforma, etc., etc.?

   
   Retomando este comentário, há muito nisto de PROPAGANDA do "american way of life".
   
   A grande maioria dos brancos americanos É POBRE ("hillbillies", "rednecks", etc., que povoam todo o centro dos EUA).
   São os tais "white trash", brancos tradicionalmente pobres, referidos no artigo do público (https://www.publico.pt/mundo/noticia/white-trash-ou-a-pobreza-enquanto-tradicao-americana-1750642), que levaram à vitória do Trump.
10. • ramos1999
    • 13 novembro 2016

     # 270

    A única coisa que acredito que o Trump vai mexer será no acordo climático vai criar empregos derivados a isso mas aumentara a poluição,,também acredito que comece a controlar e a expulsar mais ilegais,,nos muçulmanos não vai tocar mas controlara,,as empresas americanas serão beneficiadas em relação as exteriores e logicamente eles ficarao a ganhar,,neste momento as políticas mais poluidoras levam a crescimentos mais rápidos mas a longo prazo ja sabemos
11. • J.Fernandes
    • 13 novembro 2016

     # 271

    Colocado por: Luis K. W.Retomando este comentário, há muito nisto de PROPAGANDA do "american way of life".
    
    A grande maioria dos brancos americanos É POBRE ("hillbillies", "rednecks", etc., que povoam todo o centro dos EUA).
    São os tais "white trash", brancos tradicionalmente pobres, referidos no artigo do público (https://www.publico.pt/mundo/noticia/white-trash-ou-a-pobreza-enquanto-tradicao-americana-1750642), que levaram à vitória do Trump.

    
    Não nos deixemos iludir, ser considerado pobre nos EUA , pelo critérios oficiais, é muito diferente do que sê-lo em Portugal. Grande parte da classe média portuguesa está abaixo do limiar de pobreza americano. Com mais tempo posso procurar dados objectivos, mas a título de exemplo, na cidade de NY um rendimento mensal de menos de 3000usd, se bem me lembro, é considerado abaixo desse limiar.
12. • ramos1999
    • 13 novembro 2016 ^editado

     # 272

    Colocado por: J.Fernandes
    Não nos deixemos iludir, ser considerado pobre nos EUA , pelo critérios oficiais, é muito diferente do que sê-lo em Portugal. Grande parte da classe média portuguesa está abaixo do limiar de pobreza americano. Com mais tempo posso procurar dados objectivos, mas a título de exemplo, na cidade de NY um rendimento mensal de menos de 3000usd, se bem me lembro, é considerado abaixo desse limiar.

    
    esta muito enganado,,na América ser pobre é ser miserável,,,umas simples analises de sangue custam 800 dolares e se não tiver dinheiro deixam morrer a entrada dos hospitais,,,a América não se resume unicamente a nova iorque,,em termos de ajudas Portugal que não ajuda ninguém ja ajuda mais que a América e tem la muita gente que nem 5 dolares ganham a hora a pagar o dobro das rendas de Portugal,vivi meio ano la e tenho família a 50 anos la e bazei,,,aquilo ou é tudo ou nada,,tenho uma familiar que estava bem da vida tinha casa e casa alugada,,de um dia para o outro diagnósticaram um cancro no estômago penhorou a casa,carro tudo para pagar os tratamentos e faleceu,,pais miserável,,neste momento o meu cunhado paga 500 euros mensais de obamacare e vê se a rasca ao fim do mês pois é obrigado,,miséria é miséria em todo o lado,,vou começar a tirar fotos da miséria que vejo em Paris e depois falamos,,
    
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVnRtfXJ-oo

    Concordam com este comentário: eu, Bricoleiro
13. •  
      Picareta
    • 13 novembro 2016

     # 273

    Colocado por: J.Fernandesna cidade de NY um rendimento mensal de menos de 3000usd, se bem me lembro, é considerado abaixo desse limiar.

    
    Claro, isso dá apenas para arrendar um quarto para dormir.
14. • J.Fernandes
    • 13 novembro 2016

     # 274

    Colocado por: PicaretaClaro, isso dá apenas para arrendar um quarto para dormir.

    
    Quem ganha $3000 em NYC, obviamente que vive fora, em NJ ou coisa parecida.
    Cá é a mesma coisa, acha que quem ganha 1000€/mês, tem um apartamento nas zonas mais caras de Lisboa? E no entanto com esse salário fica um bocado acima do nosso limiar de pobreza.
15. •  
      Sergio Rodrigues
    • 14 novembro 2016

     # 275

    https://www.facebook.com/www.JOE.co.uk/videos/774886846008717/
16. • branco.valter
    • 15 novembro 2016

     # 276

    A China reage às propostas do Trump...
    
    China threatens to cut sales of iPhones and US cars if 'naive' Trump pursues trade war
    
    President-elect ‘will be condemned for his recklessness, ignorance and incompetence’ if he imposes tariffs, says Communist party-controlled paper
    
    Tom Phillips in Beijing
    Monday 14 November 2016 08.06 GMT
    
    
    US president-elect Donald Trump would be a “naive” fool to launch an all-out trade war against China, a Communist party-controlled newspaper has claimed.
    
    During the acrimonious race for the White House Trump repeatedly lashed out at China, vowing to punish Beijing with “defensive” 45% tariffs on Chinese imports and to officially declare it a currency manipulator.
    
    “When they see that they will stop the cheating,” the billionaire Republican, who has accused Beijing of “the greatest theft in the history of the world”, told a rally in August.
    
    On Monday the state-run Global Times warned that such measures would be a grave mistake.
    
    “If Trump wrecks Sino-US trade, a number of US industries will be impaired. Finally the new president will be condemned for his recklessness, ignorance and incompetence,” the newspaper said in an editorial.
    
    The Global Times claimed any new tariffs would trigger immediate “countermeasures” and “tit-for-tat approach” from Beijing.
    
    A batch of Boeing orders will be replaced by Airbus. US auto and iPhone sales in China will suffer a setback, and US soybean and maize imports will be halted. China can also limit the number of Chinese students studying in the US.
    
    “Making things difficult for China politically will do him no good,” the newspaper warned.
    
    China’s foreign ministry has used more diplomatic language to caution Trump not to square up to Beijing.
    
    Foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang told reporters last week: “I believe that any US politician, if he takes the interests of his own people first, will adopt a policy that is conducive to the economic and trade cooperation between China and the US.”
    
    The excoriating editorial was printed hours after Trump spoke to China’s president, Xi Jinping. The president-elect’s staff said Trump thanked Xi for his well wishes and congratulations on his election victory.
    
    The statement read: “During the call, the leaders established a clear sense of mutual respect for one another, and President-elect Trump stated that he believes the two leaders will have one of the strongest relationships for both countries moving forward.”
    
    However, experts say officials in Beijing are still battling to untangle what a Trump presidency means for relations between the world’s two largest economies but wager he is unlikely to follow through on his most radical campaign pledges such as imposing 45% tariffs on “cheating China”.
    
    Paul Haenle, a veteran US diplomat who is director of the Carnegie-Tsinghua centre at Beijing’s Tsinghua University, said: “The biggest lesson that they draw from watching our presidential campaigns over the years is that he will become more realistic and more pragmatic once he is in the position where he has to govern. That is what they are hoping for when it comes to Trump.”
    
    “If he follows through on a 45% trade tariff then I think it will be damaging to our own interests and we will have fallout that will affect our own companies and our own economy and it won’t be effective. It will not achieve what he is setting out to achieve. So from that standpoint he is going to have to moderate some of that rhetoric as he puts together actual concrete policies.”
    
    Jorge Guajardo, Mexico’s former ambassador to China, said he too expected Trump to moderate many of his audacious campaign pledges when he took office.
    
    “He’s in the hot seat now. He has got to deliver. It’s not the same as campaigning,” he said.
    
    Guajardo said Trump’s bluster would be quickly replaced with more realistic talk as he understood that serious engagement with Beijing was now needed on a range of key issues including the Paris climate deal, North Korea and trade ties.
    
    Attempts to strike a deal would soon be set in motion with Trump and the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, likely to come together early in his presidency, Guajardo predicted. “He’s a deal-maker and nobody is more of a deal-maker than China.”
    
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/14/china-threatens-to-cut-sales-of-iphones-and-us-cars-if-naive-trump-pursues-trade-war
17. • ramos1999
    • 15 novembro 2016

     # 277

    O branco eu ate percebo e sei ler um pouco inglês,mas textos tão longos da para cansar o cérebro
18. • branco.valter
    • 15 novembro 2016

     # 278

    Isto é longo?! Eu este fim-de-semana li um artigo que imprimi para ver mais tarde... tudo em inglês e 4 páginas sem fotografias.
    
    Vamos lá, não há pequenos-almoços grátis, para recolher informação há que fazer-se um esforço.

    Concordam com este comentário: eu, Joao Dias, Vítor Magalhães
19. • eu
    • 15 novembro 2016 ^editado

     # 279

    Colocado por: ramos1999O branco eu ate percebo e sei ler um pouco inglês,mas textos tão longos da para cansar o cérebro

    
    Ficas cansado com muito pouco...
    
    De qualquer das formas, o artigo é trivial, diz apenas o que qualquer pessoa minimamente inteligente já tinha percebido: se os USA começarem a impor medidas protecionistas, os outros fazem o mesmo.
    
    Por isso, não acredito que essas medidas Trumpistas avancem mesmo...
20. • branco.valter
    • 15 novembro 2016

     # 280

    Para mim qualquer pessoa quando é eleita começa do branco. Ou seja, esqueçam o que ele disse, vamos ver isso sim o que ele faz. Duvido que ele faça metade do que prometeu, especialmente quando começar a ver as possíveis consequências.