“The left” aren’t pro illegal migration, never have been and never will be. Thats a right wing trope and anyone who falls for it is a moron, sorry. Not allowing in vast amounts of cheap labour, to bring down wages, benefits the people funding the right wing parties, not anyone remotely left leaning. I’m also willing to bet that the bigger problem is the legal migration system the right wing allowed business interests to fuck into the ground, to stop wages from rising.

Ok, then a brutal question: why are they opposing the mass deportation of illegal immigrants ?

How do you think tax cuts for the rich are paid for? All the money that should be going towards those things are going into the wealthy pockets of the people who then convince you the problem is anything but them.

Ok, that’s true but overall I don’t think that not cutting the taxes to the rich could put a dent in the total amount (btw, how much one need to earn to be defined rich ?). I mean, I fully support the idea that everyone should pay the taxes based on how much they earns but I don’t understand this idea that the rich are the source of all the problems. Yeah, they may not pay that much taxes but they are also a really small number.

The housing crisis for you and me is the record profit boon for landlords and property developers.

That’s true if you and me can buy (or rent) an house. If you and me need to stay in our parent’s house, the landords and property developers end with empty houses (landlords) or bankrupt. And there are other factors to contribute to the house crisis other than the price.

Youre saying they haven’t been in power for 6 years but its still all their fault? That seems a stretch.

In the UK ? I am not saying it is all their fault but for example in Italy we will pay the damages done by the left (and an idiot on the right) for years to come, whatever the left or the right will be in power.

I never said that once let alone continued. Please drop the victim complex and some people do stupid things. I do stupid things too. However, believing the right wing will save people from themselves is a stupid thing i don’t do.

Look, it is not to play the victim card. The point is that when people vote you need to convince them to vote for you. It is not always a rationale reasoning, I agree, but in general people tends to vote for who say will handle the problems people have (or think to have) in the day by day.
Now, in UK the right were voted, they did not well so now people will presumably vote for the left. Good. In Italy we have the opposite situation: the left was voted, they did not do well and now people vote the right. BTW, in Italy the right wing won because at the last elections people who vote for the left wing did not showed up to vote, now they cannot cry “the right win”, they should have moved their ass that day.

The question is: can we really blame someone that have (or think to have) a problem when he vote for the side that at least acknowledge the problem ? Yeah, most of the time he would not belive in what that side promise but what’s the alternative ?

But sure, keep acting the victim and blaming everyone else. See if that makes me vote for you.

Probably not.

I can do that too you know. I just choose not to.

I know. But even choosing to continue to vote for someone that not solve the problems does not seems a good idea.

Thats just an overly sweeping, thought terminating, cliché thats only ever said by people who would never vote left of Reagan anyway. You’ll excuse me if I don’t bother arguing that “da left” policies =/= zero, I’m sure.

Fair enough and you are welcome.

I think you would struggle to show me anything with “the left” saying there are no problems.

The mayor of Milano for one. Even if some area of the city are basically off-limits after a certain time, expecially for women.

They might not agree with made up problems that don’t contribute to the difficulties people face but that’s not the same thing.

Again, fair enough. They can think that it is a made up problem. But what should be the correct answer ? Because if I say “look, there is too many illegal immigrants around in this area of Milano (Stazione Centrale) and it is not safe because of the petty crimes”, the answer could not be “you are too ignorant to understand why it is not a problem”, you should explain to my how having thousands of illegal immigrant around living by petty crimes is not a problem, if you can (just an example btw).
Or if I ask for more kindergartens so I can have children you cannot answer to me that we are already too many and the next week say that we need to welcome more immigrants because the population is declining.

Of course, I must be wrong. Its not wealthy business interests who benefit from the housing crisis or falling wages.

Ok, assuming you are right, where is the benefit of a housing crisis where young people could not buy an house since they cannot have a mortage from the banks due to the low wages ? I would understand if the housing crisis rise the price and people could afford to buy more expensive houses, but it not seems to be the case. Ok, I understand that there could be some very short term benefits, but then ? It is not that you can eat the house and as the price increase the number of buyers goes down.

No, clearly its the left! Sorry, I’m not going to fall for the “considers you part of the problem” rhetoric. Youre either lying to push some “you can’t even be white these days” trope or are genuinely part of the problem and deserve it.

Given that the left was in power (in one way or another) for more than 20 years of the last 30 years, at least in Italy, I would say that maybe it not all their fault, but they are not innocent either.

The right have been in power in Italy and the UK and have been for years.

Ok, facts checks.
Here the list of Prime Ministrers from 1994 to today (so the last 30 years) in Italy:

• Berlusconi (Right): 11/05/1994 - 17/01/1995
• Dini (undefined): 17/01/1995 - 18/05/1996
• Prodi (Left): 18/05/1996 - 21/10/1998
• D’Alema (Left): 21/10/1998 - 22/12/1999
• D’Alema (Left): 22/10/1999 - 26/04/2000
• Amato (Left): 26/04/2000 - 11/06/2001
• Berlusconi (Right): 11/06/2001 - 23/04/2005
• Berlusconi (Right): 23/04/2005 - 17/05/2006
• Prodi (Left): 17/05/2006 - 8/05/2008
• Berlusconi (Right): 8/05/2008 - 16/11/2011
• Monti (undefined): 16/11/2011 - 28/04/2013
• Letta (Left): 28/04/2013 - 22/02/2014
• Renzi (Left): 22/02/2014 - 12/12/2016
• Gentiloni (Left): 12/12/2016 - 1/06/2018
• Conte (Mostly Right): 1/6/2018 - 5/9/2019
• Conte (Left): 5/9/2019 - 13/2/2021
• Draghi (undefined): 13/2/2021 - 22/10/2022
• Meloni (Right): 22/10/2022 - today

The 3 undefined are what we call “Governo tecnico”, so not really from the Left or the Right.

Tell me again how the Right have been in power for years, please. Maybe it is true for UK.

When will you lot grow up and admit your own mistakes and abject failure to do anything other than make already very rich people far richer?

Ok, so what the Left did to stop this ? Just make anyone poorer ? Yeah, of course I am part of the problem and continuing to call me “part of the problem” or “too ignorant to understand” obviously will make me to vote for you. Good job.

The point is: don’t trust the polls, especially if there is a social stigma associated with one of the options.

Its true, most right wingers are selfish cowards.

Some right wingers. Many not.

Although, lets be real, the polls are never that wrong.

Oh well, the one about Trump was. And even some more recent ones. What I noted lately is that the polls are no more reliable in any case, they are wrong most of the time even if not by that much, I agree.

The reason people will vote right wing is because Italy has a problem with fascism? Well, thats an interesting take.

No, the reason people in Italy vote right wing is because the left wing has nothing to offer. How the left wing can win when their entire political program is only “the right wing should not win” ? Man, I can vote the left, but they need to have something more concrete than just “the others should not win”.

I mean, if anyone is upset at their purchase power dropping, having to live with their parents or lines at the food kitchen and chooses to vote right wing because of it, they’re beyond stupid. Nothing anyone could say to them would work, as you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

I agree. But you are missing the point, which is that they voted for the only side that at least acknowledges there are problems. Then I concede that maybe their solution is not the best or even the correct one, but at least is something concrete.

“I know, I’ll vote for the people who are directly funded by the groups who directly profit from those problems! I’m so smart!”

What do you even say to that kind of “thinking”?

Wrong, the choice is between a side (the left) that consider you as part of the problem and a side (the right) that promise you to solve the problem. What do you think a person will vote ?

“No, its not that you’re stupid, its just that, actually, when your house is on fire, its generally considered more sensible to reach for the fire extinguisher instead of the flame thrower. I know, I know, I’ve heard the term fight fire with fire before too. However, I’ll tell you what I told my friend, shortly after they lost their job. No, you can’t always fight fire with fire. Especially when you’re a firefighter, you doughnut.”

True, but also calling for the one that spread the fire don’t seems a good idea.

It is really simple: the left had its chance, they failed and so people vote for the alternative. To continue to vote for the same people that create the problem is not that intelligent either.

If houses that were used to house tourists are no longer allowed to do so, why would they not become available for either rent or sale?

For rent because, depending on the laws, it can be really hard to get it back in case there is a tenant that do not pay or refuse to leave. In many italian cities there were many houses (they talk about 1/3 of the houses in Milano) that were empty because it was too dangerous to rent them (damages, missing payments, evictions which take years, people that refuse to leave even after the end of the contract). The same reasons make way harder to sell a rented house. So all (or most) of these house went to the short rent market (AirBnB and the likes).

For sale because the owner could keep it in case he need some extra money down the road or his son would need it some years from now or any other reason.

What else is there for the owners to do with them?

Nothing, which is better than to have to (eventually) fight to get the house back from a bad tenants, with all the time and money involved.

I see the point of what Barcellona (and other cities) want to do but the raise of short rents are a consequence, not the cause. True, renting on AirBnB make me more money than a normal rent contract but what people do not understand it that this system would have worked even if it would make me less money than a normal rent because 1) I would be sure to be paid, 2) I would be sure that the tenants would leave at the end of the rent, 3) where would be some sort of (partial) compensation in case of damages and 4) if I ever decide that I now need the house I just need to stop listing on the site and I have the house back.

This thread is about the UK, not Italy.

I know. What I mean is that I would not be so sure that what people say they will vote will be what they actually vote.
In Italy many people told they would never vote for Berlusconi but somehow he won the elections. Same with Trump, the poll gave him losing yet he won.

The point is: don’t trust the polls, especially if there is a social stigma associated with one of the options.

However, if we are to talk about Italy, its always had a problem with fascism, being its birthplace and all. A millenniam long hangover from Romes slave economies and Christianity is to blame for what makes it very much the outlier and not the norm here.

You sentence is the exact reason why people are going to vote for the right wings.
The only people talking about fascism in Italy is the left wing. At the last EU election the points of the left were that the fascism must not win and that their secretary is a multigender woman. Not a word about the actual problems we have (for example, that people have seen their purchasing power drop by a considerable amount, a couple that want to build a family must relay on their parents to be able to buy an house and even more if they decide to have a child, lines at soup kitchens get longer and longer and so on).

But yes, we are going off-topic. My bad.

but the conservatives are now starting to talk to them again while the progressives are still talking only to themself in an ivory tower.

Considering the conservatives are about to be whiped out at the next election, I hope that was meant to be ironic

Not sure about that, honestly, at leasto from what I see in Italy.

True but they basically cut how many people could stay in Barcellona, not how many people could go to Barcellona.
So what will happen, in my opinion, is that people will continue to go to Barcellona, staying in the surroundings to sleep.

So both of the problems they want to solve will be not solved: they will continue to have over-tourism and the houses will not go on the market so the prices will not lower.

Keep in mind 2 nations within the UK didn’t want to leave along with a large chunk of the other two.

Irrelevant. It is like saying the Lombardia and Veneto do not agree with what Italian government decide: it could be true but they cannot do whatever they want, they are part of Italy.

While balance can be good some times, the idea that a group of business interests and oligarchs coming together for the sole purpose of lowering their tax bills and buying the nations assets for peanuts, maskerading as a political party, could provide said balance is a strange one.

On the other hand even trying to level everyone to the lowest level is wrong.

Conserving the established power and wealth as well as keeping everyone else down is the only thing they look to conservatives look to conserve. The rest is the lies they tell, in order to get in to do it.

True, the correct balance would be conserve the power and let everyone else to rise, but I undestand it is an utopian vision (the established power would never allow it).

But in the end I think that the main problem is that both parts lost the contact with the normal people but the conservatives are now starting to talk to them again while the progressives are still talking only to themself in an ivory tower.

Everything. And nothing and all.

There is not a single thing the conservatives are completly right about and the progressives are completely wrong (or vice-versa of course), so I cannot truly pinpoint something specific.

Fast forward to 2028: “why tourists do not come here anymore ? We are loosing money here.”

The conservatives still have power in the UK and will continue to have influence for the foreseeable future. As long as conservatism has any place in UK politics, the UK should not be permitted to re-join. Conservatives will eventually just re-Brexit.

I see what you are saying, but I don’t think you are completly right. Re-join can takes years and it will be under the EU rules, not UK, so no more special treatment like before. That alone is difficult to sell to UK, but I am not sure that if UK re-join people will vote again to exit, given that Brexit was sold with lies that was already exposed.

There is simply no place in a healthy, modern society for a conservative government. Let the UK rid themselves of their plague of conservatism first before being allowed to further harm the UE with this dangerous illness.

Disagree. A good government is a balance of progressivism and conservatism. Real life it is not black or white but a shade of grey (for the most part).

Is Brexit an ignorant, lazy, myopic tantrum you can undo?

No, you can only ask to join again, then start the discussion and if everyone agree, join again. But this time it will be on EU terms, not UK terms.
And the process can take years.

Maybe the services that don’t need to sell your data to be in the black.

More than the charging infrastructure it is the city infrastructure: when you have condos built without any planning 50 or more years ago, even if you pass a law that every home need to have a charging station in these condos it is physically impossible to do it. Charging infrastructure comes after you solve the problem where to put 70 or more charging station for every condo in the district.

Hybrids: the worst of both worlds.

If you want to keep relying on gasoline then just buy an ICE car

Maybe I can use a hydrid: short trip (to the train station/mall/small affairs in the vicinity) go in electric, longer trip use gasoline.

Not everyone has a charging station at home and in many places you cannot install it, be because forbidden by some old laws or because there is not the physical option.

Wait, they give Europol access if and only if a swiss judge order it. They protect your privacy but neither you or them are above the law.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

I agree on this.

If it is worth doing, it is worth getting it done, even if we aren’t 100% certain or ready on a lot of things.

From the article it seems we are not even 10% certain. In summary, we don’t understand (yet) the problem, we have no clue on how complex is, we have no hard number to tell us how big it is.
I agree, something need to be done. But for now the “something” is just to try to understand better the problem, or at least how big it is.

Doctors don’t wait for the worst before starting treatment.

True, but they start treatment when they know what they need to cure or at least they have solid evidence that indicate something, not before.

Specially if corrections carry none or way less risks than what is currently being done.

Hard to decide that corrections carry lower risks of something we don’t understand.

Ah yes, the usual method of waiting until the issue becomes confirmed and also way too severe to fix instead of acting on precaution and harming profits of private companies.

No, but as even them don’t understand what the complications are and how much the damages could be, maybe to wait to have at least some hard number looks like a good idea.

What could go wrong?

And what could go wrong if we start to fight a problem that we don’t understand how big it is, maybe using the wrong solution on a wrong scale ?

They didn’t just vote for the right wing though, they voted for Nazis. So yes, they are literally bigoted, racist, homophobes. If you support people who admired Hitler, guess what? You’re a fucking asshole of a very high degree.

Listen here, as long as people like you don’t understand that AfD (and all the other extreme right wings) are the consequence and not the cause, you will never solve any problem.
People voted AfD because they are the only one, as bad as it is, that at least aknowledge the problems people have (or think to have).
Do you really think that when someone tells you that they see [something] as a problem the better course of action is to insult them, consider them as part of the problem and then call them nazis when they voted for someone else ? Because that is what everyone else except the extreme right is doing.

Yeah, it is bad, but do you really think that people will always continue to vote for the side that they see as the cause of what they see as a problem ?

Being poor or troubled doesn’t make you an asshole.

True

My parents grew up in extreme poverty in El Salvador, and they didn’t become extreme racists. I was in extreme poverty in university in the USA, I didn’t suddenly start voting right wing either, let alone extremely far right. I hated the democrats over there, but knew the right wing wouldn’t solve it because bad people don’t go good things.

The point is how much you should endure before you become an idiot. Yeah, to vote for the bad guys do not solve the problems, but also to continue to vote for the cause of the problem do not solve it.

You don’t end up voting for genuinely bad people who admire one of the most atrocious regimes in human history because of frustration.

True, you end up voting for genuinely bad people because the supposed good people are the one that in your view are the cause of the problem and you do not see any other option (if not do not vote).

You only do so because you either already have a broken moral compass, or are extremely ignorant and stupid. In Germany though, it’s more likely to be the former rather than the latter considering their history. And it’s that recent history that makes it that much more shameful for Germany, and that shows that Nazism was still not extinguished.

Nazism will never be extinguished, you cannot. But you can relegate it to the point that it is irrelevant. But what are you still missing is the cause.

You don’t deal with an intolerant group like Nazi or AfD by excusing them or reaching out to them. You don’t tolerate the intolerant (paradox of tolerance), because otherwise it’ll only be a matter of time before you or someone else is no longer tolerated. And that’s something history has proven repeatedly.

True. You deal with intolerant groups like Nazi and AfD removing the causes that make them rise before they can rise.