On September 20, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivered her first State of the European Union speech in which she declared that the wages of too many people are not adequate to keep body and soul together. Low wages “destroy the dignity of work, penalize the entrepreneur who pays decent wages, and distort fair competition in the Single Market,” she said.
Given the great discrepancies in living standards between the richer and the poorer member states, no single EU minimum wage will be imposed on all 27 countries. Instead, “it wants to ensure there is a collective bargaining for wages in place, that different national systems have clear and stable criteria, that trade unions and employers are involved in the process, that there are few exemptions and that there are monitoring mechanisms in place,” as Reuters summarized the gist of the embryonic proposal back in September.
On October 28, the Commission proposed an EU Directive to ensure that workers in the Union are protected by an adequate minimum wage, allowing for a decent living wherever they work. What is a directive in European law? It is “a legislative act that sets out a goal that all EU countries must achieve. However, it is up to the individual countries to devise their own laws on how to reach these goals.” Or, as the Commission said in a statement, “the proposed Directive creates a framework to improve the adequacy of minimum wages and for access of workers to minimum wage protection in the EU.”
Klára Dobrev, the DK politician who later became one of the deputy presidents of the European Parliament, already during the EP election of 2019 declared her intention to fight for a European minimum wage, a European minimum pension, and minimum healthcare benefits. In September, a few months after the opening of the new parliamentary session, she announced that her proposal for legislative action with respect to a minimum wage that ensures a decent living had been well received by President Ursula von der Leyen. The President promised that the question of an adequate minimum wage would be discussed in the first 100 days of her program.
Fidesz immediately began a campaign against Dobrev and the idea of introducing an adequate minimum wage indexed to the existing median pay in member countries. Pro-government media outlets deliberately conflated her suggestion with a nonexistent plan to impose a universal minimum wage, from Luxemburg to Bulgaria. But here and there, they went even further, when, for instance, they asserted that “the European Commission has affirmed several times that it has no intention of interfering with the member states’ policies on minimum wage.” In reality, a “directive” is “interference” in the internal affairs of the member states because it sets goals that they have to achieve.
This summer Pesti Srácok announced that “Mrs. Gyurcsány [Klára Dobrev] is lying left and right despite Brussels’ denial of her claim.” It is not true, as Dobrev claims, that the Hungarian government is against such a plan. The veracity of that assertion, however, can be called into question as a result of Enikő Győri’s statement on Hír TV the other day, according to which “the promise of Klára Dobrev is irresponsible and dangerous.” After all, Győri is one of the high-ranking Fidesz MEPs, who at one point was an undersecretary in charge of the Hungarian presidency back in 2010.
Dobrev, in her efforts to achieve an adequate minimum wage in the EU’s member states, was joined by István Ujhelyi, MSZP’s MEP. He described the goal in the following terms: “The proposal now announced by the European Commission takes into account the economic and development disparities between Member States, but seeks to guarantee fair conditions and a fair minimum wage for all European workers in the long term.” Dobrev, on “Egyenes beszéd,” was optimistic about the fate of her proposal. “We are not at the finish line, but we have reached the home stretch,” she said. She explained that the net monthly Hungarian minimum wage is now approximately 107,000 forints ($340), which could increase to 140,000-150,000 forints ($445-$476), depending on whether the minimum wage will be 50% or 60% of the average take-home pay.
The government media, most likely reflecting the government’s views, sneers at the proposal. Magyar Nemzet wrote today that even DK politicians refute Klára Dobrev’s claims about the chance of implementing the European Commission’s directive in Hungary. The DK politician Magyar Nemzet has in mind is Ferenc Dávid, the former secretary-general of the National Association of Entrepreneurs and Employers (VOSZ), who a year ago, in an entirely different context, talked about the government’s decision to announce a 10% raise for state employees in the middle of negotiations between VOSZ and the trade unions. But Dávid said not a word about the EU directives on an adequate minimum wage. The article also asserts that “the Fidesz-KDNP MEPs supported the suggestion of the European Commission because our country already meets these directives.”
Well, I don’t know, but somebody is not telling the truth because Klára Dobrev, on her Facebook page on October 23, wrote that “yesterday, the European Parliament voted by a two-thirds majority on my package of proposals to have a European minimum wage! But there are still those who do not support it. Fidesz MEPs voted against it. They are the ones who do not want every European Hungarian to have a fair salary. Don’t you think that is outrageous?” Well, one Fidesz loyalist proudly stood by the “outrageous” decision because “it shouldn’t be the new Soviet Union that tells us what to do.”
Hirado.hu quoted Nicolas Schmit, EU Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, who, according to the Hungarian government media, “stressed that it would be irresponsible to expect countries to introduce a common minimum wage level which would ruin the economies of the Member States.” So, let’s see what Schmit actually said: “Almost 10% of workers in the EU are living in poverty: this has to change. People who have a job should not be struggling to make ends meet. Minimum wages have to play catch up with other wages which have seen growth in recent decades, leaving minimum wages lagging behind. Collective bargaining should be the gold standard across all Member States. Ensuring adequate minimum wages is written in black and white in Principle 6 of the European Pillar of Social Rights, which all Member States have endorsed, so we are counting on their continued commitment.”
What do Hungarians think of the proposal? Blikk, a daily tabloid, made a list of pros and cons of the minimum-wage directive and found lots of positive aspects to it. It draws countries closer; it helps the country’s convergence; it would help ensure financial survival during the pandemic; and it motivates workers. And the cons? It will take too long to implement it; it will be difficult to achieve uniformity; and the governments “where an increase in the minimum wage is a political question” might want to sabotage it.
All in all, this is good news for DK and Dobrev and an uncomfortable development for the government party. But, of course, knowing the speed at which the European Union proceeds on all issues, it is eminently possible that it will be four or five years before we see the introduction of anything approximating an adequate minimum wage in Hungary. Unless, of course….
Orban opposing minimum wage is barbaric!!!
Actually since for Catholics this is all soul’s week (bennfoglaltatik mindenszentek, halottak napja) its appropriate and in keeping with the tradition of Elizabeth Báthory, one our most infamous Hungarian speaking women, who gets many references this time of year relating to Halloween celebrations in the USA. Since we are surrounded here in the midwestern USA by sickness and death from Covid 19 there is a particularly ominous nature to this celebration this year. Elizabeth Báthory’s 1610 trial records do actually exist and have formed part of the basis for several books about her murderous activities. The atrocities relating to women and young girls described most consistently included severe beatings; burning or mutilation of hands; biting the flesh off the faces, arms and other body parts; freezing or starving to death. The use of needles was also mentioned by the collaborators in court. There were many suspected forms of torture carried out by Báthory. Báthory has her defenders too, they claim the Catholic Church and its allies faked most of the evidence in order to kill her because she was a Calvinist and they wanted some of her vast land holdings in what is today Romania. She was never executed and died held in… Read more »
A general minimum wage may (supposing they are able to step up their domestic markets) perhaps be beneficial to the countries with government regulated wage-control. Theoretically good for them!
But for the countries with independent domestic market-based wage regulation by employers and labor-organizations in collective agreement, where the lowest wages typically exceed the proposed minimum, it’s definitely not an attractive solution, by any standard.
It’s difficult to imagine these strong economies supporting the idea of the EU putting a choke on their domestic economic leverage.
In addition to that, they already pay huge compensations to the weakly organized domestic markets.
Schmit said “Collective bargaining should be the gold standard across all Member States.” So setting a minimum by collective agreements is not endangered, but a legal safety net for those that are not protected by collective agreements will be added. This will of course mainly have an effect on countries as Hungary, but Austria for example has no legal minimum wage. Abuse might be way lower than in Hungary, but can’t be excluded completely.
Just as the clauses about democracy and rule of law look good on the paper and sound agreeable from the speaker’s chair, the reality of how these ideas are practiced, ultimately depends on those who practice them. I am not so optimistic about being able to ignore the behavior of the global competition that goes on regarding wages on the labor markets. If a much cheaper and effectively wage limiting standard, but less secure, is allowed to compete or replace the more expensive, but much more secure, agreement-model – who do you think will be the losers? The wage earners who have to give up their bargaining rights will not benefit in any way, and the theoretical alternative of free mobility so far only works one way – cheaper labor moves towards better wages and better wages become lower and stagnant as a result, while domestic economies lose internal flow. The idea of proposing the minimum wage as a solidarity based model, when in fact it is an effective limiting measure, setting a lowering cieling over the bargaining leverage of the wage earners, seems to me more like the kind of rhetorical pornography a certain segment of very conservative academic… Read more »
Michael, a legal minimum just does not take away the possibility to agree on higher standards between employers and workers unions. In enough countries this happens effectively. According to the relevant commissioner there are no plans to limit the rights of closing collective agreements with one single exception: They mustn’t agree for lower values than in that country is allowed legally. Of course where workers unions are weak the legal situation becomes important (as we have it in Hungary with very little rights), but the planned directive will not hinder unions at all. By this it is correct to say that in some countries the directive will have more effect onto the daily life than in others. That it is obligated to use a safety belt in cars doesn’t mean that you mustn’t sit in cars equipped by airbags as well.
I’m not sure if you recognize the effects of establishing a lower standard as a reference for price-negotiations.
It limits the bargaining leverage of labor unions, which I believe must be the real intention behind the proposal – Why? because already there are no legal obstacles which justifiably keep a government regulated wage agreement from raising its domestic minimum.
It’s like saying: If people are willing to pay more for a car equipped with airbags, it’s their own decision – but they don’t have to accept a more expensive car if they don’t want to.
The EU think tanks probably think more about the symbolic signal-value of the proposal than they think about the effects it will have on the market-economy. Not to mention the gap it opens between the countries that have to pay more than they already do. The money must come from somewhere.
Take the German example. Germany introduced not that long ago a legal minimum wage, while it existed a long time in other Western European states. Nevertheless since that introduction in several cases employers and unions agreed in a higher minimum for some sectors where earlier no or the legal minimum existed and asked the government to declare it for valid for the entire sector, not only for those employments are directly effected by the collective agreement. Or take the Netherlands, where a minimum wage existed a long time before even Hungary introduced it. It is more or less an exception if an employee is paid the minimum wage only. It is just the safety net I wrote about earlier. All this shows that having a legal minimum wage doesn’t mean that your worries must happen.
The Germans introduced minimum wages in 2015.
At a time when the economy was in good growth.
Today it takes more than hope to convince the sceptics about any benefits of the idea.
As long as there is an employment crisis, the minimum wages are out of effect for people who are unemployed for longer periods and not effective before a 6 month underpaid full-time work period, which will have to be prolonged, possibly doubled, if the crisis lasts next year out.
The timing of the EU proposal could not have been worse.
The timing of the EU … do you read your comments too? Re: „minimum wages“ this is not a Point since 2015 …
Your last paragraph says it all… I lost faith in the EU’s effectiveness as year after year the union failed to deliver on their plans that looked good on paper, but never realised.
So should the EU be reduced again , just containing those countries which are willing to stand for their people?
Would be much easier if one didn’t have to contend with the Balkan where autocrats rule.
“The rule of law” should be conditio sine qua non for an EU membership.
I’m sure that O1G would have no problem with a min wage of say 1000 forint /hour as long as his cronies continue get a few millions per month.
The income disparity in Hungary is unbelievable – typical for a third world sh*thole country – says my wife and she has experience there with a pension of less than 100 000 forint a month. Just one indicator:
When we met she was still working as a “sales girl” even though she was over 60 years old …
“I’m sure that O1G would have no problem with a min wage of say 1000 forint /hour ….”
Wolfi, the minimum wage is actually 926 Ft / h and for more qualified jobs the guarenteed wage is set on a minimum of 1 211 Ft / h. The bigger problem is that from the very first Forint 33.5 % are deducted. Közmunka workers are getting less than 51 % of the minimum wage, while the deduction remains the same.
István, you’re right of course.Gong from 926 to 1000 forint could be sold as a big raise!
I often wonder about these “Közmunkás” and how they must feel when I see them cleaning the streets.
Well, at least it helps – many people just throw their garbage – plastic bags, beer cans, water and pálinka bottles on the street. Our neighbour even found pampers in her court …
Wolfi, it would be a raise of 8 %. Exactly the same as we had the last years. That it doesn’t meet inflation is not mentioned, but used for propaganda of course!
150 000 HUF is far too little to live a dignified life in Hungary. But maybe one sack of potatoes is then not enough to buy someone’s conscience.
If you look at the richest countries in Europe these countries have strong trade unions. This is of course not acceptable for Fidesz.
You’re right, it should be two sacks of potatoes. To avoid the above, a decent programme from “opposition” is well overdue.
Fidesz pays for the potatoes with tax money – the opposition cannot do that.
No, no!
It should be potatoes and a sack of onions!
And maybe a few packages of flour so people can buy some good cakes.
“a decent programme from “opposition” is well overdue”????
Read what DK did in this context on EU level, Éva wrote about it. Besides most opposition parties want a reform of the tax system, wherein the lowest incomes would be exempt and increasing with increasing income. Both more than a sack of potatoes before elections….
I think Jobbik first launched the campaign in Hungary for a Europe-wide minimum wage?
An increase in minimum wage for many small (one-man/ woman) businesses just means they have to pay more contributions to the government (healthcare, pensions, etc.) without any real increase in income (if their business income doesn’t increase)…
Many of the one man/woman self-employed do not pay themselves a salary because it would be very expensive. They only pay tax on their turnover which is manipulable. That means poverty in old age but at least a “normal” life until there. The widespread opinion that Fidesz caused by their expropriation of the private pension is that there is no pension any more anyway. Hungary is a failed state in the minds of Hungarians, I am not surprised about that.
Jobbik wanted a minimum wage in Hungary only but based on Western European wages. Those days they wanted to leave the EU as well. I think no need to explain why all this would have been a disaster.
Not too much OT.
Just remembered that there are many people in Hungary who officially work only part time – the”extra hours” are paid tax free under the table.
But this means of course that social security and pensions are also based on the official income …
This “scheme” only benefits the employers. Those who are ok to be paid ” under the table” should be aware, this “schene” will be reflected on their pension.
Did you ever ask those who can’t buy enough food for their families today, whether they care about their pension? The part they get without deduction of taxes and contributions is 50 % higher than the part they earn nets legally. The employer just has the “advantage” of not paying 15.5 % social tax.
All the more reason for people to take responsibility and vote for more socially healthy economic practices, rather than burlesque “national” fairy tales and Oligarchy.
Absolutely agree that voting for FIDESZ is voting for poverty of large parts of the population. Just Something wants to convince people in serious problems to ignore their empty fridge, but to worry about the pension they might get over 20, 30 or even more years. This is just not how people think. For saving money (and a pension contribution is in last consequence the same) one needs to earn more than needed for pure existence.
This is why the old system (dark middle ages) “keep them poor” is so successful. Someone who has nothing is very grateful for a sack of potatoes. I wonder how many potato sacks Orbán got for Paks II. He is certainly the Potato Sack King.
That’s true! But the situation is such that all the money for pensions etc. is already present.
What’s not present, is the political determination of the public to manage the control of it.
Since this summer the social security has to be paid over a minimum of 48 000 Ft for part time workers. Not to create great pensions (the minimum is 28 500 Ft / month, if applicable!), but to generate money for the state.
As of noon of October 31, about 15% of the Slovak population had been tested in the test-everybody effort there.
Almost 10% of the this large sample turned out to be asymptotic carriers of the corona virus!!
(Slovakia was largely spared from the virus until September)
7947/828518 = 9.59%
https://korkep.sk/cikkek/belfold/2020/10/31/orszagos-covid-19-teszteles-szlovakiaban-percrol-percre-a-korkepen/
Correction:
Almost 1% of the this large sample turned out to be asymptotic carriers of the corona virus.
7947/828518 = 0.96%
In the Dunaszerdahely district, which is mostly populated by ethnic Hungarians, 0.92% tested positive, 605/65399.
https://parameter.sk/orszagos-teszteles-tobb-mint-600-fertozott-dunaszerdahelyi-jarasban-200-komaromiban
Deaths/million people since March.
US: 712
Canada: 268
Spain: 767
UK: 685
Italy: 639
France: 563
Romania: 363
Czechia: 303
Hungary: 188
Ukraine: 167
Slovenia: 163
Poland: 149
Croatia: 137
Germany: 126
Austria: 123
Slovakia: 40
Scandinavia:
Sweden: 587 (herd immunity attempt)
Denmark: 124
Finland: 65
Norway: 52
Thanks tappanch, that’s a really interesting set of figures. Of course everyone feels the economic pain of lockdown (and people in ex-socialist countries generally have fewer savings), but it seems like those countries with relatively few restrictions are getting some frighteningly bad results.
The numbers in Hungary (deaths and new infections) are going through the roof at the moment (roughly 5 times as many deaths per day as in the first wave) without any effective restrictions (apart from extending Schengen border closure till the end of December and having to wear a mask to go shopping)
Not sure what the answer is but the present policy isn’t working: 🙁
ellenszel.hu/2020/10/31/szint-vallott-egy-gyori-elvonalbeli-korhazi-dolgozo-nagyobb-a-baj-mint-gondolnank-ezrek-osztjak-a-levelet/?fbclid=IwAR0Yw_ae1UBPoNdRxq-boD04OvvVw0ZuhVNOhPEbw5vid9yL4iDBx64PWhA
Deaths/million people since September 1.
US: 145
Canada: 27
Spain: 145
France: 94
UK: 74
Italy: 52
Czechia: 263
Romania: 171
Hungary: 124
Ukraine: 107
Slovenia: 99
Poland: 95
Croatia: 91
Austria: 42
Slovakia: 34
Germany: 14
Scandinavia:
Sweden: 12
Denmark: 16
Finland: 4
Norway: 3
In Borsod county, the increase of the confirmed infected people is 33.6% in a single day.
https://444.hu/2020/11/01/valami-teljesen-osszekuszalodott-a-kormanyzati-koronaoldal-adatai-kozott
I am told that the reason our Dictator will not impose a lock-down on disease-ridden Hungary is that there are some “vitally important” foci matches coming up that he needs an audience for. [“For the 1st wave, we were not prepared, but now, for the 23nd we are prepared”. For what, one wonders, to screw up all over again?]
Can this be?
The discussions of a minimum wage soon gets blotted out by those who wish to retain their position of privilege. Of course, Fidesz oligarchs wish to retain the present system embodied in the phrase. “Us First, the Rest Nowhere”. But surely we would all be better off living in a state with a specified minimum wage as well as universal access to health care and a universal base pension? Can we be proud to be living in a country that (nominally, acc. to Mr. Matolcsy) is doing so well but where a very significant percentage of the population live in poverty?
Doesn’t it turn your stomach that a thief like Rogan creamed off Millions of Euro selling off Hungary’s heritage for his own personal profit?
Why do you think a minimum wage would have any effect on the system and the poverty in Hungary?
The money has to come from somewhere inside the Hungarian market – not from the EU or Santa Claus, and it won’t come as a result of higher export-pricing and corresponding higher import prices. It will have to be found in profits generated by a higher domestic turnover.
True, just our economic policies are made to punish consumption. Until now inflation and higher taxes ate up all rises of minimum wages Orbán has decided on. Since those earning minimum wages are mainly engaged in the local value chains (most exporting companies are already paying more) this has direct influence on the local prices. All measures resulting in a higher PPP by same gross wages would be more effective. This however would result in a tax reform that low incomes taxes lower and high incomes taxes higher. Here the thought of Bimbi letting oligarchs pay would indirectly be an option indeed, better use of public money and goods would have some positive effect as well.
Letting Oligarchs pay?
If I am not mistaken,the whole foundation for Oligarchy is to buy legislation which secures incomes and fortunes on the hands that pay the legislature – Or what?
There is no administrative way around it – Back to the ballot box and vote responsibly!
Not within the NER, that’s for sure. But could you imagine that family and friends may keep ill-gotten wealth there after? Shouldn’t those earning well pay more taxes than those earning little? Today the taxes are with 15 % the same for everybody, just that the lower incomes have to pay additionally 18.5 % contributions over their entire income.
I can’t disagree on taxing wealth and higher incomes.
If the government can’t figure out a way to do that and keep the hand under the poorest and the lowest incomes, I really don’t see much use for the government at all.
The rich are always going to take care of themselves anyway, as they always have.
BBJ has new data on earnings in 2020:
https://bbj.hu/economy/avg%20gross%20earnings%20at%20huf%20395,400%20in%20jan-aug_191327
“Full-time employees’ average gross nominal earnings amounted to HUF 391,600 and excluding fostered workers were HUF 402,400.
Average net earnings were HUF 260,400 excluding tax benefits and HUF 269,000 including them.”
But we know of course that these averages aka arithmetic means are totally misleading – the median or the real distribution would be informative.
My favourite example (got the idea from my maths prof 55 years ago):
In a typical village in East Hungary everyone of the 100 workers gets 150 000 forint/month. Now a castle/mansion is built there by a friend of Mészáros who makes 50 million each month – calculate the new average …
OT: Washington Post is writing just now:
Another election night nears, with trepidation replacing hope
Democrats grow anxious in PA
Biden has slight lead, no longer holds statistically significant advantage.
FL is a tossup
(I would add: OH is firmly Trumpland)
If these are so, it means the momentum is with Trump, he’s improving his positions in key battleground states.
Nate Silver at the same is confident that this time it’s different and Trump is really unlikely to win.
I guess we’ll have to wait and see but certainly it’s not a slam dunk for the Democrats, despite the craziness, incompetence of Trump and the policies (like tax cut for the rich etc.).
Imagine if there was no COVID, Trump would win in a landslide no question.
Last week Financial Times had an interesting point.
In 20 years, 30 percent of the population will elect 70 of the 100 senators.
Of course this small population will include liberal places like RI or Vermont too, but overwhelmingly conservative places.
Basically, the article says, the rural, Christian, white population will have a veto on all laws and the Democrats will only rarely have a majority in the Senate.
The courts will inevitably move to the right since Democratic presidents will not have majorities in the Senate and simply can’t appoint judges (let alone justices) while a Republican presidents can easily push through anybody (ie. staunch, battle-tested Federalist Society candidates).
I do hope hope will fall on your face, especially since you have just listed here falsehoods about the standings of different states. Why don’t you admit that you’re a Trump guy in U.S. terms and Orbán’s man in Hungary?
Because I am neither. I was surprised and dismayed to read the WP headlines today. As to the analysis of the Senate, the Financial Times published a very long article by Edward Luce (the FT’s US correspondent himself) on 17/18 October titled “Will the US tear itself apart?”. The article has this as the last but one paragraph. Ornstein is Norman Ornstein quoted as “a leading scholar of US politics”. Levinson is Sandy Levinson one of the most respected US constitutional law professors at UT and Posner is Eric Posner the (conservative) law professor at the UChicago. Brooks is Rosa Brooks a law prof at Georgetown. “Let’s suppose that the likelier outcome next month is a Biden victory — and a slow-burn US constitutional crisis, rather than imminent breakdown. For how long can it slowly burn before it flares? “If the system is the same in 2030 as it is now, America will start to fall apart,” says Ornstein. He points out that within 20 years, 30 per cent of the US will elect 70 of its 100 senators. Levinson adds: “The US Senate is an affirmative-action programme for white, rural, Christian conservatives, who have an increasingly powerful veto over… Read more »
So, by looking at today’s headlines in The Washington Post, suddenly you discovered that Trump would have had a landslide victory without the pandemic. I’m looking madly for those articles you are talking about and I see nothing that would have induced anyone to come to that conclusion. All through Trump’s presidency his approval rate was never higher than 49%. How could landslide materialize out of figures between 35% and 45% I have no idea.
I used to think that you are just a pessimist, but it’s becoming clear to me that you are a sophisticated troll, spreading false news about U.S. politics as well as the Hungarian opposition.
The landslide victory without COVID is my opinion, I can’t add references to each and every sentence. If Trump is close to winning in this situation then without COVID (the economic issues) he would be leading “everywhere”. For me this is logical. The point is: Trump’s position is much stronger than what one would expect given his style, incompetence, erratic behavior, scandals, policies etc. This has not been accounted for properly by the Democratic establishment. One can of course debate if Trump is actually close or not (how close is he to carrying PA which was declared the most likely tipping point state?) to winning, surely if he loses retroactively he will be declared as a loser from the beginning. Everybody will say oh, why did you worry, 538 always said he was gonna lose. But the situation is much more complex. Unfortunately Trump is pretty strong. From Bloomberg to WP there have been articles about Democrats being anxious in the last few days. I only quoted FT, the WP and Bloomberg – the most mainstream of mainstream media. How can anybody conclude from this that I support Trump or Orban. This doesn’t make sense. I sometimes add my evaluation… Read more »
You can go on and on about your consulting mainstream papers, but almost all of them will publish opinion pieces from both sides of the aisle. The trouble is that you always pick which is on the side of Trump and immediately announce that whatever these people came up is God’s given truth. That’s the problem. The same is true in Hungarian context. That’s not simple pessimism. As reflection of political inclination and preferences.
I don’t quote opinion pieces. I almost never read opeds.
I quote normal articles written by respected journalists who are on the staff of the paper.
They do quote various people, experts and sure the pieces contain controversial statements too (to increase traffic and get people agitated) but they are the mainstream.
We have to see that the left of centre (as it has been written about a hundred times that it hollowd out, is i decline etc.) should change and get better, smarter, more focused, more strategic.
Be tough like McConnell and the Senate Republicans are, if the GOP can be so strategic and united the Democrats too must be. They Democrats’s vote for a Clarence Thomas ever again (many Democrats voted for him back then).
All I want is for them to change in this way, focus on the outcome.
You have odd ideas about what an opinion piece is and what is not. Here is a recent quotation from you: “Let’s suppose that the likelier outcome next month is a Biden victory — and a slow-burn US constitutional crisis, rather than imminent breakdown. For how long can it slowly burn before it flares?”
What do you think this is? Straightforward news?
Opinion pieces: editorials, columns, and op-eds. What you just quoted here is an op-ed. Op-eds are articles written by a subject-matter expert. They are often solicited by the staff of the paper. What you quoted here is an op-ed.
After I read the Washington Post I took a look at Magyar Nemzet and what did I see on its front page? An opinion piece on the forthcoming U.S. election by the great analyst, Ádám Topolánszky. After telling us the great economic accomplishments of his idol, Donald Trump, we can read the following: “Knowing all this at the end of 2019 President Trump could be sure of winning the election this year.” Is it possible that you made a mistake, and it wasn’t The Washington Times but Magyar Nemzet you read this morning?
You may remember that I wasn’t of the greatest opinion about Topolanszky. I happen to have mutual acquaintances who knew him personally while he lived in Hungary and his antics were both (to me) hilarious and pathetic. The point is, I agree, that he is totally incompetent to say anything about politics.
That said, I also believe that if the election would’ve been held in late 2019 Trump would’ve won (with a landslide even).
Biden’s success – to me – is based on the events of this annus horribilis which noone could foresee.
This is fair though, luck is a political category, so I have no problem with this, but we need to see that it is not as though millions of American voters suddenly got to like the Democratic establishment’ relatively conservative, triangulated policies. They just think Trump’s insanity must end, which, again, is OK, but long term it means the Democrats haven’t become more likeable in the Rust Belt or in Florida.
A US friend of mine wrote this:
“Charlie Sykes, long-time conservative talk-radio host in Wisconsin, documents the slide of the Republican Party into a haven for conspiracy theorists, white supremacists, QAnon nuts, and lovers of “Alternative Facts.” Sure FOX News had a lot to do with fueling the Republican transformation into Crazytown. So did Rush Limbaugh, Breitbart News, and Social Media.
On the eve of the Election, How the Right Lost Its Mind reminds us how Democracy can be damaged by cult figures, Fake News, and corruption.”
Is Sykes well known?
Dear Prof Balogh, I have occasionally supported Marty, reminding his more intemperate critics that you had vouched for him.
Has something changed?
Ivan V you know what I’ve noticed, that you only perform for Marty … Once you wrote under Marty’s comment “very intelligent contribution”.
Since I don’t read Marty anymore, because we could prove that he was lying, I read the post and … I couldn’t read anything intelligent. What do you say to this observation …
The late David Graeber (the recently deceased radical left-wing anthropologist; like a good Fidesznik troll I propagate people like Graeber) wrote that he asked his stepson about politics.
The about 20 years old guy said that he’s not dealing with politics but what he saw is that “people on the left hate each other”. “People on the right may have radically different opinions but they help each other, they work together with discipline.”
This is just a view of course.
But we are absolutely on the same side, as I mentioned I never voted for Fidesz, but since you hate critical opinions and opinions which question your received wisdom you hate me.
Or look at how the Labour is now killing the party’s left-wing (the Corbynites) or how the communists wanted to deal with the SocDems first instead of the fascists.
The left-wing (in the left-right dichotomy, using just two sides) is always more divided and have internal divisions.
That’s all.
I am more critical and this isn’t popular.
„… but since you hate critical opinions and opinions which question your received wisdom you hate me.“
I don’t hate critical opinions and you know that. I hate being lied to, which you did with this again. You are not critical, you are unjust and presumptuous and weak. I thought that you are Ivan V otherwise it would be illogical.
I don’t hate you. I very much dislike your distorted view of reality and your constant debasement of anything left of center while you extol everything Orbán and his comrades do. It is more than tiresome. It is irritating and counterproductive. Didn’t ever occur to you that you are doing a disservice for the cause of democracy in Hungary and elsewhere?
It’s not counterproductive as much as it is futile. I know. Just as in politics one may tell the masses to accept the restrictions, we must do it, it’s basic economics, the voters will still hate the government even if they understand the necessity. If they like the government they will accept the restrictions but those who don’t like the government will never be persuaded by any rational arguments. Here too, no matter how many articles from FT or Bloomberg I cite, readers will not be persuaded. Left of center is everywhere divided between a centrist faction (sometimes called liberals) and a left. The left (also called sometimes far left) is of course nowadays not radical at all (like Bernie Sanders’ policies would be in line with any conservative European politicians’ proposals) but politics in the last 50 years moved so much to the right (remember Nixon signed EPA into law) that even minimal left-wing proposals get branded as radical. Anyway, my point is that centrism is being criticized from the left everywhere because it doesn’t really work any more, and fails to address fundamental issues. Smart populists see the market gap left by the left and promise to acknowledge… Read more »
If I’m not mistaken, Èva adressed your activity here on HS.
That’s not exactly the same as a request for another Mountain Sermon from your side, is it?.
Marty, then why does it work in Germany, Scandinavia, New Zealand and now Austria too?
There you see large coalitions, sometimes even between the conservative parties, eg the CDU/ÖVP and the Greens?
I don’t know the answer either …
Marty, I think you’re misinformed about the state of British politics. The civil war was fought on the Tory benches – and won by the brexiteer ultras. Labour is looking more united than usual: no one seems to be prepared to die on the pro-antisemitism hill.
Starmer may well end up earning your accolade as a strong leader. I’m certainly hanging all my hopes on his leadership. Up to now, he hasn’t put a foot wrong.
I may be. You also have to see that since Scotland was lost for the Labor, given the election system it’s in trouble to being with. I’m not sure at all what would work for Labor in this situation. A centrist politcian (with an image of being strong) or a left-wing politician (Corbyn was simply not likeable by the masses in rural regions).
It may be that voters are not rational and rural voters simply don’t want the Labor like in Idaho or Oklahoma the Democrats will not win in the foreseeable future either.
First past the post systems can produce very stable majorities for long period.
Don, please desist from tilting at me: I’m not a windmill.
Although István convinced me a while back of Marty’s unreliability, I still look at his comments, mainly because he often links to interesting articles.
I have criticised him more than once for excessive doom and gloom. On the other hand, some contributors seem to me to be unreasonably optimistic. I try to live in hope without illusions – but don’t generally succeed…
… „I try to live in hope without illusions“ you should say I try to live in hope with trust … that´s it.
A discussion that illustrates the lack of European economic illiteracy. Europe’s high unemployment over the last 50 years is the direct of government intervention whether it is high mininum wages, industry wide collective bargaining or mandatory severance payments.
You global communists are every bit as destructive as national communists. The nationals eat the apple from the inside and the globalists eat it from the outside. Destructive as two varieties of termites. The most cursorily look at minimum wage will tell you that it is destructive by every measure. The National regulations as well as the EU regulations are like pouring acid on a young child who can never realize his/her dreams because you’ve disfigured him/her in every way conceivable.
I also listened to the Dobrev interview in atv’s “Egyenes beszéd”. Dobrev was asked if the minimum wages would be valid to ALL member states and she answered yes. This is a lie. There are at least 5-6 member states where there is no minimum wage at present and will not be either whatever the EU bureucrats say. For example, in Sweden the wages are subject to yearly negotiational agreements between the trade unions and the employers’ organizations. No politicians have touched this system for about 100 years. Consequently, in Sweden there is a big resistance against EU’s forced “political supremacy”. Although Sweden was promised an exception they are still not happy. Same situation is valid for some other Scandinavian countries and even for Austria. — Another lie or covering the truth in Dobrev’s interview – which was also cited by you, Éva -, is about the numbers. Tell me, Éva, if you talk about earnings in the US, are you mentioning the gross salary (before tax) or the net earnings (after tax)? Or, if you mention a number at all, would you at least say if it is a gross earning or a net sum? Guess the numbers in… Read more »
A good summary about the minimum wage situation in Hungary in 2929 (in Hungarian). Much better than Dobrev’s assesment. https://www.alon.hu/orszagos-hirek/2020/01/minimalber-emeles-2020-2020-tol-161-000-forintra-emelkedett-a-minimalber-210600-ra-a-garantalt-berminimum-ennyi-netto-bert-jelent-2020-ban