The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 94

Komorowski for complex-ridden Poles?


z_darius 14 | 3,965
23 May 2010 #61
But you can't deny that workers working in private sector are doing it to keep their job and for their company to succeed, if they fail they get booted.

Workers get booted when they fail, when their bosses fail, when banks fail. They get booted no matter what. When banks and big corporations fail they get "bailouts". When workers want bailouts (health care, education, fairness) it's called "socialism" and "nanny state".

It's all just playing with people minds and emotions, but the slogans are meaningless. Every now and then, as societies, we pay with our own money for the circus called "elections" and as a result we buy the right to argue which of the candidates, none of whom has any real power whatsoever, is a better choice to be screwed by. Meanwhile, the real players keep on robing us.

Poland is being talked into laying down and letting foreigners rip it apart, or else it will be called nationalistic. The US and UK have had nationalistic economies for a couple centuries and they did alright and that's called democracy and freedom. They want to free all other countries from their natural resources. Actually, Americans go even as far as considering all World's resources as theirs. Only that, by some geographical fluke, these resources happen to be within the borders of other countries.

Poland tried openness once before. As a consequence it was fvcked for over 123 years, The period was called Partitions.
frd 7 | 1,399
23 May 2010 #62
Workers get booted when they fail, when their bosses fail, when banks fail.

It's not true at least in the public sector, I know people who work for the public sector fi in hospitals or in city councils. Great example is hiring 10 cleaning ladies where 2 would be sufficient - that means 8 people getting paid for nothing. In a private company this situation is unthinkinable and any normally thinking boss would have booted these people. And this was just an example it's like that everywhere in the public sector. Wherever people are working and not getting paid of for what they do and how they do it.
z_darius 14 | 3,965
23 May 2010 #63
It's not true at least in the public sector, I know people who work for the public sector fi in hospitals or in city councils.

Public sector is one of the few remaining areas where people get a semblance of fairness. I see nothing wrong with that. We need teachers, tax collectors, food inspectors, police etc. Why would they have to work harder and for less then, say, a bank's CEO whose so called "work" is nothing more than a bunch of scams resulting from his power to lend what banks don't have and produce wealth from nothing?

Great example is hiring 10 cleaning ladies where 2 would be sufficient - that means 8 people getting paid for nothing.

I'm not very familiar with the economics and strategy of cleaning ladies so I'll refrain. I know that we certainly have too many politicians, and that is true also for the so called advanced economies. But I am aware of the gross inefficiencies of many, publicly traded, corporations (including banks) where the top guys get salaries and bonuses in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Is that really the most efficient way of doing business?

In a private company this situation is unthinkinable and any normally thinking boss would have booted these people.

Well, then private sector is no different than the public sector. After all they would have to boot unnecessary labor force. What were they thinking hiring them in the first place? See my note above about ridiculously high corporate wages. Corporations with a brain would boot those highly paid do-nothings, right?

And this was just an example it's like that everywhere in the public sector. Wherever people are working and not getting paid of for what they do and how they do it.

You just described the banks and some large corporations. Banks were supposed to keep economies strong and safe. How did that work out?
convex 20 | 3,930
23 May 2010 #64
Workers get booted when they fail, when their bosses fail, when banks fail. They get booted no matter what. When banks and big corporations fail they get "bailouts". When workers want bailouts (health care, education, fairness) it's called "socialism" and "nanny state".

No, they're both disgusting displays of welfare.

Poland is being talked into laying down and letting foreigners rip it apart, or else it will be called nationalistic. The US and UK have had nationalistic economies for a couple centuries and they did alright and that's called democracy and freedom.

Then Poland should do what it needs to and get out of the EU, repay that money, re-nationalize industries, and close Poland off to foreign investment. Problem solved, or? It's a Polish choice, with all the consequences that comes with making that decision. I do recall there was a referendum here and nearly 80% wanted into the EU. Has that changed? Is Poland incapable of making decisions? So weak that it can be talked into being "ripped up", as you call it? Is the FDI and the freedom of movement really tearing Poland apart?
frd 7 | 1,399
23 May 2010 #65
You just described the banks and some large corporations.

Not exactly, lets imagine you're a head of a big company you've got inefficient workers clearly slacking off - you're gonna fire them straight away. Because you're the one paying them, and you're the one loosing money when your workers are inefficient. It doesn't work that was in some public sector areas. People get same amount of public money whether they are nice to their clients or not, or when they are drinking tea instead of working - it doesn't really make any difference to the head of such office because he gets same amound of money anyways. When you see 2 people are doing the job that could be done by one person you know how to improve the situation. And in post commie public companies kicking out some "Pani Jola z okienka" is unthinkinable. It's the same in Hospitals and Universities. In universities there are old workers who teach old dated stuff kept for no reasons there are even courses created just to keep them in staff.

I'm not talking privatization is the only good way, certain changes would really be helpful though.
z_darius 14 | 3,965
23 May 2010 #66
No, they're both disgusting displays of welfare.

The only disgusting display of welfare in the recent years were the bank and General Motors welfare programs.

Then Poland should do what it needs to and get out of the EU, repay that money, re-nationalize industries, and close Poland off to foreign investment.

The topic I am interested in is privatization of national assets. I am against it and I propsed a few examples, why.

Not exactly, lets imagine you're a head of a big company

We don't have to imagine anything. All we need is to look at history. Not remote one but that which many of this forum's members consider a part of their life experience.

Consider 1970's crack down on democracy and the economic new deal in the US. Corporations took over, wages started to decline (still going down), but the economy did not improve. In fact it stagnated.

What was the solution?
Big and "creative" enterprise?
Nope. Corporate welfare was the answer. You may have heard about it under the term "reaganomics". If you look at the details it turns out that the government increased spending on military. Not to fight the USSR. Not at all. The cash went towards the publicly funded military researchers. The results were handed straight to the hands of big corporations and they are the ones who cashed and continue to cash in. You may have heard about all that via one of those publicly funded media. It's called the Internet.

If you're really opposed welfare, you need to study a little more and then you'll understand that in regards to the working man it's just a slogan. The real welfare recipients are corporations. The money is funneled towards them via the military and the academia.
frd 7 | 1,399
23 May 2010 #67
If you're really opposed welfare, you need to study a little more and then you'll understand that in regards to the working man it's just a slogan.

I never said I'm opposed to welfare, but I won't get over the idea that a public company is somewhat better than a private one. It's not about some historical truths. It's just common knowledge to anyone who doesn't have a thinking proccess straight from social-commie-nanny state past. The country won't do everything for you, you'll have to work for your wage with your skills that's the way it works.
z_darius 14 | 3,965
23 May 2010 #68
I never said I'm opposed to welfare, but I won't get over the idea that a public company is somewhat better than a private one.

I see. So you lack the basics.
Do you know that IBM or Morgan Stanley are inn fact public companies?

It's just common knowledge to anyone who doesn't have a thinking proccess straight from social-commie-nanny state past.

Whose common knowledge?
My common knowledge was that in the 19th century England when capitalism was pretty much unrestricted the country was a shhithole for most people. Many preferred to go to far off lands to kill some natives, instead of being killed at work at the slightest sign of their dissatisfaction with the labor relations.

Would you really start employing 8 year olds in coal mines again?

The country won't do everything for you

Unless you are a big corporation, of course.

you'll have to work for your wage with your skills that's the way it works.

So what particular skills did the two criminals, Bush and Blair, had that they were paid for by the tax payer? What are the results of their criminal activities? Is the world really safer now then before?

It turns out you lack in basics. Brush that up first. For now you are throwing slogans around, but offer few facts. Oh, "common knowledge" are not facts.
frd 7 | 1,399
23 May 2010 #69
hehe they were public officials so I guess it all works along what I've said earlier :)
I'm happy you're agreeing with me. I can say the same about you knowing the basics after looking at what you're saying here. I can see we can't convince each other about anything so it's worthless to continue this off-topic. Fullstop.

I'm happy it all went through without insults so common on these forums. See you in another thead.
z_darius 14 | 3,965
23 May 2010 #70
hehe they were public officials so I guess it all works along what I've said earlier :)

They were big business delivery boys. Nothing to do with the publci interest. The same is true for Obama.

I'm happy you're agreeing with me.

In which point?

I can see we can't convince each other about anything so it's worthless to continue this off-topic.

You got that right.
I am not prone to propaganda, or half truths expressed by victims of propaganda.
Ironside 53 | 12,413
23 May 2010 #71
I am not prone to propaganda, or half truths expressed by victims of propaganda.

glad to see someone with the right attitude
nincompoop_not 2 | 192
23 May 2010 #72
I heard someone say recently that Poles with an inferiority complex are voting for Komorowski because they have a low level of national self-worth. In their view, Poland must shed its own identity, ape everything in the West and under the guise of privatisation sell off its few remaining assets to foreign capitalists.

wonder who said that :)

29% of pro -PiS votes in the last election came from Poles living in America.
Someone's started a 'campaign' recently posting on various Polish forums that their (Poles abroad/Polonia) constitutional right to vote is being deliberately refused by the PO government; how? it was said that if you don't have valid passport (or national ID in the EU area) you can't vote. The person who started all this fuss is from USA and has been living there since 1991 (according to my sources).

Polish passport is valid for 10 years. If someone's been in America for 10 years+ and didn't bother to renew the passport, they shouldn't have any right to vote. Also, I dont believe that any person living in the States/Canada etc for 10+ years will be willing to come back to Poland so why do they think they have right to vote/say what's going on in Poland?

For comparison, if you are a British national you must be registered on an electoral list for max. 15 years prior to election. Over 15 yrs - you lose your right to vote.

In Canada, you cant stay abroad for more than 5 years in one go. If you do, you loose your right to vote. In New Zealand it's 3 years for NZ citizens and 1 year for those who have a permanent residency.

The opinion you quote must come form a Pole who's been staying away way too long ;)
convex 20 | 3,930
23 May 2010 #73
29% of pro -PiS votes in the last election came from Poles living in America.

Have a link for that?

I dont believe that any person living in the States/Canada etc for 10+ years will be willing to come back to Poland so why do they think they have right to vote/say what's going on in Poland?

The ones that go abroad are usually more radicalized...

The topic I am interested in is privatization of national assets. I am against it and I propsed a few examples, why.

The problem with most privatization schemes is that they turn state monopolies into private monopolies. True privatization needs to take place. The kind that allows us to make international phone calls for next to nothing, the kind that allows us to send our kids to whatever schools we want.

Do you know that IBM or Morgan Stanley are inn fact public companies?

They are publicly traded privately owned companies.

But why not compare to Hong Kong of the 60s-90s? Capitalism without a judiciary that is willing to tackle property rights doesn't make sense.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,163
24 May 2010 #74
29% of pro -PiS votes in the last election came from Poles living in America.

Can't imagine it being so high, but certainly, the American Polonia are a disgrace when it comes to being badly educated about the country that they claim is "Home". I've seen quite a few things online by people claiming that Jaroslaw Kaczynski is the best because he stands up for "Poland" - with little to no understanding of the situation at all. Many of them simply know that he plays the nationalist card - and - being American, it appeals to them.

The same Polonia has usually next to no idea of what benefits the EU brings - they just quote the same rhetoric, forgetting completely that it was the PiS government who effectively implemented Schengen. PO might have been in power when the borders opened, but the donkey work was done by PiS - yet the same Polonia will happily tell you that the EU is evil, etc etc.

Someone's started a 'campaign' recently posting on various Polish forums that their (Poles abroad/Polonia) constitutional right to vote is being deliberately refused by the PO government; how? it was said that if you don't have valid passport (or national ID in the EU area) you can't vote. The person who started all this fuss is from USA and has been living there since 1991 (according to my sources).

If you can't even be bothered to carry a Polish ID card or passport, you don't deserve to vote. I mean, if they're so proud of their country, why don't they have a valid Polish identity document? Ah wait...plastic Poles again.

For comparison, if you are a British national you must be registered on an electoral list for max. 15 years prior to election. Over 15 yrs - you lose your right to vote.

It's even worse in my situation - I can't vote in the Scottish Parliament elections at all, only the UK Parliamentary ones. And the system is so flawed that effectively, Brits overseas are disenfranchised because the UK stubbornly refuses to allow people to vote at the embassy.

The opinion you quote must come form a Pole who's been staying away way too long ;)

It's a unique feature of the Polonia who went to North America - the ones who stayed in Europe are far more in touch with what's going on here.

In all fairness - I don't entirely have an issue with someone who holds a Polish ID card or passport, being born in Poland (and having lived here for at least a year post-18 years) voting in elections. I have a problem with the Polonia who are 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants, voting in an election despite knowing next to nothing about the country apart from what their "babcia" has told them.
nincompoop_not 2 | 192
24 May 2010 #75
some of them, especially in America
PiS didn't win with PO in Europe in 2007
so it would be safe to conclude that those who are too far away and for too long are radicalised

can't remember and find where I read about the 29% - was reading lots of stuff about the topic over the last few days; PKW website not helpful

about 2007 election in Polish:

if I find where I read about that I'll post

delphiandomine
I had a look at the PKW website and the number I gave (29% of all PiS electorate being in states) doesnt add up; but as I said -when find it , will post.

I am still very much interested in Polish politics and what's going on there, but I decided not to vote in any Polish elections. Been living in the UK more than 10 yrs and voting here as I am interested in here and now. I think I don't have a moral right to vote in Polish elections if I'm honest with myself.

But if it's true, and the case in the States, that 2nd or 3rd generation of 'Poles' who have Polish passports and never lived in Poland vote - that means the Polish voting system is seriously f-ed.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,163
24 May 2010 #76
67% of Poles in the USA voted PiS in 2007

Yep, that seems believable - as I said before, the American Polonia tends to be very badly informed, and they have a somewhat sentimental view of Poland that is backed up by the talk of the "IV RP" that Kaczynski goes on about constantly.

The problem is that many of them don't actually realise how socialist (or communist, as they would say) Kaczynski actually is. All they see is someone who talks about POLSKA POLSKA and who is very anti-communist, while being very pro-Church - everything that appeals to your average American Polonia. Yet - if they knew the extent of Kaczynski's socialism, they would run a mile.

But if it's true, and the case in the States, that 2nd or 3rd generation of 'Poles' who have Polish passports and never lived in Poland vote - that means the Polish voting system is seriously f-ed.

It's a mess - they should be prohibited from voting unless they acquire, at some point, a valid zameldowanie in Poland. Or better still - prohibit voting unless they hold a current dowod osobisty - thus rooting out many of the Plastic Poles who can't even be bothered to return home once in a while.
hague1cmaeron 14 | 1,368
24 May 2010 #77
I like to call him Jan Maria-Lufthansa-Rokita :)

LMAO.

I know that we certainly have too many politicians

Well you would be in favor of PO's proposed cut to the number of MP's

But if you think we are over governed, look at the UK.

If you are a Scotsman you would have: your local Councillor
your Scottish member of parliament
your Westminster member of parliament
and finally your EU member of parliament

What a right old mess, it seems that what use to be the eastern block has nothing on Scotland. The first sign of societal failure, you can see it in every 3rd world country and even the Roman Empire, is that the number of awards and public places multiply rapidly.
bolek 6 | 330
24 May 2010 #78
Yep, that seems believable - as I said before, the American Polonia tends to be very badly informed

hmm has it ever occurred that these people are smart intelligent people well informed, and it is YOU who has little understanding of Polish politics and have a set agenda?

It's a mess - they should be prohibited from voting unless they acquire, at some point, a valid zameldowanie in Poland. Or better still - prohibit voting unless they hold a current dowod osobisty - thus rooting out many of the Plastic Poles who can't even be bothered to return home once in a while.

I don't think a couple of votes have much efect on who gets into government.
zuczek 3 | 52
24 May 2010 #79
hmm has it ever occurred that these people are smart intelligent people well informed, and it is YOU who has little understanding of Polish politics and have a set agenda?

I hardly think Poles living abroad have as much of a grip on the issues as the locals. You may THINK you do but there is no substitute for living it and no amount of media or gossip from your granny is going to change that reality.

You really have no business voting in a place you don't live anyway...rights or not. Who are you to influence things for people who actually have to be there? You don't have to suffer the impacts of your decision like those living there do. I'd be fine with laws saying that in order to vote you had to be residing in that nation/
bolek 6 | 330
24 May 2010 #80
I hardly think Poles living abroad have as much of a grip on the issues as the locals

Can I suggest the reverse, people in the west ie US have more access to information ie internet/radio/tv/newspapers than some person living in the sticks in Poland. Poles are never happy with governments and are only interested in being promised a better life style and money money and more money.
z_darius 14 | 3,965
24 May 2010 #81
The problem with most privatization schemes is that they turn state monopolies into private monopolies.

That is the point.

True privatization needs to take place. The kind that allows us to make international phone calls for next to nothing, the kind that allows us to send our kids to whatever schools we want.

I can't see how selling land, water or mineral resources to foreign companies will allow for cheaper phone calls. And when we're at it, use skype, or VoIP.

In Canada the level of privatization appears to be higher than in Poland. Our internet, cell phone and land line phone costs are the among the highest in the developed world.

They are publicly traded privately owned companies.

No. They are public companies because they are publicly traded. You really need to brush up on those basics. Before you do, feel free to visit a site owned by those who know and check for yourself. Try "US, "International Business Machines", "company name".

No, but why not compare to Hong Kong of the 60s-90s?

Hong Kong is a special case. It's like saying that monarchy is the best political system because in Denmark they enjoy a lot of freedoms, highly developed economy and internationally strong economic presence.

Capitalism without a judiciary that is willing to tackle property rights doesn't make sense.

The problem is that in today' s World the big corporations ARE the judiciary.
Chicago Pollock 7 | 503
24 May 2010 #82
Seanus

I played football today and stormed off the pitch due to their lack of heart. Some young here just lack passion, like their souls have been crushed

Poles who live in the States are highly competitive and motivated.

I encourage people to listen to Peter Schiff on how business has been stifled.

Peter Schiff is an idiot. The guy lives in La La land. American business has been stifled? Gee, how so? Quite the contrary, they've gone berserk. All they've done, since The Bush family have risen to political power, is lower our wages with illegal immigration and cheap Chinese imports. What we have in the US is crony capitalism.
Ironside 53 | 12,413
24 May 2010 #83
Those who vote on PO are trying to prevent the shame that PiS done internationally during the years 2005-2007.

what shame? You are an idiot don't you a one which is complex-ridden ?State your case its thread for you!

And what can he bring to the table?

flask ?
nincompoop_not 2 | 192
24 May 2010 #84
bolek

I suggest the reverse, people in the west ie US have more access to information ie internet/radio/tv/newspapers than some person living in the sticks in Poland.

you forgot to add - and more paranoid and losing touch with reality, overheating their brains to come up with various conspiracy theories; like the ones printed by the USA Today after the Smolensk tragedy back in April when someone wrote "let's be careful. In Poland there may be a few thousand Russian secret agents. Everywhere."

Can't find the original article on the USA Today website, but it was printed on 15/04 at 11.35 and re-printed by Polish Interia.

Most of them are stuck in the cold war era.

zetigrek:
Those who vote on PO are trying to prevent the shame that PiS done internationally during the years 2005-2007.

loads of BS! PiS didn't do well at all except for America and Canada. See my links above about the results how they did abroad.

In USA PiS won in Chicago and New York but lost in Washington and LA, for example. Apparently to a lesser number of Polonia there. I'd say to a lesser number of old Polonia. And PO won in Europe, not PiS.
bolek 6 | 330
24 May 2010 #85
I can understand people who have suffered so much in the last 60 odd years to think that way, Lets be honest who would trust the Russians??? the Americans don't, are they paranoid. Donald Tusk is a dropkick, lacks energy, presentation, confidence, personality etc and etc.
Seanus 15 | 19,674
6 Jun 2010 #86
Well, he is gonna get on great with Komorowski then :)

Komorowski is off to engrave his 'Yes Donald' stamp :)
delphiandomine 88 | 18,163
20 Jun 2010 #87
Komorowski is off to engrave his 'Yes Donald' stamp :)

Just like the President should do. :)

There's a reason why Kwasniewski was a successful President.
Seanus 15 | 19,674
21 Jun 2010 #88
The reason was the he drank copious amounts of vodka, answered the occasional phone call to say ok, and then got back to his Slavic business of mixing different vodkas.
delphiandomine 88 | 18,163
21 Jun 2010 #89
Aw come on, just because he liked a wee drink now and again ;)
Seanus 15 | 19,674
21 Jun 2010 #90
Now and again? Again and again more like :)


Home / News / Komorowski for complex-ridden Poles?