Belgian government fell

So guys...
I've decided to take you all Pizza Hut.
One day, when we all meet... In Heaven <3

"I've never seen a Walloon politician (seriously) say "Flanders wishes need to be respected as well". Many Flemish politicians have (too much, methinks)."
At this very instant, there could be a Wallonian Boomlala saying the exact same thing, the other way around.
Actually, you can't know what is said . We get told the Walloon politicians always say 'non' all the time. There will be a shed of truth in that, but you can't know how it really is. They can tell us anything they want really. (note: not conspiracy, but a lack of knowlegde) To really get a good view, you should read Wallonian newspapers too. Can you, with that little French you have each week? Wallonian newspapers will put the problem in our camp. I don't read them either, but I don't read any newspaper, I get my information from discussions like this one. So in a way I'm not biased.
You can't simply say: we are right and they are wrong. That would be a childish generalization (cheers) and really black and white.

"charismatic figure in Hitler who would turn the country around." Many people see that in Bart De Wever too. Charismatic people should be feared, not elected.

"People are not responsible for fuck ups in government." accepted

"the 'money pump' is blind" agreed
but then "If the investment policies were actually better (and the politicians competent)"
I don't think it's the politicians. Most of them are in fact good politicians, but the system is fucked up. They all want to change that system, which gives problems.
Everyone wants an answer, but there is too much discussion.
And then one party comes along and tells that they will no longer take the shit and that those who do not agree are evil. They claim to hold the answer. They claim to end discussions by not giving in. They even have a threat: 'we will shut down the money pump' or 'We will split Belgium'. They don't even take a pick. They want to leave it all open. It's actually funny how well they got it all covered for maximum votes. I can comprehend how many people fall for this, but not you. Such a party should be feared, not elected. (again, I'm not thinking of conspiracy)

'If the investment policies were actually better (and the politicians competent), I would have no problem with it.'
So does everyone agree, so does everyone say. But of course, I forgot the mean Walloon Politicians who want to steal christmas.

"The concept of self-interest states that if everyone is driven by what is best for them, everyone becomes better for it."
There is no way of predicting the possible outcome of a split. Yes, it is possible that both nations would become rich. And yes, the opposite is possible too.
Spliting Belgium should be such a last resort that it isn't one any more. Leaving it open as an option now is rediculous. There still are better resolves that should be used.

"Wallonia is already a developed country (or part of a country). And they could get even better if their fate wasn't so tied to Flanders."
There just is no way of telling. Looking at other examples isn't sufficiant for a prediction.


I'll recapitulate:
We both agree that Belgium shouldn't be split yet. Even that there are better answers. ( right?) We disagree on the outcome of a split. But that is still irrelevant as we're not that far yet.

You believe NVA will bring a change in our parliaments. I believe they're no better than any other party, but much more opportunistic for votes.
I must state that NVA already had quite a big slice of the pie last elections. All they did was say they will fix it.(you will disagree) How big does their majority have to be to resolve BHV by putting their foot down?
I fear the party. Their way of thinking is dangerously right-winged, and we do not want that as a majority.

What to vote then? There will be a lot of right. (NVA, CD&V) So we need left to counter that a bit. I believe in giving one of the smaller parties a shot at it. And really I got no problem with VLD. (except their privatisation ideas)

You told wiser things as a liberal democrat my friend.


and razor: pizza hut made my gf ill

England Will Only Get Worse Its True, also letter to the door? in england it stupid when it comes around voteing time everyone in the house over 18 gets a letter on the same day about voting,
constant postit's put through your dooor every other day the free local times has postit inside too and whole section about and we get govermant party grp turning up at your door can we count on your vote in up comming election and i am like yeh you can count on me shuting the door in your face thats about it. Lol :p

Here are some citations (La Derniere Heure, independent Walloon (actually from Brussels) newspaper):
Maingain (MR) about confederalism: Il s'agit du plus grand piège à cons qui nous attend! (== It's a trap! lulz Ackbar)
Maingain about himself: Je suis un fédéraliste, je ne suis pas un séparatiste (because Walloon politicians care soooo deeply about the Belgian state. I ain't buying it.)
From La Libre Belgique:
Armand De Decker (MR) about Flemish politics: il est grand temps que les partis traditionnels flamands tranchent avec la dictature intellectuelle des partis séparatistes. (Of course they would love to create even more division in Flemish politics than there already is --> Walloon power (much more unified), I also love how they diabolize the N-VA)
And here is a fantastic interview with De Wever: http://www.lalibre.be/actu/elections-2010/article/584304/de-wever-le-federalisme-est-un-euphemisme.html
For a 'fascist Hitler-like leader', it's weird he doesn't want to be prime minister, isn't it Lone?

I don't see pure charisma in De Wever, I see an intellectual mind with a clear message and the political responsibility to carry out that message. Also see last sentence of previous paragraph.

I think keeping multiple ideas open is a splendid idea: the party doesn't need to compromise to one position, and when the decision gets made, they can evaluate the situation and take the best one possible. Confederalism or separatism, whichever suits best, whichever keeps Flanders healthy.

I think keeping the money pump open (and vigorously defending it against the fascist separatist Flemish parties straight from hell) assures them good publicity and lots of votes, so they'd rather have that system than actually create autonomy for Wallonia.

Of course you can predict economic situations, if you objectively look at the parameters involved with the system and can create logically coherent models of said system. After a small dip of bureaucratic malaise, there will be a consistent rise as the new economic policies affect Flanders. I gave you several reasons why Flanders is an excellent economic player (despite it's small size). Most important ones are (repeating myself): excellent infrastructure, high GDP, strong education levels and productive work force.

An analogy with Czechoslovakia fits though. Czech Republic being economically stronger, Czech transfers money to Slovakia, politics are pretty much split (like in Belgium), Slovak politicians want confederalism (because they're smarter than Walloon politicians) and we got a peaceful resolution (Velvet Divorce), with both countries economically better as a result (with Slovakia closing the gap) and without worsened relations whatsoever (maybe even better).

They were strained by being partnered with the ever so cautious CD&V. More infighting than anything else. You seem to have been scared by the rhetoric of all the other parties who fear the N-VA and will do anything to put them in the bad spot. Separatists, 'softer' VBers, nationalistic-fascist. The air of bad publicity around them is bullshit, if you actually read what they say, if you study their concepts, I believe they could bring a positive change to Flanders, if not Belgium. Confederalism is an excellent system for Belgium, providing in both Flanders' and Wallonia's need, but if the Walloon politicians are too stubborn to respect our needs and wishes, and keep up the privileged 'Wallo-federalist' state model, wherein the minority can do anything simply because the majority is too compassionate, separatism will heed us both from our downfall. And then secession is the way to go.

And we'll already have enough left as it is (the Walloon bloc, led by Di Rupo). I wouldn't care about a Walloon PM, but don't put red in charge. Expensive social provisions ahoy (Flanders pays the bill, Wallonia gets the most out of it), and whoop, down our economy goes.

And I don't brand myself a 'liberal democrat'. Although I align with their position, I am a freethinker above all. I simply evaluate the situation, look at the parameters, research the parties and then make the best choice. That is how I came to my conclusion.

Yo!! What a long storys man^^

Cool story, bro.

Both sides keep diabolising eachother. But I don't get why you are doing it.

"Confederalism or separatism, whichever suits best, whichever keeps Flanders healthy." *Belgium
The whole point is that separatism is a dangerous answer with unpredictable results and there are more secure, safer answers in federalism.

"I think keeping the money pump open (and vigorously defending it against the fascist separatist Flemish parties straight from hell) assures them good publicity and lots of votes, so they'd rather have that system than actually create autonomy for Wallonia."
So does everyone know. It's not about the 'fascist separatist Flemish parties straight from hell'. It is just what every party is saying. You don't need to go to NVA for those remarks. And No, NVA is not politically superior. They say the same as all other parties, only they put it in a nice jacket of nationalism.

You can't just hope and pray for something like the velvet divorce. I'm not to sure about history, but isn't that one of the only separations without bloodshed? I do remember they were very proud of their 'velvet divorce' and had reason to.
It cannot be foretold what would happen. Federalisation is the only decent answer.

"The air of bad publicity around them is bullshit" AIR OF BAD PUBLICITY?
Ever since BDW made some great remarks in a television quiz, everyone sucks his fn cock. Why would they be the largest party in the polls, because so many people "evaluate the situation, look at the parameters, research the parties and then make the best choice"? Many people will vote NVA, the dumbest fucks first. Take it as a compliment: you don't fit in.

"but if the Walloon politicians are too stubborn to respect our needs and wishes" diabolisation and generalisation

"Flanders pays the bill, Wallonia gets the most out of it" still a diabolisation, but statistically (more or less) correct. As I have said, a solution must be found. The problem is (as always) unemployment and our lovely word "dop". The point is that there should be reformations; not in the markings in our soil, but in our unemployment benifits. Actually this problem isn't about Wallonia alone; it would solve the immigrant issues too.

What will happen next is that CD&V and NVA will have a majority. They will discus more, nothing will get solved (our system is designed that way) and both factions (V vs F) will continue to blame eachother. In the end we will have 4 parliaments filled with childeren. No, NVA will not be the 'new wind to reformations'. They have no more power than any other party. They just believe they do, and are good at making you believe that too.
There is nothing that can be done about it, but I don't want to have caused it. And I don't want you to have caused it either.

I think a combination of all good ideas is a good idea and makes the world a perfekt place.

Which is why I am more lenient towards confederalism, less shaky grounds yet we get our economic independence (although I'm convinced that both Flanders and Wallonia would survive a secession). And the N-VA is focusing on confederalism now (en route to independence, but by then their momentum will have stagnated. And they're not inherently separatist).

I don't think any of the traditional parties doesn't even dare to touch the money pump. Walloon politicians dominate the field of rhetorics, when it comes to issues such as that.

Federalisation is definitely not the answer. It would make everything worse. The federal Belgian state is an archaic ideal and will never become a reality. The two parts of the country are fundamentally different in politics, economy and demographic parameters. Different disease, different cure (once again De Wever).

I should have made myself more clear: the air of bad publicity constructed by the other parties in particular. Everyone is spitting at the N-VA now. Not surprising, they have the majority, and they know the people are fed up with the traditional parties. And with every attack, they dig a deeper hole. Especially the CD&V, who will pay the price for the political malaise they helped create.

So far they haven't been very respectful of us, seeing how they do not even wish to follow the Constitution when it comes to losing votes and losing Walloon influence on Flemish grounds. The minority doesn't need to respect the lingual laws, right? Heck, they don't even accept the decision of the Constitutional Court. And god forbid if Flanders would vote the reform through anyway (by a voting majority, not by 'fascism'), because then they're all too eager to start the alarm bell procedure because the mean Flemish politicians are forcing their will on Flemish grounds, in accordance to Belgian laws.

How is that a diabolisation? It's simply correct. What do you suggest we do to unemployment benefits? Raise them? With what money? Taxes are already one of the highest in the world.

I hope N-VA and VLD will form a coalition, with the N-VA as majority party. They're both aiming for confederalism, and it would form a nice central-right alignment with liberal streaks. Excellent.

We can't know what the other parties are planning to do for the money pump, but everyone agrees that restrictions are necessary.

There is little difference between Wallonia and Flanders. The only evidence of a difference is the language. But that isn't even a problem as every politician is/should be fluent in both tongues. I'd like you to point me out how the disease is different. Both factions are Belgian.There's a reason why we're a country.

Every party always shits on the others. NVA shouldn't feel special. Maybe a bit.

That's why I'd suggest federalisation. Why the fuck do we need 4 parliaments? Why can't I vote for a Wallonian party? Do these things have reasons or are they just random? Seriously it's all just a bunch of bullshit. The system on it self isn't fair because there are less Wallonians, but their elections count for the same as ours. So in a way a Walloon vote counts more than ours. The whole system is unfair. It's not just BHV. We're a fn small country, why all the divisions?

unemployment benifits? Restrictions of course. How often does it happen that people continue to get fired (purposely often) from the jobs they are given so they keep recieving unemployment benifits. Unemployment is not a lack of jobs, it's a lack of people that want to do those jobs. It happens amongst minorities such as immigrants, and yes in big parts of Wallonia too. VB blames the people's morality. It has nothing to do with morality, it's just the system failing. There should be a regulation so that people can't keep recieving those benifits, and so that there's more money left for those who actually need it (temporary unemployed, people with physical conditions, etc)

A coalition would be alright. But I do not want NVA as major party.

tl;dr

You're looking at culture. I'm talking about economics. The economical situation is different in Flanders and Wallonia, and hence need different treatment. In the current system this is impossible, because all the economic decisions are based on Wallonia's situation (most of the time) but need to be backed up with Flanders' money (because of our demographic majority), but Flanders doesn't get any pressure relieve due to the lagging economy in Wallonia.

Blame Wallonia. They're the ones who haven't unified all of their shit (the German microminority would be under-represented). Flanders is clean and efficient. And we aren't supposed to vote for Walloon parties because Walloon parties represent the wishes of the Walloon people in the government. Flemish voters don't really have any business with that. Equal representation has been set forth as a principle since the beginning, mainly because the demographic minority (Wallonia) had the electoral majority in the old voting system (votes based on welfare) and therefore would be more represented than the demographic majority.

I think the division came to be due to ideological differences between the two parts. Right-wing liberal Flanders and left-wing socialist Wallonia. And several elitist attitudes of the Wallonians (not only the politicians) caused frictions in the beginning of the 20th century. And then there was the 'koningskwestie' of course, and the situation-Leuven.

I agree with you on the unemployment benefits, largely. It would be a logistic hellhole though to actually control whether or not someone is abusing the system. And it would definitely not be very popular. (Weakness of democracy, in my eyes)

I think N-VA would do a good job. Finally a party that defends our wishes, but isn't too extremist to completely denounce Wallonia (they really don't). I think N-VA is perfectly willing to help Wallonia though and even work together in a federal model, but bloc-Di Rupo seems to have made up their mind about what they expect from us. Which is complete servility (when it comes to state reform issues). N-VA simply will refuse to do that.

And recent polls concluded N-VA currently has 25% support, which is large in Belgium. I'm only afraid of last-minute changes, when voters suddenly go to the traditional parties anyway, because they're scared of change. I find it wonderful, though. I hope they will be able to live up to their image. I know it's politics, but we can give them a chance to make a change, at least. The old parties wouldn't do shit, and the small parties aren't worth a dime (and VB is too extreme). Go N-VA.

Buy the book when it's done poeple.
Well keep going

short cause I'm tired and we're slowely reaching an agreement anyways.

Because every region with a different economical landscape needs different politics. No. That BDW quote makes little sense. I prefer the ones he made against Rik Torfs in 'de slimste mense ter wereld'. Ow yeh, that show had nothing to do with politics, he was there as a celebrity. Sorry, my bad.

It still is a load of bullshit. We're one country. We don't need 4 parliaments and 20000 parties. Someone needs to clean that shit up.
I know one thing; NVA will be as terrible a cleaning lady as any other party.

"Because every region with a different economical landscape needs different politics. No."

That makes no sense. Politics need to be adjusted to the economical parameters. Otherwise we could create one big economical blueprint which can be applied everywhere and every time. Although principles can be universal (capitalist sentiment, free market, private corporations, ..) , the concrete realizations of these principles need to be adjusted to the economical situation in order to be as effective as possible. And this is where Belgium goes wrong, and why confederalism is the correct solution.

Just because you say it's bullshit, doesn't mean it's bullshit. You haven't pointed out any argument for federalisation, just 'we're one country'. Confederalism would keep Belgium one country. But a better structured country. Which is the same you want.

I don't care about the amount of parliaments, if they are efficient and represent the vox populi. The multitude of parties is annoying sometimes, but that's part of democracy, especially Belgian democracy. We have always been a government of coalitions, and there is a profound elegance to it: cooperation above all, no partisanship (USA Rep-Dem rivalry). We used to be renowned for our cooperative abilities in the EU, but we destroyed that reputation. You know who I blame already.

I never watched that show (Slimste Mens), by the way.

"the concrete realizations of these principles need to be adjusted to the economical situation in order to be as effective as possible. And this is where Belgium goes wrong, and why confederalism is the correct solution."
Yes and that can't be done by a country? You actually need a confederalist state for that? is France split in a billion parts because of "different disease, different treatment" ? Is any country in the world? I mean, when we split Belgium in 2, why notiin 10, for every province. Or in 300, for every city and village. It's bullshit and you know it. Belgium would work better with one federal parliament, like a real country.

Why confederalism is bullshit? Well it's not that hard. We now have 4 parliaments: a flemish, a walloon, a federal and even a german one. In Flanders you can't vote for Walloon parties (except BHV :s). And the other way around. Reason: none. Sense: none.
Federalisation would not only solve BHV (which seems to be quite difficult), it would bring structure in a system that doesn't make sense at all. What if I want to vote a Walloon party? I can't. Again; reason: none. sense: none.
Oh and also, I stated before that a Walloon vote counts more than a Flemish one. Which you didn't correct if I understood well. A Belgian vote counts for everyone the same.

And the arguments for confederalism? That the system works so damn well as we can all see?


About a million watched that show every night from monday to thursday. It has a tremendous effect on the way people look at politicians. Their sympathic character is often worth more than their ideas. Again a reason why I hate democracy. Fn anachronism (although I cannot give an alternative)

Of course it can be done by one country, but in Belgium the federal system doesn't work because the Walloon politicians do not share the same federal attitude as the Flemish politicians do. Walloon politicians work the federal system to produce all kinds of benefits for the Walloons, play the victim role as the demographic minority and riot every time Flanders makes some of its wishes clear on the federal level, despite us having a demographic majority. I'm perfectly fine with supporting Wallonia, but not in this manner and not with their attitude.

And France has 23 regions with their own elected council. It's not completely the same, but it's on the same level as Flanders and Wallonia. But you're right, France is a successful unitary country. But I do think they apply different economic strategies in different regions depending on their needs.

We have 6 parliaments, not 4. 3 of those are found in Wallonia (the demographic minority lulz). We used to have 2 but we streamlined it into one. Excellent.

You're missing the point of dividing the votes. Flemish people represent Flemish wishes. Walloon people represent Walloon wishes. We have no business interfering with each other's representation. That's the philosophy behind it. And no party is forbidden to campaign in both regions, so in a way we already have a federal election. Parties just don't seem to care. Whether that's positive or negative, I'm not sure.

I like the 'vote equality' no matter what. Both sides get equal representation at the table, and in our bipolar federation, it's a nice principle. Like I said, I find Belgian consensus-politics to be a great asset, if it works. And only in the 21st century there started coming holes in it. So either we erase the wall (federalization, or even unitary system) or let each region do it's own thing, within the national shell of a confederation. Both Flanders and Wallonia sovereign, but with shared assets (army, foreign affairs, things we have a common view upon). It would remove the Flanders-Wallonian disputes, or at least defederalize those, so that there doesn't need to be a complete shut down of the government every time we don't reach consensus.

And we would become the first modern confederation ever, a political curiosity. A Velvet LAT-relationship. Effective, with a Belgian identity, but without bickering and political infighting. In fact, very Belgian-esque. A brand new solution to an old, lingering problem. Something we excelled in during the 90s. And both Walloons and Flemish are nationalistic enough to keep Belgium together, apart.

Well, I didn't get influenced by it.

Also, I'd like to prematurely stop the debate. You can have your last word if you want, but I find this subject rather boring. I've never been hugely interested in Belgian politics, and I still don't. I don't care that much about federalization and de-federalization, although I do have my opinions on it.

It's funny how we are political polar opposites though. One more subject we have completely different views upon.

EDIT: I also did the political view test to determine which parties align with you. And as expected: VLD, LDD and N-VA. Central-right ftw.

http://www.stemwijzer.nl/
Vote boom, Voteee!

Funny, these are my top 3 =P
1) PVV
2) Trots op Nederland
3) VVD
xDD

PvdA

1) PVV
2) Trots op Nederland
3) SP (lulz)

So I'm liberal, like predicted, but somehow I go along quite well with the socialists in the Netherlands. Don't know much about Dutch politics. I do know PVV is Blondie's party, but I wouldn't have any qualms voting for him.

U can better don't vote for the Dutch Politics, it's hopeless. They can't even order for at least 10 years.
Well okay, i gonna vote for PvdA couse i think Job Cohen can make differents in our country. And more then Wouter Bos.
Some how Bos like more hes family now then ealier.
Only couse they got a war in our country about military in Uruzgan.
How weird can it be? i don't really understand our Cabinet here in holland^^
We talk about what we can do better in our country. and the military in Uruzgan choose for they life as military.
But Bos hates to let people there.

Let us burry the discussion then.

Every time I do a voting test, I get Groen!, even though at every ecological question I answer with a 'don't care'. Seeing how left-winged they really are, I think I'm gonna vote for them.
And also I heard they are for legalisation. It isn't that important, but it says something about their spirit.