Official Civ4 S&T Off-Topic Thread

[CaterpillarKing]

I've been following your country's news for some time now. *sighs internally* I am so sorry.

 

[CaterpillarKing]

Looks like the UK is going to leave the EU... we might be in for some scary times ahead of us....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[TheNoob]

And then what happened? The pound sterling fell to its lowest point in 31 years. Should have voted remain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaterpillarKing]

I'm not saying leave is worse, simply because they have no literal idea what would happen. The main supporter of "Leave" and also leader of the UKIP party said he has "absolutely no idea" what will happen. That's terrifying. If they have a plan, that's one thing, but this is crazy. I'm so nervous right now. I'm watching the poll numbers.

 

[TheNoob]

Remain would need 60% of the remaining vote to win, which isn't going to happen.

There's a huge far right uprising in Europe happening right now and I don't know how terrified I should be; we saw what happened last time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaterpillarKing]

France is the most likely large country to have a large ultra-nationalist movement take hold with the National Front party holding a lot of ground. I don't think it will happen, but it's still scary.

 

[GreekAnalyzer]

It's done. The UK has left the EU.

I think that far-right uprising is a little strong; certainly they're gaining ground (National Front, the recent Austrian election et al) but to describe it as an uprising is a little hyperbolic.

 

[Niccolo Edwards]

I'm not saying leave is worse, simply because they have no literal idea what would happen. The main supporter of "Leave" and also leader of the UKIP party said he has "absolutely no idea" what will happen. That's terrifying. If they have a plan, that's one thing, but this is crazy. I'm so nervous right now. I'm watching the poll numbers.

One of my friends thinks the most likely thing to happen is that without the UK the collective support for the various nations that need it (Greece) will drop. Germany will continue to provide, but won't be sufficient on its own and regardless of whether they can provide sufficient support or not the German economy will suffer. As a result Germany will either be dragged down (and drag down) the EU or they will take drastic action which will screw up the EU (even more than it already is). As for the UK... no one knows. That's why I'm probably going to be busy for the next few years trying to sort this mess out... and that's just the UK end of things. What happens in the EU, that's either going to be really good or really bad for business. On a lighter note my firm has dozens of files and resumes from people who were runner-ups for job positions that will probably be hired as extra manpower.

 

[CaterpillarKing]

Well leaving will actually take several years of legislation and such. They'll still be in the EU for awhile now. It's funny, though, because, if they want good trade deals with their biggest trade partner then they will have to abide by many of the EU's regulations and submit to rules such as their free worker movement regulations and such. It's just kind of funny to think that they're leaving to almost no change.

Also, the far-right is making large gains in specific countries. Notably France. They have made a lot of ground there, playing off of the fear of terrorists coming from the immigrants, but it is still a somewhat slow rise overall.

Niccolo, what do you do again? I can't remember if you told us.

I'm pretty sure that the UK will pay into the EU almost just as much as they did before if they want to get the good trade deals they had before. If not, then Britain will be even more lost than before.

Also, we may see a new prime minister of the UK. Although Cameron said he wouldn't step down (he supported Remain), there will undoubtedly be pressure from many MPs for him to leave and for someone else conservative that supported Leave to take power. I don't expect it, but it's possible.

 

[Niccolo Edwards]

The pound has already dropped significantly and we will feel the effects of the choice quite quickly in the economy even if it is not enacted quickly (people usually sell off stocks based on the future [or what they think it will be], not on right now). The major problem that I have is that the UK will probably be changing their trade regulations so a lot of things will have to be changed to make sure they comply with the new regulations, or either a client or someone whose made a deal with one of my clients will want something changed so we'll have to deal with that too. I agree that it is funny that they are leaving to basically no change, but they will probably reduce aid to the EU countries that need it which will screw up the EU's economy and make life even more fun.

The European Far-Right is small, but vocal. Kind of like the far right everywhere else. The problem is the same as everywhere else - people can get behind a hardline stance on issues (Brexit is an example of this - its a simple solution to a not-so-simple problem). The nice thing with the European Far-Right is that they are in Europe a notably left leaning area and one that still has memories of the far right (Fascism) being rather evil (along with the far left being evil- hopefully Europe will generally stay fairly left/central and not head to the extremes)

In really fancy terms I'm technically a lawyer with a specialization in corporate and international law. What I really do is liaise, by which I mean I chase people down and get them to conference rooms so that they can talk (basically a client tells me they want to make a deal with someone and I act as a liaison between the client, my firm and everyone else).

 

[CaterpillarKing]

The European Far-Right is small, but vocal. Kind of like the far right everywhere else. The problem is the same as everywhere else - people can get behind a hardline stance on issues (Brexit is an example of this - its a simple solution to a not-so-simple problem). The nice thing with the European Far-Right is that they are in Europe a notably left leaning area and one that still has memories of the far right (Fascism) being rather evil (along with the far left being evil- hopefully Europe will generally stay fairly left/central and not head to the extremes)

The problem with that is they are aren't so small any more. There are really no far-right parties in America with any strength. The Tea Party is the closest thing to that and they only have a few tens of thousands of supporters but aren't even a significant third party like the Libertarians. Compare this to the National Front with has 21 of 74 seats representing France in the European Parliament, and has dominated regions of the country. Also, in Britain, the UKIP party (notorious for many of its MPs using HORRENDOUS racial slurs and saying racist comments) have about the same support in France. Right-wing radicalism is definitely on the rise in the face of the current refugee and it cannot be overlooked. More and more of France is imposing Islamophobic laws, such as banning creating a non-pork alternative for school lunches, which is ridiculous. I'm actually sort of frightened by the rise of such parties in Europe and what it could mean.

I don't know much about France's system, but England has a similar system to ours when electing MPs like how we have electors. The results can be the same. The popular percentage doesn't usually equal the electoral percentage. In the UK it keeps the two large parties (The Labour Party and The Conservative Party) on top by a long ways. If the votes were one for one then UKIP would have much more representation than they do now, and that's terrifying.

That's also why you don't see large hard-right third parties in America. You only see parties shift in their views. The Republican Party is shifting more to the right and the Democratic Party is shifting more to the left. These are polarizing times we're living in.

In really fancy terms I'm technically a lawyer with a specialization in corporate and international law. What I really do is liaise, by which I mean I chase people down and get them to conference rooms so that they can talk (basically a client tells me they want to make a deal with someone and I act as a liaison between the client, my firm and everyone else).

That's actually pretty cool. So, "technically being a lawyer" (your words), and being around that kind of stuff, what kind of advise would you have to someone (me) that is interested into going into law and such? I want to have a career in politics when I grow up, and I have a marked interest in law. That's why I enjoy Speech and Debate so much.

 

[Niccolo Edwards]

Sorry I didn’t respond to this earlier. I’ve been in meetings (still am in video conferences and calls with clients) since before the vote and I’m now on a plane with about dozen associates en route to Europe. Aside from all the chaos and memos at least something funny has come out of this. One of the partners shared this little nugget of wisdom during a short moment of down time:

This just in, fifty-one precent of the UK population confirmed to harbour masochistic tendencies. No word yet from industry officials or the UK’s finance minister on the expected rise in sales of rope, dog collars and sex toys.

The problem with that is they are aren't so small any more. There are really no far-right parties in America with any strength. The Tea Party is the closest thing to that and they only have a few tens of thousands of supporters but aren't even a significant third party like the Libertarians. Compare this to the National Front with has 21 of 74 seats representing France in the European Parliament, and has dominated regions of the country. Also, in Britain, the UKIP party (notorious for many of its MPs using HORRENDOUS racial slurs and saying racist comments) have about the same support in France. Right-wing radicalism is definitely on the rise in the face of the current refugee and it cannot be overlooked. More and more of France is imposing Islamophobic laws, such as banning creating a non-pork alternative for school lunches, which is ridiculous. I'm actually sort of frightened by the rise of such parties in Europe and what it could mean.

Honestly, you should never underestimate any extremist groups because while they aren’t the largest (most people tend to be more moderate) they are the loudest. The European Far-Right does scare me a little, but I doubt they’ll gain too much power (these people tend to be really loud, but eventually they're ignored or elected, usually the former). That being said, the entire political (and economic) situation will change with Brexit so it could be interesting what happens there (they may become more powerful, especially if the EU's economy goes down the drain).

I don't know much about France's system, but England has a similar system to ours when electing MPs like how we have electors. The results can be the same. The popular percentage doesn't usually equal the electoral percentage. In the UK it keeps the two large parties (The Labour Party and The Conservative Party) on top by a long ways. If the votes were one for one then UKIP would have much more representation than they do now, and that's terrifying.

I honestly have no idea how France’s system works (I'm pretty sure the President at least, if not the PM as well, is/are elected separately from the two houses). I know that it’s bicameral with a President and a PM as part of the executive and that the two ‘parliaments’ can be called together as one for constitutional amendments (thank the French Revolution and De Gaul for it being so confusing). France’s PM or President actually called an emergency session of one of the bodies a few hours ago in response to Brexit. France has a two tiered ballot system (it's more proportional than FPTP or Electoral Colleges) in which the first round has a ton of people, but the second only has the top two candidates. The UK and most of the Commonwealth (except Australia and possibly a few others) vote by a first-past-the-post (hyphens are included). The FPTP system has pretty much the same major pitfalls the Electoral College has; popular vote doesn’t always mean a victory and votes are more easily split and not counted.. If you want information on this I believe Canada’s new Liberal government is trying to change the system, so there’s probably all sorts of information on it online (look up: Canada Electoral Reforms, there’s plenty of results)

Elections in the parliamentary system of CW Nations work by the party or coalition with the largest number of seats gaining control of the House. Technically they don’t vote, the monarch (in this case the Queen) appoints the Prime Minister at the recommendation of Parliament… It’s a really fancy way of saying that they implicitly vote for the PM, then do their duty. I suppose it would be like electing Congress who would then elect POTUS. The nice thing is that the executive and the legislative bodies are controlled by the same party or coalition and thus there is less infighting within the government.

That's also why you don't see large hard-right third parties in America. You only see parties shift in their views. The Republican Party is shifting more to the right and the Democratic Party is shifting more to the left. These are polarizing times we're living in.

Interestingly, it has been suggested that the public/average American is not polarized, so much about the issues, but rather about political allegiance and parties (many Republicans are in support of some form of gun control and abortion in some cases). It is possible that a Democrat may agree with a Republican’s entire platform but vote against him/her because s/he is a Republican. Of course, Congress and the entirety of Washington is so polarized that getting anything done is a miracle of biblical proportions (trust me I've tried and so has my firm on behalf of a client... in the case of my firm's attempt... it was a fun way to waste five or so million dollars).

That's actually pretty cool. So, "technically being a lawyer" (your words), and being around that kind of stuff, what kind of advise would you have to someone (me) that is interested into going into law and such? I want to have a career in politics when I grow up, and I have a marked interest in law. That's why I enjoy Speech and Debate so much.

Most of my job has nothing to do with politics (we outsource to a lobbying firm when absolute necessary). It's actually a lot of dealing with guys who have degrees from Stanford, Oxford, Yale, etc. and egos that would make you think they have PhDs and singlehandedly built a billion dollar company from the ground up (spoiler: they didn't and they don't like to be told that). Probably the most exciting part of my job is when I have to deal with people that don't want to be dealt with.

As for your question, it depends. Do you want to go into politics or do you want to do politics? Basically, do you want to be a staffer, a lobbyist, etc. or do you want to be a politician? I'm assuming the later. It also depends on if you want to be a lawyer first, then more into politics or just start in politics and move you way up.

My general advice for life and career is that you should spend your education learning about things that excite you and that you can apply to your job, that you should spend your time creating networks of people within and without your profession (be the guy that knows a caterer or two, a beautician, a mechanic, a photographer, an officer in the army, a cop or FBI agent, a couple journalists and so on). Outside of that, learn, learn, learn. The more people you are able to hold a semi-intelligible conversation with the better (you don’t have to be able to do their job, but you should know what their limitations are). I can offer you a little bit more information if I know what you want to do (I'm assuming politician), but that isn't really my area of expertise (let me know though, I can probably give a little bit of advice).

 

[TheNoob]

So Cameron is stepping down by October and Scotland is going to have another independence referendum within the next two years...

This is going to be a fun ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaterpillarKing]

I honestly have no idea how France’s system works (I'm pretty sure the President at least, if not the PM as well, is/are elected separately from the two houses). I know that it’s bicameral with a President and a PM as part of the executive and that the two ‘parliaments’ can be called together as one for constitutional amendments (thank the French Revolution and De Gaul for it being so confusing). France’s PM or President actually called an emergency session of one of the bodies a few hours ago in response to Brexit. France has a two tiered ballot system (it's more proportional than FPTP or Electoral Colleges) in which the first round has a ton of people, but the second only has the top two candidates. The UK and most of the Commonwealth (except Australia and possibly a few others) vote by a first-past-the-post (hyphens are included). The FPTP system has pretty much the same major pitfalls the Electoral College has; popular vote doesn’t always mean a victory and votes are more easily split and not counted.. If you want information on this I believe Canada’s new Liberal government is trying to change the system, so there’s probably all sorts of information on it online (look up: Canada Electoral Reforms, there’s plenty of results)

Elections in the parliamentary system of CW Nations work by the party or coalition with the largest number of seats gaining control of the House. Technically they don’t vote, the monarch (in this case the Queen) appoints the Prime Minister at the recommendation of Parliament… It’s a really fancy way of saying that they implicitly vote for the PM, then do their duty. I suppose it would be like electing Congress who would then elect POTUS. The nice thing is that the executive and the legislative bodies are controlled by the same party or coalition and thus there is less infighting within the government.

Yeah, FPTP, that's the phrase I was thinking of. I just couldn't actually materialize the word I was trying to think of. In this day and age, with such an informed voter base, I'm surprised there aren't more people upset about the non-popular thing. That's usually because the majority wins anyhow and it works out, but I wish there was a little more resentment to the old system.

Interestingly, it has been suggested that the public/average American is not polarized, so much about the issues, but rather about political allegiance and parties (many Republicans are in support of some form of gun control and abortion in some cases). It is possible that a Democrat may agree with a Republican’s entire platform but vote against him/her because s/he is a Republican. Of course, Congress and the entirety of Washington is so polarized that getting anything done is a miracle of biblical proportions (trust me I've tried and so has my firm on behalf of a client... in the case of my firm's attempt... it was a fun way to waste five or so million dollars).

I actually had to study this for my AP US Government and Politics class. The average voter is much more moderate then the average politician on either side. But politicians are getting ever more polarized. They are separating more and more, where they used to somewhat agree. Check this infographic out:

Spoiler :

As for your question, it depends. Do you want to go into politics or do you want to do politics? Basically, do you want to be a staffer, a lobbyist, etc. or do you want to be a politician? I'm assuming the later. It also depends on if you want to be a lawyer first, then more into politics or just start in politics and move you way up.

My general advice for life and career is that you should spend your education learning about things that excite you and that you can apply to your job, that you should spend your time creating networks of people within and without your profession (be the guy that knows a caterer or two, a beautician, a mechanic, a photographer, an officer in the army, a cop or FBI agent, a couple journalists and so on). Outside of that, learn, learn, learn. The more people you are able to hold a semi-intelligible conversation with the better (you don’t have to be able to do their job, but you should know what their limitations are). I can offer you a little bit more information if I know what you want to do (I'm assuming politician), but that isn't really my area of expertise (let me know though, I can probably give a little bit of advice).

Yeah, that's pretty much what I intend to do. For the longest time I thought I wanted to be an aerospace engineer, but I realized that is just so not me. I'm much more social and talkative and I like to try and prove points. That's why I want to do law. Off of law I want to jump into politics, like use it as a springboard. The network is an interesting thing I never thought of, that's pretty neat. Yes, though, being a politician is what I want to do.

 

[GreekAnalyzer]

Significant third party

Libertarian

Top kek.

I think that the UK could go into a recession within the next few years. The loss of financial services in London and the need to renegotiate trade treaties is going to hurt the UK pretty badly, and that could possibly lead to a recession.

Also, this article from The Onion is really hilarious: http://www.theonion.com/article/americans-confused-system-government-which-leader--53156

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

There are dumb people for Leave, and smart people for Leave. Smart people for Stay, dumb people for Stay. I find most people against Leave are against the supporters, which is merely a manipulation of the media.

I have to say, I was for Leave! Hooray! Now let's hurry up the Scottish and Northern Ireland independence and have them rejoin the EU.

As for the stock market, all it is is a glorified racehorse track. It's going down because people bet on the wrong outcome. It'll come back up - no need to worry! We must not make our decisions on what the stock market will do.

 

[TheNoob]

I have to say I'm say heavily in favor of Scottish independence


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

By the way, can you believe the media is trying to tell people Bernie Sanders is supporting Hillary Clinton? What a bunch of lies! MILLIONS are falling for it!

Sheep....

 

[TheNoob]

I don't trust the media because they're looking at this through the perspective that this is just a horserace and it's all personality politics.

I don't care if Hillary gets the nomination (which she is overwhelmingly likely to), so long as she adopts progressive policies. Having Warren as VP would be a huge plus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CaterpillarKing]

I don't know if she would pick Elizabeth Warren, though. There's this thing called "balancing the ticket", which means that you pick someone that will appeal to a different demographic, i.e. the male demographic. That's why McCain picked Palin, to get women, and Obama picked Biden, to not scare off moderates that would see a complete minority ticket as "too progressive" if you catch my drift. I'm not saying I don't want Warren, I'm just not sure how likely it is, considering she will be trying to win over a lot of the more moderate voters that just don't like Trump. I imagine she'll probably pick a slightly less liberal white (or other race, doesn't matter as much as the gender in this case) male. Not that it's right, it's just what happens and what voters will and will not vote for.