I would love to see an EU wide movement.
Prost! :-)
Seems to be a complete clusterfuck, as someone living in the Nordics it's pretty funny to think that a bit of snow can simply grind to a halt the richest area of Germany.
ChatGPT: "Stockholm lies approximately 28.87% of the way north when considering the span from the southernmost to the northernmost points of Sweden's municipalities, based on latitude."
Swedes do not care about your conclusions as we still won't claim Stockholm is in the southern Sweden.
Again, reading your comments it looks like you're translating Swedish words directly to English ("Sydsverige" -> "Southern Sweden"). But they are not the same, right?
And I didn't just ask ChatGPT for a number.
I used ChatGPT Python data analysis to process official SCB datafiles with the population count and geographical locations for the 290 municipalities ("kommuner") in Sweden.
They were sorted in increasing latitude (south -> north). The population count for each municipality was accumulated until it reached 80% of the total Swedish population.
The municipality where the 80% threshold was crossed turned out to be Västerås.
That means that my claim "Southern Sweden with 80% of the Swedish population" is correct. You don't have to go that far north (32%) before you've covered 80% of the Swedish population.
Where do you think the 80% threshold lies?
Source data:
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/regional-statistik-och-kartor/regionala-indelningar/digitala-granser/
https://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101A/BefolkningNy/https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B6dra_Sverige
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydsverige
Ingen av dessa geografiska områden inkluderar Stockholm. Sluta använda ChatGPT som källa, det får dig bara att framstå som korkad.
Jag har inte skrivit något på svenska eller ens riktat till en svensk. Jag skrev "Southern Sweden" till en tysk.
Det har inget att göra med vilka begrepp vi använder på svenska. Avsikten var att att ge honom en bild av vilken del av Sverige jag menade i mitt första inlägg. Vad får dig att tro att han tolkade "Southern Sweden" som det svenska "sydsverige" (dvs Skåne och Blekinge), och inte "Sverige upp till Stockholm ungefär" som jag menade?
Din engelska är långt ifrån perfekt. Jag antar att du inte har bott längre perioder i utlandet, och inte heller är extremt van att kommunicera på engelska med folk som inte känner till Sverige? Jag har bott utomlands i omgångar i uppemot två decennier nu, och tycker mig ha en bra bild av vilken bild personer i andra länder får när jag säger "Southern Sweden". Detta är alltså en helt annan sak än vad någon från Linköping uppfattar som det svenska "sydsverige".
Jag definierade sedan exakt vad jag använde ChatGPT till. Dvs att låta den analysera officiella datafiler från SCB för att räkna ut hur långt norrut man måste gå för att täcka 80% av befolkningen. Detta gjordes steg för steg, med kontroller av mig längs vägen att delresultaten verkade vettiga eller fick rättas till. Jag påstår inte att det garanterat är 100% korrekt, men det är långt ifrån snutet ur näsan som du antyder.
Du kanske tycker att "80%" är ointressant, men den biten kommer från mig, inte ChatGPT.
Om du tycker att det verkar helt osannolikt att 80%-gränsen går ungefär i höjd med Västerås, så skriv det isåfall?
Var menar du att 80%-gränsen går? Luleå? Halmstad?
But that wasn't the context in this case. I described the situation in Sweden to a person from Germany.
In that context, I think it is reasonable to call the southernmost one third of Sweden "Southern Sweden".
It will give him the correct mental image of what I meant when he looks at a map of Sweden.
> Stockholm is not in southern sweden
Are you sure this the level of comments you are supposed to post here?
With the help of ChatGPT, I crossreferenced two lists of all municipalities (kommuner) in Sweden to place them in an increasing latitude order (south->north), and calculated where the 80% population threshold lies.
The answer is Västerås, which is a bit north of Stockholm. It is only 31.7% of the distance to the northernmost point in Sweden.
So 80% of Sweden's population lives in the southernmost 32% of the country. This might not be called "Sydsverige" in Swedish, but describing it to a foreigner I think 32% qualifies as "Southern Sweden".
Source data:
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/regional-statistik-och-kartor/regionala-indelningar/digitala-granser/
https://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BE__BE0101__BE0101A/BefolkningNy/Yeaaah about that, Denmark is currently covered in snow and the country isn't equipped to deal with it at all. As soon as the snow starts falling busses and trains are cancelled, people realize that maybe winter tires aren't such a bad idea, roads aren't cleared because the cities don't actually have the budgets to deal with it. So you can't rely on public transport, but driving can be dangerous because many roads aren't kept clear and other people are idiots, driving around on summer tires (that includes busses and trucks).
Hold the phone. Are you telling me winter tires are not mandatory by law in Denmark in winter?!
You could probably get a fine for driving without them if the weather makes it unsafe, but that would be because you're not driving according to conditions.
Anyway, loads of people are driving around on summer tires during the winter and it's amazingly dangerous and they cause problems for themselves and others.
That is exactly how the law is written in Sweden too:
"During the period from 1 December to 31 March there are special requirements in Sweden on which type of tyre a certain vehicle is to have when there are winter conditions on the road."
https://transportstyrelsen.se/en/road/Vehicles/winter-tyres/
So, according to the law in Sweden, winter tires are not legally required if there are not winter conditions on the road.
But most years, you won't make it much past December 1st before encountering winter conditions in most parts of Sweden.
That's absolutely insane. One would think the Nordics would be a bit morse sensible on this. Here in Austria they are mandatory between November and April even if you live in places that don't see much snow. Yeah, it's an added expense and PITA but when the snow does come it's overall way safer.
That does not seem to be correct:
"Die Winterreifenpflicht gilt für Pkw und Lkw bis 3,5 t nur bei winterlichen Fahrbahnverhältnissen und nur dann, wenn auch gefahren wird."
https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/themen/freizeit_und_strassenve...
That wording looks to be the same as for Denmark and Sweden?
Edit:
Seems like some need a history lesson about Hans Carl Nipperdey
Thanks to
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Carl_Nipperdey
who already stripped worker of their rights in the Nazi regime.
"There were no strikes against Agenda 2010 as the German constitution prohibits politically motivated strikes, but some demonstrations at least were organized and supported by the unions."
(for those who don't know, Schröder were a Putin stooge):
This serves as an important reminder for the distinction between national wealth and individual wealth, which are not always directly proportional. You can easily make your country wealthier and your people poorer at the same time, which is exactly what Agenda 2010 did.
But thankfully workers aren't mere wheels, and they can design the said framework themselves! Pretty much like peasants got to imagine parliements so as to gain the natural right to rule over themselves, despite kings and lords trying to convince them it was a silly and dangerous idea.
Congratulations, you have just invented entrepreneurship
Yes, they're called committees. They're wildly inefficient for fundamental reasons [1]. We tolerate them in government, because when it comes to the state, we've learned that being consistently right is more important than being efficient. That's not the case in commerce.
I don't think worker-owned companies are communist. Until recently, investment banks and law firms were predominantly structured as partnerships.
You can't have strong unions and labor regulations when you don't have your own captive world leading domestic industry like IKEA, Siemens, SAAB, Novo Nordisk, Bosch, Airbus, etc. Nobody would invest in your country.
World leading companies were moving to eastern Europe because it was cheap. Both land and labour.
In some cases comparable to china. It is an outsourcing hub, way to cut costs.
You get same skill (or even more) in Poland as you can get in Germany, but for half price and slightly less bureaucracy.
Maybe compared to the US, but not compared to France, Germany or Nordics.
>World leading companies were moving to eastern Europe because it was cheap. Both land and labour.
The "cheap-ness" of labor is also related on the availability and strength of unions, lack of bureaucracy and red tape, taxes, worker's rights and social benefits, not just on their local supply/demand and purchasing power.
Having had strong unions in EE that could strike on a whim and demand better conditions, wouldn't have made it very attractive to foreign investors despite the lower wages.
In fact, the constant strikes in the early to mid '90's is what kept foreign investors away from Romania causing it to fall behind most of its post comunist neighbors at the time.
Foreign investors are also looking for stability, not just cheap labor.
Lots of rules about overtime, work schedule, total working hours, vacations, sick leaves, payment, notice period in case of mass layoff.
Labour law is strong. But people are cheap - that's what attractive for international employers.
Minimum wage, costs of living in Germany is higher than in Poland. What is a minimal wage in Germany is a decent wage for factory worker in Poland.
Yes, it's the same in Romania, on paper, there are loads of rules and regulations to protect the workers, but those rules are broken all the time by employers, especially in low paying jobs, because low paid employees don't have the time and money to take those employers to court, and there are next to no unions.
And the labor laws are still weaker than what workers in for example France or Netherlands would get for the same job at the same company.
Then there's environmental regulations which are laughable in Romania compared to what they are in Germany. To open a dirty tire factory or a mine in Germany you'd get protests up your ass meaning you'd never start building, while in Romania everything gets rubberstamped quickly if you grease the right wheels, meaning the cost of doing business is much lower regardless of wages, as the environmental costs also factor in the total cost of doing business somewhere, not just wages.
Also in Poland labour law is covering mainly people on regular employment agreement. There are ways to get around and screw employees, but western factories and outsorcing vendors(like TCS, Capgemini) are not doing business that way.
On paper. In practice workers figure out pretty fast that if that big employes moves shop they're screwed for life. I don't know much about Poland, but somehow I don't think unions in Poland will be "no, we don't want Mercedes to open a factory here and tell us what to do" :)
EE is full of entitled elderly pensioners that control the narrative and are only interested in returning to the "good old times of communism" in one way or another.
Prosperity requires stepping out of your comfort zone and implement ideas that bring competitive advantage over your neighbors. These kind of ideas are lumped in the same category like LGBT rights, climate etc etc.
Because also the political and education system in communism couldn't create any visionary technocrats focused on innovation and exports.
It simply encouraged cronyism, lying, backstabbing, empire building, fiefdoms and thievery from the same zero-sum pie aka the local national economy.
Well educated and innovative workers from Taiwan or South Korea weren't sent to the gulags or political prisons for "free thinking" or for coming from the wrong family backgrounds.
The alternative for eastern Europeans always was to go to UK or Germany and be a fungible labour there.
Current strategy increased quality of life in EE countries. So far that in main cities in Poland housing prices are 4000-5000 USD per square meter.
And while it's better to be with work than without, living paycheck to paycheck in fear is not that great either, and doesn't exactly provide ways out. So sometimes we're left with just what solidarity we can arrange without legal representation, like the time entirety of one of my former workplaces left the job one day for what american management did to one of them.
Poles are entrepreneurial and forward thinking nation that will sooner or later become economically as prosperous as WE.
We on the other hand will always be discount version of Austria/Germany.
EE was basically bankrupt in the early 90's. How could they have caught up to join the wealthy innovation driven countries like UK, Netherlands, Germany and Nordics, on mere fractions of their education and research budgets and considering the massive social damage 45 years of communism has done to eradicate free thinking, innovation and entrepreneurship. Basically, post 1989, nobody had any idea how to run a business, how to do market research, marketing, sales, any of that, let alone build businesses that could challenge wealthy established players from the west, since none of that was taught in schools and universities during communism and now you have to catch up with over 45 years of lost progress over night.
It was just not possible at the time, so being cheap outsourcing labor was the only choice to get out of poverty.
That left those countries without any local champions or easy options to elevate themselves. I've said it many many times that it will take dozens of unicorns like UIPath in Romania to offset the loss of industries now dominated by DACH companies.
Romania would need to become another Singapore which is almost impossible.
There was surprisingly a lot of free thinking, innovation, even entrepreneurship. Not everything was as bad as it was painted, not everything was as good as it was sometimes shown.
One of the rare positive elements in all that chaos that some had pointed out and I agree was that the chaos at least ensured consumer goods were better represented and prevented oligarchic centralisation to the level that happened in some other countries.
The problem in EE is not the laws it's the local psyche.