English Forum Switzerland

English Forum Switzerland (https://www.englishforum.ch/forum.php)
-   Swiss politics/news (https://www.englishforum.ch/swiss-politics-news/)
-   -   Vote September 26th (https://www.englishforum.ch/swiss-politics-news/305763-vote-september-26th.html)

jamon8 10.09.2021 11:46

Vote September 26th
 
Since the discussion already started in another thread, I think it makes sense to have a dedicated thread.

So, two questions will be voted:

- 99% initiative - higher taxes on dividends, rents and royalty
- LGBT marriages

The first one is likely to fail. The second one is likely to pass, considering preliminary polls’ results.

komsomolez 10.09.2021 11:53

Re: Vote September 26th
 
99% - 37% yes
Marriage - 62% yes

komsomolez 10.09.2021 12:21

Re: Vote September 26th
 
So 99% is an initiative and requires both popular vote and cantonal majority to pass, correct? The marriage vote is a referendum, that passes with popular vote only?

Always confusing.

jamon8 10.09.2021 12:30

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Correct.

Talk to you later 10.09.2021 12:34

Re: Vote September 26th
 
LGBT marriage = higher taxes for them? Just like for Heterosexual married couples?

amogles 10.09.2021 12:41

Re: Vote September 26th
 
I'm open to good arguments on both votes but as things are now I'm planning to vote no to the 99% thing and yes to the marriage thing.

komsomolez 10.09.2021 12:42

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Talk to you later (Post 3346797)
LGBT marriage = higher taxes for them? Just like for Heterosexual married couples?

Don't they already pay the same tax as married couples if they have this "eingetragene Partnerschaft"? And it is not necessarily higher either.

Downerbuzz 10.09.2021 13:03

Re: Vote September 26th
 
While I'm all for a more equal wealth distribution, this initiative is too " schwammig" for my taste. Afaik there's no definition at what level they want to apply those measures. Like amogles said, I'm open to good arguments.

I'm not a homophobic ..... so will of course be voting yes on the other issue.

vushka 10.09.2021 13:27

Re: Vote September 26th
 
I would vote 'Yes' for the LGBT marriage except I don't agree with the adoption of children by same sex couples so will vote 'No'

DantesDame 10.09.2021 13:51

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by vushka (Post 3346819)
I would vote 'Yes' for the LGBT marriage except I don't agree with the adoption of children by same sex couples so will vote 'No'

:(

That's really too bad.

jamon8 10.09.2021 14:24

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DantesDame (Post 3346831)
:(

That's really too bad.

Do you mean adoption?

I think this is the only controversial question - very few would argue that homosexual couples must have the same status in the society, but considerably more would be against children adoption by them.

Axa 10.09.2021 14:52

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamon8 (Post 3346844)
Do you mean adoption?

I think this is the only controversial question - very few would argue that homosexual couples must have the same status in the society, but considerably more would be against children adoption by them.

The fun thing is that ~44% of marriages end in divorce in CH. So, lots of chances for children to not be effectively reared by an homosexual couple even if the adoptive parents are gay.

HickvonFrick 10.09.2021 15:00

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DantesDame (Post 3346831)
:(

That's really too bad.

I don't really get that either. Particularly as an unmarried gay person in a relationship can adopt. (But also on the fundamental issue regarding whether gay people can parent children)

jamon8 10.09.2021 15:14

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by HickvonFrick (Post 3346864)
I don't really get that either. Particularly as an unmarried gay person in a relationship can adopt.

For sure, there are several already existing possibilities to adopt or give birth (in case of women). However, I’d say that this is more about the opportunity to show their position on the matter.

Tom1234 10.09.2021 15:22

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamon8 (Post 3346874)
For sure, there are several already existing possibilities to adopt or give birth (in case of women). However, I’d say that this is more about the opportunity to show their position on the matter.

Is this what you mean:

https://ausmed-images.s3-ap-southeas...202_body_1.jpg

mossie 10.09.2021 15:30

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Never understand all these caffufles over such pathetic arguments. IF you dont like it look away and move on. If a Gay couple live next door or a woman with a Burka as long as they dont bother you whats the big deal. I know plenty of heterosexual couples who shouldn't be left near children so dont see that Gay couples are different to any cross section of society.

jamon8 10.09.2021 15:40

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom1234 (Post 3346878)

No

HickvonFrick 10.09.2021 15:43

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamon8 (Post 3346874)
For sure, there are several already existing possibilities to adopt or give birth (in case of women). However, I’d say that this is more about the opportunity to show their position on the matter.

Not long before you get cancelled!

komsomolez 10.09.2021 16:05

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Generally quite boring topics. I would expect turnout to be quite low, especially as the polls seem quite clear.

vushka 10.09.2021 16:15

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mossie (Post 3346883)
Never understand all these caffufles over such pathetic arguments. IF you dont like it look away and move on. If a Gay couple live next door or a woman with a Burka as long as they dont bother you whats the big deal.

As others have pointed out, for many against it's not about the marriage, it's about same sex adoption.

As there will be children involved and affected it's simply not good enough to 'look away and move on'.

My2pups 10.09.2021 16:21

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Don't be an ass...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom1234 (Post 3346892)
But it's what you wrote:


How many possibilities are there to give birth (in the case of men)?

Did you get dropped on the head as a baby?


Tom1234 10.09.2021 16:22

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamon8 (Post 3346900)

2) No and the same question to you - just to understand the reason of your aggressive behavior..

Rather than red rep me, perhaps you ought to re-phrase your previous statement so it actually makes sense?

Are you worried that if a gay couple adopt, they may make the children gay?

Or is it something else?

Tom1234 10.09.2021 16:23

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fduvall (Post 3346919)
Don't be an ass...

Are you now a forum moderator?

Are you calling me an ass? I thought naming-calling wasn't allowed?

My2pups 10.09.2021 16:25

Re: Vote September 26th
 
I am saying don't be one...

I am a spam deputy, so exerting the authority vested in me to call out bad behavior...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom1234 (Post 3346922)
Are you now a forum moderator?

Are you calling me an ass? I thought naming-calling wasn't allowed?


Tom1234 10.09.2021 16:27

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fduvall (Post 3346924)
I am saying don't be one...

I am a spam deputy, so exerting the authority vested in me to call out bad behavior...

Your authority pertains to dealing with the posts that fit the category which the title "spam deputy" suggests.

jamon8 10.09.2021 16:33

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom1234 (Post 3346920)
Rather than red rep me, perhaps you ought to re-phrase your previous statement so it actually makes sense?

Are you worried that if a gay couple adopt, they may make the children gay?

Or is it something else?

I never said anything like this. These are all your aggravated issues (fell free to re-phrase correctly). And yes, don’t be an ass :D

komsomolez 10.09.2021 16:40

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamon8 (Post 3346844)
Do you mean adoption?

I think this is the only controversial question - very few would argue that homosexual couples must have the same status in the society, but considerably more would be against children adoption by them.

Absolutely. If this was without the adoption part, I am sure it would pass with 75% or more. When you drill down in the polling, you will note that - although majority in favor of the law - close to 50% of center/right voters (FDP, CVP) have reservations when it comes to gay abortion rights. And I can perfectly understand this.

amogles 10.09.2021 17:03

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by komsomolez (Post 3346939)
close to 50% of center/right voters (FDP, CVP) have reservations when it comes to gay abortion rights. And I can perfectly understand this.

Why should gay people have different abortion rights to straight people?

Who even suggested this should be an issue?

Where are you getting this nonsense from?

ennui 10.09.2021 17:05

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by amogles (Post 3346956)
Why should gay people have different abortion rights to straight people?

Who even suggested this should be an issue?

Where are you getting this nonsense from?


Pretty sure auto correct or something changed adoption to abortion. Everyone’s getting trigger happy.

wachtwoord 10.09.2021 17:51

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ennui (Post 3346957)
Pretty sure auto correct or something changed adoption to abortion. Everyone’s getting trigger happy.

Cartman's mom once made the same mix up in South Park. Tried the whole episode to get Cartman (an 8 years old boy) aborted. Hilarious episode :D

Refarding the vote: yes for the marriage proposal, no to the tax proposal. An argument against gay marriage by the Christians not mentioned in this thread thus far that I understand (but don't agree with as the ship has sailed) is that marriage is a religious institution in which the state should have no say. Historically speaking they have a strong point.

ennui 10.09.2021 17:58

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wachtwoord (Post 3346977)
Cartman's mom once made the same mix up in South Park. Tried the whole episode to get Cartman (an 8 years old boy) aborted. Hilarious episode :D

Refarding the vote: yes for the marriage proposal, no to the tax proposal. An argument against gay marriage by the Christians not mentioned in this thread thus far that I understand (but don't agree with as the ship has sailed) is that marriage is a religious institution in which the state should have no say. Historically speaking they have a strong point.

Yes, but by the same token, what about civil marriages…..many people have only a civil marriage, sanctioned by the state.

amogles 10.09.2021 18:04

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ennui (Post 3346980)
Yes, but by the same token, what about civil marriages…..many people have only a civil marriage, sanctioned by the state.

In the best of all possible worlds I think the state should not issue or regulate marriage certificates, but that people should be able to go to a lawyer or notary and notarize their relationship by means of private contract in any constellation they please, and regulate rights of visitation, care, medical decisions over one another, sharing of assets, inheritance etc in any way they please. What's wrong with polygamy, for example, as long as all parties involved are consenting adults and all agree to the terms of their own free will?

In the interests of separation of Church and State formal traditional marriages should be a church-only issue. There are BTW churches who don't have a problem with same sex weddings, and everybody has the right to chose their church or have none. I don't think the churches need the state to spell this stuff out to them.

minimimi 10.09.2021 18:59

Re: Vote September 26th
 
This is more of an answer to rainer_d in "housing bubble" thread, to not write there :)

I believe that people should be given opportunities, e.g. education should be more equal and there are countries managing it better than Switzerland. Of course, people are not created equal and absolute equality is not possible. E.g. intelligence (let's not go to definition or distribution) is important for many successes, including academic and that is one's personal luck or not.

I also believe that safety nets should exist when someone has problems out of their direct control, e.g. health problems.

And taxes should be used for these things (of course many other things, including infrastructure).

But there is a point where if you don't give enough incentive to people to work many won't. That border is different for different people. It is not only relying on social help but also not studying enough expecting that whatever you do someone will bail you out.

I have also heard directly from people misusing the system. Though I cannot know how common that is. Also some stuff that costs taxpayers a lot is just thrown money but no idea how to make the system more efficient hence cannot say much.

Current system in Switzerland works quite well in Switzerland but this low income difference (especially after taxes - last it was 2.6x on upper and lower 10%) may not be encouraging enough.

Also the Swiss safety net is encouraging enough for people to take on risks (e.g. startups). But it also requires people to have a good enough pay-off for unslept nights.

One should remember that most of people are willing to take risks and put extra effort if the pay-off is good enough. Should people who studied and had very little free time really get compensated almost equally as those who did not? One's salary is not only what that person is doing at that moment but also all the effort and investment that brought to that point.

Regarding rich avoiding tax: I am sure there are many who do. Probably some try more some less. But in Switzerland top 5% earner pay huge taxes and there's not much legal to avoid that (we pay almost the same tax as in California which has one of the highest rates in the US). The easiest is to found a company but not something suitable for every job.

Anyways, majority of Swiss citizens pay very little tax and no way this country could function the way it does without the tax from the "rich".

Caleb 10.09.2021 19:00

Re: Vote September 26th
 
It MUST be Friday. The thread got detailed in under 10 posts, name-calling in under 15.

Back on topic: I can’t vote just yet (I still need to wait about a year for our papers to go through), but for me it’d be a clear YES for “Ehe für Alle” and a NO for “Kapital besteuern”, on the principle that the initiative itself lacks in accuracy and detail (although I fully agree with the principle).

nickatbasel 10.09.2021 19:08

Re: Vote September 26th
 
I will be voting YES to same sex marriages. Some of the homophobic posters from the NO campaign are quite disgusting. Sadly, gay bashing happens far too frequently - particularly in Zurich.

nickatbasel 10.09.2021 19:10

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom1234 (Post 3346927)
Your authority pertains to dealing with the posts that fit the category which the title "spam deputy" suggests.

Basically glorified milk monitor.

amogles 10.09.2021 19:10

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by minimimi (Post 3347013)
This is more of an answer to rainer_d in "housing bubble" thread, to not write there :)

I believe that people should be given opportunities, e.g. education should be more equal and there are countries managing it better than Switzerland. Of course, people are not created equal and absolute equality is not possible. E.g. intelligence (let's not go to definition or distribution) is important for many successes, including academic and that is one's personal luck or not.

I also believe that safety nets should exist when someone has problems out of their direct control, e.g. health problems.

And taxes should be used for these things (of course many other things, including infrastructure).

But there is a point where if you don't give enough incentive to people to work many won't. That border is different for different people. It is not only relying on social help but also not studying enough expecting that whatever you do someone will bail you out.

I have also heard directly from people misusing the system. Though I cannot know how common that is. Also some stuff that costs taxpayers a lot is just thrown money but no idea how to make the system more efficient hence cannot say much.

Current system in Switzerland works quite well in Switzerland but this low income difference (especially after taxes - last it was 2.6x on upper and lower 10%) may not be encouraging enough.

Also the Swiss safety net is encouraging enough for people to take on risks (e.g. startups). But it also requires people to have a good enough pay-off for unslept nights.

One should remember that most of people are willing to take risks and put extra effort if the pay-off is good enough. Should people who studied and had very little free time really get compensated almost equally as those who did not? One's salary is not only what that person is doing at that moment but also all the effort and investment that brought to that point.

Regarding rich avoiding tax: I am sure there are many who do. Probably some try more some less. But in Switzerland top 5% earner pay huge taxes and there's not much legal to avoid that (we pay almost the same tax as in California which has one of the highest rates in the US). The easiest is to found a company but not something suitable for every job.

Anyways, majority of Swiss citizens pay very little tax and no way this country could function the way it does without the tax from the "rich".

I think Switzerland does by and large do these things well.

Of course you can always nitpick and find cases where the system is not working, but you can do that for any country and system.

By and large Switzerland is fiscally cautious. Money is spent wisely and effectively and nonsense spending projects are not popular. The education system is very good and overall skill levels are high, not just among the top few percentile of university kids but across all strata of the education system. There is also good social mobility and plenty of opportunities for people who want to take them.

Infrastructure is among the best in the world with virtually everything being maintained in perfect condition.

All this comes at a price of course, but people have social and civic responsibility and populist positions based on envy and hate of those richer than themselves are typically turned down at the polls.

minimimi 10.09.2021 22:37

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by amogles (Post 3347020)
I think Switzerland does by and large do these things well.

Of course you can always nitpick and find cases where the system is not working, but you can do that for any country and system.

By and large Switzerland is fiscally cautious. Money is spent wisely and effectively and nonsense spending projects are not popular. The education system is very good and overall skill levels are high, not just among the top few percentile of university kids but across all strata of the education system. There is also good social mobility and plenty of opportunities for people who want to take them.

Infrastructure is among the best in the world with virtually everything being maintained in perfect condition.

All this comes at a price of course, but people have social and civic responsibility and populist positions based on envy and hate of those richer than themselves are typically turned down at the polls.

I agree that opportunities are there but could be more equal. While not being an expert on education I was looking at different statistics for a project related to another country. Switzerland was not that great for equality of academic performance. For example Estonia and Canada appear to do this much better.

Also Switzerland is spending too much money for the test results it gets. I never looked into reasons for that. I guess being an expensive place plays a role.

For example for the US, also very bad money/results ratio holder, it was explained as spending too much on students with disabilities, tablets, etc. Of course it is always a question of how to distribute money. You can't get everything. May be harsh but I would rather invest into the majority and top performers. I think that lifts a society up faster. While all members of the society contribute or damage it, those most able can do disproportionately more (well, will agree that sometimes they can do very bad things as well). More able and more educated ones come up with innovations usually.

Regardless of how controversial, PISA tests show us that it is possible to get majority much more educated than we are doing. OECD average for top grade receivers was 17%, while places like Singapur, Hong Kong do achieve close to 50%.

Having held exercises many times at ETH I also know personally that many graduates of so acclaimed gymnasiums come with very mediocre maths knowledge.

wachtwoord 10.09.2021 23:01

Re: Vote September 26th
 
@Minimimi: those type of comparisons you are referring to are quite subjective and usually extremely biased, even if not intentional by those making the comparison. I wouldn't put any value into that. On top of that if it only shows relative worth if (hypothetically) worldwide there are only 2 countries (slightly) better that isn't a big deal. It much more useful to compare to yourself in the past (the progression in time) and that's already hard enough to do with any level of objectivity.

minimimi 10.09.2021 23:18

Re: Vote September 26th
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by wachtwoord (Post 3347137)
those type of comparisons you are referring to are quite subjective and usually extremely biased, even if not intentional by those making the comparison.

which ones, why?

no way I can find all the reports now, read tones of them.

but this is for Switzerland:

https://www.oecd.org/pisa/Equity-in-...witzerland.pdf

"In Switzerland, social background is more closely linked to success at school than it is in many other countries"

Whoever is interested can read the rest...


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:22.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0