Blog entries from category Political thoughts
Blog entries: 4. All Blog entries are sorted chronologically.
Tags: No Tags available
Germany's Vice Chancellor and Minister for Employent (shouldn't we rather say Unemployment) has read my blog!
Or that is what I thought, when I heard his comments these days about pensions. Word is, that one should increase the agelimit for receiving 100% of pensions from 65 to 67 years - already in 2012, some years earlier than previously planned.
So far, so good, I thought. Right direction.
But what do I hear today?
As pensions are tied to salaries, and salaries were decreasing in 2005, pensions would be decreasing too, this year. For the first time after WW II, though.
And what does Muentefering do?
Talking about introducing a new law to keep pensions growing ... "should this induce higher costs for the system" ... don't ask me about the "should", as this is a definite "this will" ... "we will have to offset this ... later."
So at least, he understands something.
And then continues, that they will not do this - the offsetting - in this legislative periode, but the earliest after 2010, i.e. the next one.
Being 66 today, that means, Muentefering postpones taking care of problems ... to when he will be gone, for sure.
That is one way of taking care of.
So ... no reason to be happy ... they did not read my blog ;)
... and the current German government's actions are not reforming things, significantly.
But then ... who would have thought they would.
B.
P.S.: Not changing things drastically is probably though the main reason, why approval ratings are so high for them, especially the chancellor Mrs. Merkel.
Deep down, people know, reforms have to be introduced ... but they might hurt some, in the short run ... so postponing change is being perceived as a relieve.
Too bad, postponing is not really a sustainable method, though.
Read entry » |
Blog replies
- No related Blogs yet
Tags: No Tags available
„Munich“, the newest Steven Spielberg movie, is an extraordinary movie. Most probably much stronger, violent, and accusing, and less forgiving, soothing, “happy-ending” than any other Spielberg movie to date, it polarizes people. And it does so because of its graphic display of violence, yes, but even more so because of its topic, terrorism, and how he is dealing with it.
Did anybody see this movie?
What do you have to say about it?
Is Spielberg, as some key influential people in Israel say, a traitor of the cause of Israel? A blinded pacifist, who equates terrorism with counter-terrorism?
And what is your opinion about the reasons for terrorism at all?
And is there “the” terrorism, or are there many different types? All kind of Islamic fundamentalist terror organisations, Ireland’s IRA, Italy’s Red Brigades, Germany’s Red Army Fraction, or whatever … and do differences matter?
And is there a way to stop terrorism? And if so, what way would be the best way?
Is it naive to believe, one can fight murderous terrorists without ones own violence?
So many questions, stipulated by this movie, by this topic. What are your answers? What is your opinion?
I am curious to know!
b.
Read entry » |
Blog replies
- No related Blogs yet
Tags: No Tags available
And while we are at it, here are some more interesting numbers, you might want to throw into the ring at your next dinner party;)
Topic: Social Security
You may say, what do I care about Social Security!? And if you are 60 or 70 or so, that is probably fine. But if you are 30 or 40, it will hit you bad. And if you are 10 or 20 … well, enjoy your life, now;)
But, let’s cut the polemics, and give you some hard numbers:
It is a matter of fact, that the U.S. Social Security system’s finances are unsustainable over the long haul (And, Europeans, don’t laugh … the situation in most of your countries is not really better).
A recent Business Week analysis (quoted in Business Week’s European Edition / Jan. 9&16th, 2006) figured out, that the Social Security system can probably muddle through for another 30 years or so - before it collapses.
Or, with small changes to it, continue and amass a deficit of a staggering 3,700,000,000,000 USD !!! over the next 75 years.
Why is that so?
There are some interesting numbers. At its inception, there were FOURTY workers to pay Social Security taxes for every single retiree to receive benefits.
Today, that ratio is THREE to one!
And in some 30 years, it is even going to be TWO to one.
In Germany, to quote a European example, that ratio of two to one will already be reached BEFORE 2020.
And in 2030, it will be more like 1.3 to one (According to an article in CICERO Jan. 2006 by Armin Laschet, Germany’s only “Generations Minister” of the Christian Democratic Union state government of North Rhine- Westphalia).
One of the reasons being, that people are getting older and older, but retire earlier and earlier, which doesn’t help the system at all. In Germany, with rather similar problems to solve, people got retirement benefits for about 10 years – in the 60s! Nowadays, they receive pensions for some 17 years, and in 2050, a 60-year old will receive full pensions for about 23 years.
So even by increasing the Social Security tax share of ones income in the U.S. SIXFOLD from 2% at the start to about 12% nowadays, and who knows, where this is going to end, it will not work, in the long run.
Nor will it work in Germany, where “Social Security taxes” (obligatory Pensions, Health-Insurances and Unemployment-Insurance) are at unbelievable levels of above 40%!!
20%, that German employers are paying for their employees, and another 20%, that the employees have to pay themselves.
So a significant policy change has got to come, and that will likely include even higher Social Security taxes, lower Social Security levels, and longer work lives. Not a real killer app to win upcoming elections – but waiting … will not help.
Read entry » |
Blog replies
- No related Blogs yet
Tags: No Tags available
Paradise is near, if you believe German government, who just met outside of Berlin to decide on their main issues for the upcoming years, and how to tacle them.
And one of the main reasons for Germanys rise to the Olymp is their big, generous spending spree of about 25 Billion EUR to support the economy. Applause, applause … is what they want. But, is it justified?
And even more so, as they are talking about 25 Billion … over 4 years, so actually just about 6 Billion per annum.
Let’s put that into perspective.
I just read, that in last November, German companies exported goods for about 70 Billion. As consumption within Germany is not really booming (wonder why!?), let’s ignore the size of the economy as a whole, some 2 Trillion EUR, but focus just on exports. Multiplying by 12, we get some 800 Billion EUR of exports, per year. And some 2.5 Trillion EUR in exports per 4 years … and here comes the new government and expects an economic boom because of their 25 Billion?????
Ok, if we add contributions of states and communes, we get the astounding number of 36 Billion. Wow, now I am impressed, indeed.
Or another angle. One of the main reasons for that initiative is to put more people into work. Ok, that is fine, but then … why make such a fuss … do they really believe, that with their 6 Billion, which is roughly one grand per unemployed per year, they can make a significant change?
Question: Did I miss something???
Is there some genius in that programme, that I could not detect, but that justifies hope, that it is good for something?
I mean, something other than votes?
What is your opinion?
Read entry » |
Blog replies
- No related Blogs yet
|
|
Guests: 14 und Du 
|
