XPost: soc.culture.russian, soc.culture.europe, soc.culture.german
From: schelby@swcp.com
"Former King of Pangea" wrote:
>"packard" wrote in message
>news:dhpp0b$bvd$1@online.de...
>> Former King of Pangea wrote:
>>> Lucky for Germans the American economy is much more resilient than
>>> theirs.
>>
>> Rather than engaging in a pissing contest I would like to discuss what is
>> the real reason behind Germany's sluggish economy. But I guess I'm talking
>> to the wrong person.
>
>Yes you probably are. There probably is no "right" person for you to talk to
>since you aren't open minded.
He is a lot more open minded than you are. It's a mystery why you
are so resentful about Germany. What is it to you if their economy
sputters?
>Here it is in a nutshell courtesy of the CIA...
This makes me laugh. Remember that a CIA prognosis has little to
recommend itself when it comes to foresight or accuracy.
>"Germany's aging population, combined with high unemployment, has pushed
>social security outlays to a level exceeding contributions from workers.
>Structural rigidities in the labor market - including strict regulations on
>laying off workers and the setting of wages on a national basis - have made
>unemployment a chronic problem."
Yes, it is a dilemma. You see, these people who are now pensioners
rebuilt a devastated country. They worked hard and smart. So they
earned their social security. If the generation that followed had
fewer kids, there must be a reason for it. Maybe they learned that
the 20th century was not a wonderful place for children and other
living things. Therefore there is now a demographic glitch. So what?
It's an overpopulated country anyway. And per capita, Germany has
nearly as many immigrants as the US, and it absorbed huge numbers of
expelled people and asylum-seekers. One can't predict, but national
borders may mean less for the next generation, so these issues will
dissolve themselves gradually. One thing is clear: the overheated
and insecure nationalism of the US is not a model for Europe.
>Aging population in a bureacratic welfare state...not a good thing. Add on
>top of that the refusal of workers and unions to allow change. Eventually
>they will have to change...or go hungry.
Why do you worry so much about that? Rest assured that these people
have gone through a lot that was much worse, and they are still
alive and kicking.
>In short, Europeans want to stay in their fantasy dreamland. Like a drug
>addict, they can't get better until they hit rock bottom and admit they have
>a problem.
What you don't understand is that they have different habits of
mind. Their points of view have deep tap roots in history and are
not based on a concept of dog-eat-dog. German cities had, for
example, free hospitals for the poor as early as the Middle Ages.
>This is also why most European countries could not defend themselves. It's
>easier for politicians to spend money on welfare than defense.
You are listening to too much neo-con drivel. But I understand this.
So far, wars have been relatively good to the United States. It
always emerged stronger and more dominant from each one, with the
exception of Vietnam. Continental Europe, on the other hand, has
been bled dry by wasteful wars. It learned that modern slaughter
solves nothing and costs far too much in lives, treasure, and good
will.
So no, it is not easier for politicians to spend money on social
instead of national security. It is more mature. In the US, nothing
seems to be easier than mortgaging the future for the sake of buying
ever more guns. Seeing enemies everywhere abroad delivers perpetual
new excuses for not fixing social problems and breakdowns at home.
So please, leave the Germans to solve their own problems. They can
and they will, in time.
ES
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
