More than one position can be true. Center left Parties all over Europe are in bad positions, but ALSO right wing media has a habit of trying to induce doubt or anger.

Tomahawks need semiconductors. Semiconductors need rare earth metals. The biggest producer/refiner of REMs is China, by far. So when the Iran war eventually ends, the US will want to replenish their stock piles, thus they’ll need access to Chinas rare earth market.

I wonder if China will use that leverage. They could restrict access for whatever reason, leaving the US potentially unable to defend Taiwan. At the same time, this would probably alarm every other REM-dependent nation to ramp up alternative supply chains. So this leaverage can be used only once.

Agreed. Call me optimistic, but i think the public opinion is shifting towards an anti-US stance. Slowly, way too slowly If you ask me. But the tendencies are right.

Our biggest flaw is exactly this. There is no way the other members can push out a state that has been compromised by US- or Russian intelligence. This will likely be our downfall, if we dont do anything about it.

It’s easy to come to this conclusion, but as of now there is no real evidence. Just keep in mind that Trump attacked Iran and Venezuela and puts heavy pressure on Cuba. All 3 of them russian allies.

I think by worshipping the idea of a US-dictatorship, he acts AS IF he was a Russian asset.

Same with Cuba right now. The US claims to be concerned about Cuba’s democratic deficits and human rights violations. All while ignoring their own democratic backsliding and ICE’s gestapo-like racial cleansing of the population.

I’m convinced that MAGA is attracting many people who live a rough life. Poorly educated, resentful, low income people whose attention is fixed on the next paycheck and the cost of groceries. Again and again, I see that many of them seem to view society as a zero sum game. Meaning “if those foreign looking people get punished now, I will surely be better off next month, right???”

The problem is systemic. I blame the chronic failure of political education across the country. Because of that, I do not expect meaningful political change unless it is triggered by some kind of major rupture, crash, or shock.

Maybe not peaceful, but you need to abolish the two-party-system. The longer I think about it, the more I am convinced that it’s one of the root-causes for many problems. At this point, it’s not a democracy anymore, but tribalism.

Well, well, it’s almost as if a market economy needs regulation and limits to prevent it from going off the rails.

I’m not an expert on tariffs, and I am also not a big fan of them. Our economy is deeply intertwined with other economies, so tariffing will immediately raise production costs, leading to higher prices and less competitive exports. As a policy maker, I would be afraid that such a move would be the nail in the coffin for our economy.

Furthermore, being part of the EU single market means trade policy is largely set on EU level.

Let’s hope that the current efforts turn out to be effective. And thank you for the lively exchange :)

Ah, I get you. Agreed

You make a good point, and I wouldn’t disagree with it. However, your argument doesn’t really contradict what I said earlier. I still think it was a good thing that Germany took in so many refugees. Perhaps not primarily from an economic perspective, but from a humanitarian one.

The goal should not be to reduce exports, but to make growth less dependent on them. If you want to diversify demand, you would aim to strengthen domestic demand components. Meaning: higher household purchasing power, stronger private domestic investment, public infrastructure spending.

This needs a bit of context.

One reason Germany is where it is today is how wages developed in the early 2000s. In Germany, wages grew much more slowly than productivity, which kept labor costs low. This helped German companies compete internationally but also limited how much money many people had to spend domestically. At the same time, the Agenda 2010 (Set by former chancellor Gerhard Schröder, right before the Merkel era) reformed the labor market in favour of the employer’s side. This expanded flexible and low-paid jobs. As a result, Germany became very competitive in exports while also developing a relatively large low-wage sector. Basically: Germany followed a “keep your own people poor, so that the factories they are working in have lower production costs and can export their stuff cheaper”-doctrine.

This could (maybe?) be reversed by increasing the role of domestic demand. That would mean stronger wage growth, lower taxes on lower and middle incomes, and stronger collective bargaining coverage. Governments should also expand public investment in infrastructure, housing, and education. But I also think that it will be very hard to reverse that trend.

True words. But those are two different kinds of diversification. Germany is highly diversified in terms of what it produces and exports, which is what the Atlas of Economic Complexity is all about. My point refers to how economic growth is generated. Germany relies heavily on external demand, meaning exports drive a large share of growth while domestic consumption plays a comparatively smaller role. So the economy is diversified in its industrial structure, but less diversified in its demand structure.

Latest study on Immigration in Germany that I read came to the conclusion that (fiscally speaking) recent migration has a net-zero effect on the German economy. The desired economic stimulus that came with migration in the past is smaller than expected and roughly covers the states expanses. So I doubt that polands strict Migration Rules have anything to do with that.

I think the problem lays here: Germany is a rich country, but its people dont usually have much money to spend. Our wealth comes from export and is not driven by domestic purchasing power. Or in other words: Germans are underpaying themselves. This created quite strong of a chokehold where we are highly dependent on other countries buying our stuff. How is that going, now that every state drives a protectionist agenda? All, while China is flodding the market with cheap alternative goods. Germany simply failed to diversify it’s economy a long time ago.

I’m learning Dutch with Babel. I like the App a lot, and it genuinely does it’s best to keep the learning process exciting.

Only downside are the costs.

I wonder. How can European politicians look at the US and their domestic ICE-problem. They see how unwanted ICE is, how much it hurts the republicans approval rating. The republicans approval rating has diminished further and further, partly (!) because of this. And EU Leaders are like… Yeah let’s also do this. Will be a good idea!

🙄

It’s about time. Since the icelandic people are so dependent on fishing, I would even be fine with it, if they got some kind of special deal that protects their domestic fishing waters.

At this point, Hungary is actively working against our interests. We desperately need a mechanism to exclude such dysfunct democraties / rogue member states from the bloc.

Yeah, I think you are right. Thank you!