Opinion | Germany Needs Something New. Instead It’s Getting This Guy.
Friedrich Merz, almost certain to be the country’s next chancellor, is yesterday’s man.
We had someone "new" with great ideas. His ideas were held back and his ideas suppressed by Russian disinformation fueled by BILD and Springer and a treasonous AfD.
His name is Robert Habeck.
I think you meant FDP, the AfD sucks donkey dick, but it wasn't the reason that the Ampel failed
So sad to imagine what could have been without them
The guy worked for Black Rock who I've only heard of in "evil corporation" contexts. He made millions of dollars doing this work and then he gets back into politics and his one of his first priorities is lowering the taxes of corporations during a period where the government needs to be raising more funds and investing in its people! How is that not an obvious quid pro quo? Isn't he not an obviously compromised actor who's more ambitious than he is good willed?
Not even talking about conservatives as vehicles for societal decline, how is Merz not viewed by everyone as someone who has only his and his wealthy friends interests at heart by his past actions and history? Of course he's not the change we need, he's conservative - they, on average, cause pain to the working class. But even more so Merz is compromised, is he not? Just like the FDP after their last coalition stunt.
If someone, including a whole party, put party or power before the people of Germany (and I would argue the people of Europe and mankind as a whole) shouldn't they be barred from ruling? They're exactly the people you don't want running.
The thing is, lowering taxes and being corrupt is the normal thing to do as a conservative. People should know this, yet they keep voting for these parties.
The most outrageous thing about this is that we still call those grifters "conservatives". The adjective "conservative" comes from "to conserve". Those so-called "conservatives", though, do conserve nothing. In the contrary, they actually do destroy society and its infrastructure in order to increase their personal wealth and power.
I just want to change the lens those people view lowering company taxes with. Why lower company taxes? What's the goal? I'd argue the common answer is to grow "the economy" which sounds like it means "make more jobs and pay people more." But the question then becomes if the goal is to pay people more why are we taxing companies less? Why not tax people less? That's a more direct line to "growing the economy" except instead of giving more money to companies which is a theoretical proxy for giving money to people, we just give people more money directly.
I wish well meaning conservatives would think about it like that. I don't think Merz is a well meaning conservative, in fact I don't know if most conservatives in power are well meaning. But that's what I'd hope the working class conservatives, who are wittingly or unwittingly betraying their own self interests, would think. Why give money to companies in the hopes they give more money to the people. Why not give money to the people and let them spend it on companies.
The task calls for a leader with a fresh vision of the future. Unfortunately, that’s not Mr. Merz. Committed to tax breaks for the wealthy, harsh restrictions for migrants and cuts for welfare recipients, he is a throwback figure. His program amounts to an effort to turn back the clock to a time when the country could depend on cheap energy and plentiful exports to propel it on the world stage. Today, Germany is in urgent need of change. Instead it’s getting Mr. Merz: yesterday’s man, with yesterday’s ideas.
Aber früher war doch alles besser!
Wenn wir nur genug Ausländer abschieben wird alles gut!
Nichts wirklich neues was wir nicht schon wüssten, aber gut zusammengefasst fürs Ausland.
