The German election

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

please only germans take the poll, "what are you going to vote for

The upcoming election in Germany is splitting the nation.

Complicated explanation

The CDU/CSU (liberal right wing) was considered to win with a great advantage. But during the last days the SPD (socialist left wing) has gained some ground. So far the CDU/CSU in coaltion with the FDP has equal votes with a potential coalition with the SPD/Grüne/Linke (liberal socialist, green,  socialist). But the SPD/Grüne said they would NOT build a coalition with the "linke".

Easy for foreigners

I know this is hard to grasp for foreigner so I try a different more simplifying approach. Since 1998 we have a coalition of a socialist party and the green party running the country. Due to the fact that most counties in Germany now run by conservatives the socialist administration asked for an early national reelection. They feared to no longer being able to properly adminster Germany.

The polls currently show a draw between the conservative coalition and the left wing coalition.

The left wing coalition

SPD, Schröder (currently cancelor of Germany)

Green Party, Fischer

Die Linke, Lafontaine (fully socialist)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The right wing coalition

CDU, Merkel

CSU, Stoiber (bavarian conservatives)

FDP, Westerwelle

I know the topic is difficult to explain, but I hope some germans come here to provide some help!

[Gordy 0]

WHy?

This is English language forums and for all OFP owners.

Let's make a thread for every country's election worldwide, shall we?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I know I know, you are warmly welcome to participate and discuss the issue. But if you would participate in the poll without knowing the parties nor being German then I guess it could destroy the results!

[Murmur2k 0]

There's nothing wrong with having this here in the Offtopic forum. Look at all the other off topic posts - don't have to be OFP related.

[Daddl 10]

It's a tough decision - a change might be good, but Merkel&Co are the ones who would have licked Bush's butt and joined the war (even the little help Germany actually did provide - like overflight permissions, etc. - was against the constitution as a court ruled just a few weeks ago) and they don't offer any real alternatives anyways. They are the ones who blocked everything in the Bundesrat all those years for petty power games instead of being constructive when the republic needed cooperation most. This is something I'll never forgive them.

On the other hand Schröder isn't the one to improve things, either - and Lafontaine is in it just for the ego trip, Gysi is being an idealist when we need realists, the Green Party is often still too dogmatic (although Künast really did a very good job), and the extremists (left or right) are, well, stupid extremists.

I guess I know which party my second vote goes to (if only to improve the oposition), but not living in Freiburg anymore - Gernot Erler at least was a candidate I could respect - the local candidates in Halle really don't convince me. Not sure whom I'll vote there.

[der bastler 0]

CDU/CSU/FDP -- no, done that, nothing new.

SPD/Grüne -- no, done that, weren't better than subject #1.

Both blocks want to start recording telecommunication connections, want to implement biometric IDs and generally mess around with our Grundgesetz, perverting basic rights. Plus they favour, or do nothing against, software patents.

die PARTEI -- funny, but no.

APPD -- hmm, free beer, but... no.

Tierschutzpartei, PBC, Büso and the like -- not capable to rule a country.

NPD and the like -- no, NEVER!

not voting -- no, because then one can't complain at all.

Looks like former conservative/centre bastler is heading into a brand new direction. Me likes that.

[Bordoy 0]

If i was German and elegible to vote, probs would be one of the right-wing parties as thats how I am. But I don't know alot about the situation of politics in Germany. Just hoping you lot get someone in who does good for you and your country and doesn't turn it into a sh*t state.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]WHy?

This is English language forums and for all OFP owners.

Let's make a thread for every country's election worldwide, shall we?

I don't see the big deal. Every one went insane during the USAs presidential election on year, so why not have a German thread for their election?

I plead ignorance when it comes to German internal affairs, as a matter of fact I only know Shroder the current premier.

What ever happens, have a good election and I hope you guys end up with a strong leader.

[remcen 0]

hey you forgot one important option: "don't know yet for whom to vote"

i have to admit that that's what applies to me unfortunately. at all prior elections i knew pretty well for who i would cast my vote to, but this time it's really hard. after all the SPD owes it's swing in the polls lately to it tending to be more leftist than before and denying the very necessary but unpopular reforms it pressed through the two chambers -although they did not show much effect due to the complicated and obsolete process of political decissions.

on the one hand i sypathize with the social democrats for their general world view, but their swing to the left under the pressure of the new left party is rather annoying.

on the other hand there are two reasons in favor of the conservatives: the merkel healthcare concept which will change the healthcare from a direct employer/employee contributions system (thus making labor expensive in germany) to a tax financed system. and second the kirchhof tax model with its 25% flat tax and radical abolition of all those numerous complicated exceptions, subsidies, etc is really appealing although i hate the general conservatism (concerning the role of family, immigration, nuclear power, foreign policy, etc.) of the CDU which is behind kirchhof (let's not forget: when schröder still was the reform-chancellor he would havve praised a concept like kirchhof's. now he's condemning it just because it's election time and it's the agenda of the CDU). and after all it's very questionable if the kirchhof tax propositions will ever be realized. the mighty bosses of the states will do everything to prevent the law from being realized cos then they would loose a means of their power: all those little tax exceptions and subsidies of all kind which helped them to be elected in the first place. if the merkel health-reform will ever be realized is questionable too, cos stoiber (the conservative boss of bavaria) is known to be against it.when it was about a common healthcare-agenda of the CDU and the bavarian CSU he has already proven that he won't accept merkel's concept, mainly for populists reasons i think.

to sum it up: the SPD isn't electable for me any more, partly because it is responsible for what the "spiegel" (news magazin) called bureaucratic monsters: all those half-hearted reforms.

the CDU never was elegible for me- the only argument in favor of it is the maybe-to-be-realized kirchhof tax and the merkel healthcare concept.

as for smaller parties: the green party is somewhat too visionary and sometime lacks a sense for the reality although most of the real green fundamentalists (the "fundis") have been driven out of the party about ten years ago. some projects like the wind power promotion were totally insane, also the "dosenpfand" (deposit on certain drink cans). the party is also responsible for those said "monsters".

liberals: though i like their market-based and de-regulation approach to things i don't really know what they want. the CDU was at least honest when they announced to raise the VAT by 2 per cent. the libs only say they want to cut taxes but it's not clear to me how they want to refinance that. any other explicitly political statements from their side: did not noticed any.

conclusion: i'm running out of time.

i think i'll vote for the conservatives for the first time in my life hoping that they make things better

in fact i think that germany needs a radical cut, basically a new constitution with a clear distinction regarding the competences of the single states and the federal government instead of the hotchpotch of overlapping responsibilities preventing every reform from being fully realized- it's really sad that neither the federal government nor the bundesrat (chamber of the state deputies) really runs the country but the "vermittlungsausschuss" (arbitration commission) where all that perverse horse-trading takes place. second: the state elections need to be sort out new. it's totally insane that almost always there are state-wide elections somewhere in the republic so the parties are in a constant election campaign preventing realpolitik to be made, even at the federal level. two eletion dates like in america (as the same time as federal elections and then mid-term ones) would be a lot better IMO.

in fact germany was to get a new consitution by the words of this very constitution after the re-union, because the constitution of 1949 should be in effect "until the german people is re-united" (approx. quotation). this is the case now, but the eternal chancellor kohl simply had this passage deleted from the constitution in 1990 and virtually annexed the former GDR.

anyway.... no party wants this clear and radical cut simply because it's almost impossible to realize. those instances which would have to ballot about such a reform might subscribe their own disempowerment. so nothing will ever change; only step by step maybe which can take eternally in germany.

hope that helps ppl from outside germany to understand the current situation a bit better - and the quandary i'm in.

[Balschoiw 0]

CDU+CSU: "Das Merkel" is nothing I can vote for. Who wants to have a cancellor who needs to copy her speeches from Ronald Reagan ?

And Stoiber definately is my top-hated politician with his arrogance and his views on foreigners. I gladly remember his announcement after the last elections where he thought he had won, but it turned out that he hadn´t

FDP: I wonder why they still exist. No program, no identity, just a hoax of a party.

NPD: Nothing I ever wanted to see in the Bundestag.

SPD: Hope they get back on track soon

Die Grünen: A little bit "off" during the campaign phase. They kept relatively silent but I think they did a fairly good job. Künast isd top-notch and Fischer is well respected and represents "my" views abroad.

PDS: A cheap joke for an ego-trippin Lafontaine and Gysi who failed to work properly in Bundestag and Berlin´s Senate. He may be a good speaker, but that´s it. On a sidenote I wanted to know where the SED billions went. Gysi knows but he doesn´t tell. Now they are acting like Robbin Hood but they are thieves and nothing but lousy populists.

Well the choice isn´t hard for me. We need to continue the way that has been started. Das Merkel just has an agenda and affinity to energy giants like EON I totally dislike. She also plans to revert to mass animal keeping and things like that.

No profile, bad plans, washy ideas and absolutely no concept behind it others than raising taxes and cutting workers rights and starting full scale pollution again while she sends of troops to US wars.

That´s a total no-go.

[sanctuary 19]

Quote[/b] ]SPD, Schröder (currently cancelor of Germany)

Why do Schröder would want to cancel Germany ?

What is hard for me , as a non german , to follow the Germany election is the following : what is the difference between the Germany president (Horst Köhler if i remember) and the Germany Chanchellor (currently Schröder) ?

some years ago i thought it was the same politic model as in France , with the Chancellor being the same as a Prime Minister in fact.

But in France, the Prime Minister is not elected directly (but undirectly as the french Assembly majority, deputies elected by the french people in fact can influe a very lot on who it will be), the President (that is directly elected) select him.

And despite the France Prime Minister 'power', he doesn't seem to be as important for the country as a Germany Chancellor for his country , in term of what they are allowed to do.

While the Germany president seems to have lower 'power' in his country than the France president in France.

So any clarification in this difference is welcomed.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I see things from a different angle. I see that currently foreign investors are "on hold" due to these elections.

Overseeing only the investment market I deal with professionally I can say that basically only a conservative coalition will motivate these people to invest in Germany. The business athmosphere created by the left wing administration has led to a strong insecurity when trying to budget investments. You never know what comes! On the other hands some companies already have thought about transfering headquarters to the UK and Ireland (part of their risk management plans).

Lets speak openly here. The reforms initiated by the left wing coalition wouldnt have succeeded if the Right wing parties wouldnt have agreed. Also, the tolerance level of the left wing concerning reforms is exhausted. They accepted strong cuts in the unemployment support and that was already enough for them.

Reforms are over, the socialists wont support any changes anymore, the next 4 years will be political stagnation.

They dont even have plans of how to get rid of the 30. billion income deficit for next year (well they have it but dont publish it).  

It is not appropriate to say "CDU/CSU/FDp" been there seen that. The candidates of today are not genetically connected with Helmut Kohl. The team including specialists like Kirchhoff and Merz have the know-how we need for smart reforms. I gladly take suggestions if you know someone more capable in terms tax reforms than these 2. And they WANT these reforms, the basis of the SPD never did.

I fear no change, I fear stagnation, I fear that germans forget what makes the country wealthy. Today many of us believe it is the fair distribution, back then we were rich an knew it was Germanies industrial power.

I hear that the CDU wants to soften the protection against  dismissal and the SPD sais this would cause a social winter in Germany. Well guess what, if the company needs to layoff an employee, they will be able to do so, it currently just costs them more bureaucracy.

9 out of 10 employees leave their company within year after having received an unlawful dismissal! Thats fact.

I know what I vote for and force myself to be convinced of what I am doing. I think we need fresh people in Germany, even if it means changing the administration every 4 years. Germans have to learn again that changes are something positive!

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Copying slogans is nothing new. That can hardly be an argument

Quote[/b] ]FDP: I wonder why they still exist. No program, no identity, just a hoax of a party.

A hoax party? I must agree that during the last election they tried silly strategies to get young voters, but it doesnt represent their programm. You seem to forget that the FDP has generally the most educated voters, but their reforms are currently slightly to risky!

Quote[/b] ]Die Grünen: A little bit "off" during the campaign phase. They kept relatively silent but I think they did a fairly good job.

They have done a great service for germany in the past concerning women rights and ecology. However I know from photovoltaik and wind energy projects that their lack of economical knowledge ruined most projects. We got tons of wind generators and basically none of them is creating profits, they are just objects for investors to spare taxes!

Quote[/b] ]PDS: A cheap joke for an ego-trippin Lafontaine and Gysi who failed to work properly in Bundestag and Berlin´s Senate. He may be a good speaker, but that´s it. On a sidenote I wanted to know where the SED billions went. Gysi knows but he doesn´t tell. Now they are acting like Robbin Hood but they are thieves and nothing but lousy populists.

There is no need to discuss about this party. I fully agree with your point of view.

Quote[/b] ]We need to continue the way that has been started. Das Merkel just has an agenda and affinity to energy giants like EON I totally dislike. She also plans to revert to mass animal keeping and things like that.

The SPD wont be able to continue reforms due to the rigidity of its members. Their programm does NOT contain any plans of changes for the next 4 years!

What you say about Merkel is new to me, and I doubt this is true!

Quote[/b] ] Fischer is well respected and represents "my" views abroad.

Fischer is well respected? He is a clown! What has he achieved so far? Everything failed, no constant seat in the UN, Iran still makes fun of us. Fischer has just no political weight like Kohl once had. The relations with the US are terrible due to a lack of smart diplomacy! Not only the US made mistakes, Germany and France did too! Schröder never realy cared about relations nor the iraqi people, he simply wanted to gain votes! They learned their lesson during the war in the Balkans!

I am happy that Merkel at least is honest what she intents to do in the upcoming year. Anouncing a tax increase is nothing that makes people love you!

´

The terribly high unemployment rate currently in Germany tells me that the SPD did no social politics. I also know that our economy has zero growth, so they didnt help businesses either? Our deficits are still high so they didnt improve national finances! The Eco-tax is only a nice slogan, 95% of the money goes to the national pension fund. So they didnt help the environment either! They have bad references, I wouldnt hire them again!

[Balschoiw 0]

Albert I guess this is a board where everyone can speak out his opinion freely. If you don´t agree, it´s no reason to go rampant.

Keep it with the facts.

Das Merkel indeed is lobbying energy producers. One of the first things she did at the campaign was to speak at EON to reassure them that once she´s in power the plans to get rid of nuclear power plants will be reverted and an additional 20 nuclear power plants will be built over the next 50 years.

The mass animal keeping is on her agenda also. She wants to revert limitations to chicken farms and allow cage keeping again on the scale that was present during the mid 80´s.

Google

Quote[/b] ]I suggest you read their programm first.

I did. That´s why I call them a hoax party.

Quote[/b] ]You seem to forget that the FDP has generally the most educated voters

Hmmm...

Maybe let´s say that most of their voters are businessmen who want their own kind of country they can make profit in. Where was the FDP over the last 8 years ? They only seem to pop up for elections. Else there relevance is 0.

Quote[/b] ] However I know from photovoltaik and wind energy projects that their lack of economical knowledge ruined most projects.

The 100000 roofs program was extended multiple times and is indeed a very sucessfull program. I just need to look out of the window to see a lot of roofs covered with photovoltaik cells. Almost every farmer here has them on his roof. Even if the energy produced is in no comparison with energy produced by power plants of another kind it´s worth the effort, isn´t it ?

I may remind you that Germany is the technological leader in photovoltaik production worldwide. A lot of jobs were created in that sector and the initiative itself is a good move for all participating parties. The search on alternative energies and their useage will be dominating our lifetime for known reasons. Is it that bad that germany is world-leader in this ?

Quote[/b] ]The SPD wont be able to continue reforms due to the rigidity of its members.

It´s not the members who hinder reforms. Indeed, everyone knew that those reforms had to be made but noone ( CDU/CSU Kohl) of the guys who knew what was coming wanted to start them as they are pretty unpopular.

Quote[/b] ] Their programm does NOT contain any plans of changes for the next 4 years!

As a matter of fact they have started reforms that will need time to take pace and get effective. Rome wasn´t built in one day. You may want to read the Financial Times article on the positive effects and the good path we have right now. Their analysts are pretty confident about what the reforms will achieve in the long run.

Quote[/b] ]Fischer is well respected?

Yes he is. Check foreign press on him. In fact Schroeder and Fischer raised our image abroad a lot with their initiatives on multiple battlefields. Be it international trade agreements, the EU or bi or trilateral action and the war on terror.

I want to highlight Struck, the german minister of defense also. He is a very concious man and does his job way better than anyone we had before. If I think of Ruehe or Scharping I still could puke...

Quote[/b] ]Everything failed

Untrue, and you know that.

Quote[/b] ]no constant seat in the UN

1. This has yet to be decided

2. Check germany´s history

3. If it means to crawl up Bush´s anus to get into the UN, I´d say we do not need to go there

Quote[/b] ]Iran still makes fun of us

Like any other country Iran has the ability to decide what they want to do. And no, the process is not over. EU is getting pretty tough on them right now. Shall we check what the US do about them ? Rice says, that she does not advocate sanctions against Iran right now.

So it´s Fischer´s fault that Iran wants to run it´s nuclear facilities ?

Maybe you should check how well the help initiative for global catastrophes ran. Indonesia may give a clue. Or Sudan air-bridge. Or Ethopia air-bridge.

In fact germany reacted faster to international crises than the countries did in which the crises happened.

Now I don´t know if that can be called a failure....

Quote[/b] ]The relations with the US are terrible due to a lack of smart diplomacy!

The relations are terrible (although I wouldn´t say so because the educated people in the US indeed to respect Germany for their no to the Iraq - war) because the US went for war, betrayed the UN (check Powell´s latest press statement) and opposed Bush jr. It was right to do so as we know today. The whole stunt was no gemran initiative. We did not start a war based on made up intel.

So yes, the relations may have been harmed, but I f***** don´t care if the US feel hurt if someone doesn´t join their lines and they are going for an illegal war. I just don´t care. Would you be happy if german soldiers would be part of this betrayal ?

Just to make some profit ?

Fact is , with Merkel in office we would have been there. That´s fact. A fact noone can put aside. We would be part of an illegal war that was made up by the US and the Brits.

Quote[/b] ]Anouncing a tax increase is nothing that makes people love you!

Yes, especially when you argue that by raising taxes you create more jobs which is absolutely nonsense.

Quote[/b] ]He definetly is a goddamn liar!

So is Merkel. You may want to check what she had to say about the corruption affair with Dr. Helmut Kohl, her godfather she later stabbed with her news article.

Talking about new heads in the CDU. Where are they ?

It´s still the same gang.

[lwlooz 0]

While I agree with Balschoiw on most things about the CDU ideas I also don't really like and the FDP are just liberals who only care about businesses and not people it was Schroeder afterall who initiated the new elections.That is why this whole thing is really paradox to me.If the current government with its ideas is so good,why do we have new elections in the first place then? .

So.. I am really undecided what to do,although I rather give CDU+FDP

a go since Schroeder will probably just turn around after the elections and do the same as them

As usual in elections,you have to find the less of two evils

[remcen 0]

Quote[/b] ]Yes, especially when you argue that by raising taxes you create more jobs which is absolutely nonsense.

such an apodictic declaration is nonsense. it depends on what you spend the taxes on. if they are used to cut the contributions made by empoyers and employees it makes a lot of sense. thus the non-wage labour costs would be decreased which is crucial for making labour payable again and creating new jobs, much more crucial than liberalizing the labour market. ("umlagefinanzierung vs steuerfinanzierung"; see my post above) the scandinavians have undertaken that step like ten years ago and look were they stand now.

Quote[/b] ] Merkel just has an agenda and affinity to energy giants like EON I totally dislike

it's not only the CDU who favors these big companies but also the SPD. remember the merger between ruhrgas and e.on some years ago. the "Bundeskartellamt" (federal cartel control office) forbid the merger, but then economics minister müller allowed the merger by the so called minister-allowance. before he became minister he was a top mananger of VEBA, one of the pre-decessors of e.on. what is he now that he quit politics? a high-ranking manager of ruhrkohle which is also affiliated with the energy sector. result: you pay monopoloy prices again, 60% higher than those of the state-monopoly times.

(e.on is the supplier in bavaria, right ;D)

in fact it's the SPD who traditionally tends to cope better with big business like e.on, not with the small and medium sized companies which are the actual backbone of the country's economy.

Quote[/b] ]Also, the tolerance level of the left wing concerning reforms is exhausted. They accepted strong cuts in the unemployment support and that was already enough for them.

Reforms are over, the socialists wont support any changes anymore, the next 4 years will be political stagnation.

i absolutely share that fear. unfortunately a slow pace at reform-making is system-immanent in germany due to the fact that so many instances participate in political decissions and that way try to push through their points. -> new constitution or emigration.

the social democrats have lost the "new middle" they proclaimed 7 years ago and now face even a break-away of their traditional voters. so they try to bond at least these voters by their left wing stance which makes the SPD unelectable for me.

@Balschoiw: thus you cannot compare the SPD of the reforms of that of today.

i sympathized with the modernizing SPD, but now they deny the very reforms they initiated. (i'm talking of the important reforms here. labour market, not dosenpfand and nuclear energy exit. but after all it's a matter of preferences.)

Quote[/b] ]

It´s not the members who hinder reforms. Indeed, everyone knew that those reforms had to be made but noone ( CDU/CSU Kohl) of the guys who knew what was coming wanted to start them as they are pretty unpopular.

as you cannot compare the SPD of like 3 years ago you cannot compare today's CDU with that of the late kohl years. as i wrote: the kirchhof tax and merkel healthcare concept are the most honest and sensible political agendas i've read in ages. for me they counter-weight much of the unreal conservatism of the CDU.

after all it's the best of very bad options. unfortunately no party makes me vote without bellyache if you know what i mean

[WhoCares 0]

For me it will be one of the small left-wing parties, not sure yet whether Gruene or the Linkspartei. But not so much for ideological reasons but more as a tactical choice.

Why?

CDU/CSU (black) will gain normal majority, FDP (yellow) will make the 5% limit. As I don't like the Black/Yellow constellation (and that's for ideological and programmatic reasons) I don't want that this constellation reaches absolute majority.

SPD (red) will come in second.

Gruene (green) and Linkspartei (red) will also make the 5% limits. At least I hope so as otherwise black/yellow would suddenly turn out with absolute majority due to the effective loss of the votes for those that do not make the limit (not counting 'Ueberhangsmandate' ).

A Red+Red+Green coalition is pretty unlikely, even if they achieve mathematical majority. To much hatred toward the Linkspartei (in parts the successor of the SED, the former GDR governing party) from all sides (just think about the Buendnis90 fraction...).

Result: Great Coalition of CDU/CSU + SPD. And I actually like that idea.

As already said I don't like the idea of a Black or Black+Yellow government. Too conservative´, too much affinity to Bush, too close to the economic elites.

Red+Green(+Red maybe) on the other hand would be the same situation as the last seven years. Problem with that is that most major reforms would have also to pass through the Bundesrat (representation of the federal states parliaments) which is under Black control for more than six years already - often (ab- )used to blockade many progressive changes and one of the reason for the limited progress in the last years. To a certain extend the politics were already controlled by a Great Coalition due to this.

A Great Coalition would resolve this blockade (to a certain extend). It would be under conservative (black = center-right) direction but with a strong internal( ! ) center-left influence/control. It could work, as now both share responibility, no more blockade of major changes once they are defined. Internally defined, not the 'watered' results we got in the last years from the Vermittlungsausschuesse (instance to resolve blockades between Bundesrat and Bundestag).

I don't think that it would last a full legislative period (4 years) though...

As I said, to get this result it is important that Black+Yellow does not have absolute majority and this is best achieved by having the small left parties in the parliament (=>5%).

Worst we could get is Red+Green again due to the blockade...

Edit: Does all this make any sense at all???

I also hope that it is a close call with the postponed election in Dresden becoming an important factor - want to see Mr. Stoiber on Promo-Tour with the frustrated Ossis  

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Bals, I edited some of my points, but you were too quick to answer. If you check you will see that I somewhat decreased the level of agression in my post.  

I know that dealing with all these topics is probably to time demanding. Maybe we should try to avoid statistics and talk generally. (as we are doing right now)

What I generally miss in your way of arguing is the right attitude towards our economy.

Quote[/b] ]Maybe let´s say that most of their voters are businessmen who want their own kind of country they can make profit in.

Why are you so angry at people wanting to create a good economical athmosphere in Germany?

It is our industry and the opportunity to make profits that drives prosperity and employment. People wanting to earn money is GOOD for our nation.

The company I work in (belonging to my brother) has been growing fast during the last years even though my brother had to fight hard against the repressions of SPD regulations and especially bureaucracy. We are now 50 people and all are happy to have a good job! Did you  never work in a company depending on profits?

Before you distribute money you need to earn it!

People are free to transfer their money into another country! You treat them like that they will!

Quote[/b] ]A lot of jobs were created in that sector and the initiative itself is a good move for all participating parties

That is incorrect and I can assure you that I have some people here I can ask. Jobs were created, that is sure, but the stats given by the Green Party are incorrect since they include employees that are indirectly linked to the industry.

Also, dont forget that the energy closed ended funds are the real hardcore solution for the ultra rich to save money. It is these investments that can make you pay 0% taxes! So who pays? It is the tax-payer!

Dont get me wrong. i strongly support these projects and I dont mind if it is paid with taxes. however what I do care about is the attitude the CDU is against it. That is election propaganda. As far as as the CDU declared so far they intent to only replace fossil with atomic energy. Also, they intent to cut subsidies (which means cutting tax advantage for investors). This is not stupid either. If you ever drove from Berlin to Hamburg you see one wind generator after the other. None of them is profitable nor generates an reasonable amount of power. They were build for tax purposes not for usage! This industry must grow, but under ordinary competitive circumstances, and it will!

Otherwise you could also subsidise car industries to produce eco friendly cars. That never worked successfuly either. Politics can create the right athmosphere for inventions, but they shouldnt subsidise them heavily. That lesson we learned 40 years ago!

Quote[/b] ]Das Merkel indeed is lobbying energy producers

Even if she was, so what? Noone is lobbying large companies more than Schröder does, thats were the unions want him to act. (see ridiculous political intervention at Holzmann).

Quote[/b] ]s not the members who hinder reforms. Indeed, everyone knew that those reforms had to be made but noone ( CDU/CSU Kohl) of the guys who knew what was coming wanted to start them as they are pretty unpopular.

This is realy a silly oversimplifications. We all know who was in the opposition these days, and you know that several years on the downturn makes a nation more tolerant towards hurtful changes. But anyhow, I am still waiting for results, without result there were no real reforms! This "Agenda 2010 light" didnt work yet.

Quote[/b] ]Fact is , with Merkel in office we would have been there.

! Assumptions! But if the UN would have agreed to support the US, then we would have sent soldiers! Schröder said no before the UN even had results!

Quote[/b] ]Yes, especially when you argue that by raising taxes you create more jobs which is absolutely nonsense.

You told me that the Eco-subsidies created jobs, they are nothing else than taxes too!

Quote[/b] ]EU is getting pretty tough on them right now

I bet iran is shaking right now! Fischer has nothing in his pockets to bargain or threaten with! The country and administration he represents has no power! Kohl once did!

Quote[/b] ]Untrue, and you know that.

Show me the bright growth figures!

Quote[/b] ]So is Merkel. You may want to check what she had to say about the corruption affair with Dr. Helmut Kohl, her godfather she later stabbed with her news article.

Thanks god she did! You complain that she changed her perspective about Kohl due to the corruption scandal? Now that funny! And I would hope you would change your opinion about Schröder too after what he had promised and how little he put into practice!

[der bastler 0]

Fact is , with Merkel in office we would have been there. That´s fact. A fact noone can put aside. We would be part of an illegal war that was made up by the US and the Brits.

Funny, to call a "may be" a fact. Anyway Germany participated in that war. THAT is a fact. Other chancellors had got the balls to refuse any help. I just remind you of Brandt stopping weapon transports crossing our country during the Jom Kippur war 1973 or Kohl denying bombers to start from Germany towards Tripolis in 1986.

[Daddl 10]

Fact is , with Merkel in office we would have been there. That´s fact. A fact noone can put aside. We would be part of an illegal war that was made up by the US and the Brits.

Funny, to call a "may be" a fact. Anyway Germany participated in that war. THAT is a fact. Other chancellors had got the balls to refuse any help. I just remind you of Brandt stopping weapon transports crossing our country during the Jom Kippur war 1973 or Kohl denying bombers to start from Germany towards Tripolis in 1986.

The point is the opposition (i.e. Merkel & Co.) was crying for this being not enough and for Germany needing to stand by it's friends - as was the rest of those who now say "ah, but we wouldn't have done anything - that's all lies". Of course they would have joined the alliance, of course we would have gotten involved - just like Spain, Italy or Poland.

Schröder tried to say no without offending the US too much (and without making the US close down all it's bases - which are a big factor for the local economy in their surroundings). While I'd rather have prefered him to say no and prohibit any use of german air space and facilities, at least he said no - not like Merkel who was licking Bush's boots and ass while 90% of the population were against any involvement!

Now they try to play it down, but I doubt many people have forgotten about it.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]Schröder tried to say no without offending the US too much (and without making the US close down all it's bases - which are a big factor for the local economy in their surroundings).

This happend during the hot phase of the last election. Schröder was trying to win votes, nothing else! And if you claim that he didnt want to offend the Americans well then I must say he is a bad diplomat, cause never since the end of WWII the relations between Germany and the US have been worse (and bases are being closed). Please be assured that a "No" which disrespects any future decisions by the UN is an insult to the US, especially since the UN investigations hadnt been finished at that time. Schröder could have assumed that there no WMD, but he couldnt have known! And the same administration still claims that the war in the Balkans was immoral. Anti Americanism was always strong amongst the generation of 1968!

Do you believe the CDU was trying to win votes when admiting that they wait for a decision from the UN. They openly said that if the UN agrees then German soldiers might go Iraq. That is honesty!

Schröder is now doing the same with Turkey, we all know that the introduction is absolutely nonesense from an economical point of view. Unafordable with unforseeable consequences in terms of migration. But the votes count, and the future generations will pay the bill! And it will cost much more than a silly 2% increase in VAT!

Handelsblatt, die Kosten eines Türkeibeitritts

[denoir 0]

I think that Ze German problem is far more deep and fundamental to be solved by a change of government. Schröder's economic policies may have not been ideal, but I would not blame him for the structural economic difficulties that Germany is facing.

If it makes you feel any better, I think all of Europe is heading that way.

What I this fundamental problem is can be summarized in three points:

1. Market saturation

2. Life quality and social security

3. Impossible industrialism

Let me explain. I'll start from bottom up. Germany like most European countries, but more than most is an industrial nation. Industry is what makes the money. (Cash++)

Through globalization, knowledge and skill has gone way outside the traditional industrial countries, resulting in some really heavyweight competition. At this point in time there is even very little difference in quality between an über-expenive German industrial product and a really cheap Asian one. Ultimately when you are buying industrial products globally, you can get cheaper and just as good stuff elsewhere. (Cash--)

This brings us to point number two. Germany like the rest of Europe has for the last three decades been in a process of moving away from traditional capitalism into a more socialist direction. Strong social security for all citizens is a value that most Europeans feel strongly about. In addition the traditional work for cash, the whole job market has become a far more rigid and structured thing. Quality of life is tied to not just money, but a range of other factors such as amount of free time, environmental concerns etc People are becoming more and more interested in these factors than they are in traditional cash.

This is a two edged sword. For the majority of people, such an arrangement is benefitial as most people will live their very average lives anyway and are completely uninterested of an effort/reward system. And traditional capitalism is based on an illusion - namely that if you work hard and smart, you'll be rich. While this indeed is an illusion in 99% of the cases, rewarding work and invention is a driving force for the 1% who might actually have any ambitions in life.

More to the point a generous social system and wider requirements for quality of life costs a shitload of money. (Cash--)

And the third and final point is the unavoidable fact that European consumer markets for industrial products are saturated. This is strongly correlated to the previous point, of people wanting other types of rewards than material one. This is in sharp contrast with America. In the US, if you can afford two cars, you buy two cars, in Europe you often don't because of various non-monetaryr reasons (environment etc) or simply because you want to spend your money on some non-industrial product. Industrial mass products are viewed with contempt and uniqueness is valued. As you can guess, terrible news for the industry. (Cash--)

So you have an industry that finances the society, that can't export stuff because the products' market value is not competitive and you produce more stuff than the people at home want to buy. At the same time people want bloody expensive stuff such as a good social security.

Who is going to pay for this? That is the ultimate problem. A society that is carried economically by industry can't work well with a strong social system.

There is one more factor, which I haven't mentioned, but which is quite relevant in the German case: industrial automation. In Detroit you can see long assembly lines where workers put the cars together. These people get paid, pay their taxes, buy cars and help the general circulation of cash, products and services in society. In Stuttgart you see long lines of industrial robots putting cars together. So what do you do with the workers? Well, you can't fire them all really both because of laws plus that a ton of unemployed industrial workers in an industry driven country would not do anybody any good. So you reduce their work hours, but give them the same pay. So the industrial worker now works 6 hours per day instead of 8 and he's loving it. But who is going to pay for it?

The only possible solution as I see it is to get rid of the industry and move on to something else. I think what we're seeing in Germany and in some other European countries is the same thing that happened when we moved from an agricultural society into an industrial one. 100 years ago 90% of the people worked with farming. We managed to move on to something different, and that's what we need to do now as well.

So Ze German problem is in my opinion not at all very German, it's just that Germany due to its degree of industrialization and due to its strong social system has come further than any other country in this process. I would bet money that in 50 years or so, even America will find itself in a similar position.

Vote Merkel, vote Schröder..It most lilkely won't change anything at all. Going back to traditional capitalism isn't an option and you can't afford the type of social system that you have been enjoying for a while now.

[Daddl 10]

Do you believe the CDU was trying to win votes when admiting that they wait for a decision from the UN. They openly said that if the UN agrees then German soldiers might go Iraq. That is honesty!

No, that was simply "ignoring the will of the voters". Which is stupid before an election. People elect whom they believe to represent them best - and supporting the US efforts to attack Iraq was definitely NOT on the voter's wish list. So whether Schröder acted out of opportunism (or rather realism in view of the electorate's opinion) or not wasn't the issue - it's what the CDU/CSU were willing to do when elected, how they acted towards Bush and against any efforts to stop the war from happening.

This hasn't anything to do with antiamericanism (spare me the tlame "why do you hate us so much" debate), but everything with what people think is right or wrong. Attacking Iraq and the way Bush & Co went about preparing the stage with fake accusations WAS criminal in most peoples opinion. And the voters have been proven right with no evidence of WMDs brought forward, no Al Quaida links (apart from the perfect playground the US prepared for them after the invasion), and life in Iraq being in a more desolate state than ever.

I do believe Schröder and Fischer that they were against the war not out of oportunism but out of conviction. This is my personal opinion and you are of course free to disagree. Still, to me the accusation of 'pure opportunism' sounds more like the whining of someone who gravely misjudged how strongly people felt about this issue. After all it's a question of probability with 90% of the german population against the war and Schröder's and Fischer's personal histories.

With 'being nice about it' I meant limiting the damage done by the Bush governement by apeasing them with little niceties. I don't consider someone warning his friend is responsible for that friend freaking out when the answer doesn't fit his plans.

And no, I'm not in favour with Turkey entering the EU - not now when we first have to 'digest' the just recently joined new member states. I think it's a good idea in the long run (talk about quite a few decades), but not now. But then I don't vote Schröder, and opposition to this within the EU is big enough anyways for that to be a real danger, anyways. This is in my opinion definitely not such an important issue as the question on how a CDU/CSU governement would act in regard to a potential future US/Iran confrontation.

[remcen 0]

@denoir: your argmuents unfortunately lack a substantial factual basis regarding the situation in gemany at least.

Quote[/b] ]And the third and final point is the unavoidable fact that European consumer markets for industrial products are saturated.

how can you say something like that and talk about globalisation a few lines above. germany is the world champion in exporting its products so it's least dependant on home demand than any other country, esp. the US.

also home markets are far from being saturated in germany. ppl save too much of their money and companies don't invest their's due to a general feeling of uncertainty which makes - i admit - a part of the problem.

Quote[/b] ]A society that is carried economically by industry can't work well with a strong social system.

that's an unproven statement and complete nonsense btw. the system has been functioning for a long time but does not any more because of the shitload of unemployed who make labour expensive (see my posts above why). if the whole social sector would be financed by indirect taxes and not by direct contributions the problem simply wouldn't exist in the extent like today. with the present system unemployment generates further unemployment making labour more expensive again.

didn't sweden make that step towards a tax-based system in the early 90s ?

Quote[/b] ]So the industrial worker now works 6 hours per day instead of 8 and he's loving it. But who is going to pay for it?

workers work longer lately. the whole system is going back to a 40, 45 or 50 hour week hour week like 30 years ago. (when i still had to do manual work at the beginning of my studies i worked for some firms - never less than 50 hours a week, including saturdays. that's what is becoming normal again in germany.) simple reason: extra paying for a workers' overtime is cheaper for an employee than to hire an additional worker. the fix costs of labour are too high due to the non-wage related contributions (see my posts above again).

Quote[/b] ]The only possible solution as I see it is to get rid of the industry and move on to something else

you are referring to clark's concepts of the three sectors with the third one (services generally) slowly replacing the second one? well, let me say two things:

1. the swing towards the service-society depends partly on statistic effects. for example: imagine a charlady wiping the office of a big steel company. so she belongs to the second sector. what if the company out-sources the segment of the charwoman? she does the same work as before, only for an external firm and belongs to the third sector over night. how much out-sourcing has taken place in the last, say 15 years? you see...!

2. do you think an economy can live without any insutrial production (i mean a big economy, not luxemburg or liechtenstein). most services are created around industrial products. no industry - no services and thus only a little third sector, the dream of the 40's, among them clark's afaik, that the third sector will slowly replace the second sector is an illusion. there's little beyond industrial production, too little for a big country to make a living on actually.

so the parties will face the problem that germany must become more competetive again, not further de-industrialized. that would be economically totally insane, even if you consider a 50-year term or more.

[Bernadotte 0]

So you have an industry that finances the society, that can't export stuff because the products' market value is not competitive and you produce more stuff than the people at home want to buy.

Here are a few other points to take into consideration:

1.  The extraordinarily high EURO will eventually fall again in favour of Europe's industrial exports long before they need to abandon their impossible industrialism.

2.  Europe will perennially add more nations to its saturated market allowing much of their impossible industrialism to remain possible a bit longer.

3.  For many decades, the US has been... um... evolving to become more like Europe.  The biggest obstacle may have been socialising health care because it would harm one of America's most important industries - pharmaceuticals.  The next decade could see a very great change in that situation as a huge number of important drugs reach the end of their patent terms.  And as soon as the US government has to start buying medication for the Detroit auto worker who scorched his lungs working in the paint booth then you will also see more robots on their assembly lines.

4.  Bra wars anyone?  Europeans still want to have it both ways.  They don't want to see fellow Europeans sewing together cheap lingerie in dirty sweatshops that pollute the environment.  But they don't mind if such goods produced that way reach their storeshelves from China.  So everytime Europe raises their own quality of life they must accept that they are also tilting the playing field against their own industry on a global scale.

It's not easy being Europe.