European News and Poland Thread 2

Not only Germany; there are moves in quite a lot of countries to reassess Chinese influence, particularly where technology and dependence on their manufacturing is concerned.


Western democracies didn't. Private companies did to make a fast buck.

THAT!

Some are made in Poznań nowadays, however their main factories are in Wolfsburg, Ingoldstady and Mladá Boleslav. Most of their production is still in Europe.

In Europe is not the same as in Germany. But it's possible that German ex-workers must be thrilled knowing that VWs are made in Europe.

@GefreiterKania
Poles tend to have a very one sided love affection towards any nation that hasn't invaded Poland, or at least for a very long time or seems unlikely to invade (personally experienced that first hand quite often).

A lot has changed during recent months.


That is nice, however, you might have been simply lucky to run into people who liked the Irish or didn`t care at all. But you might have also met people who masked their anti Irish sentiment pretty well. :):)


Yes, but it isn`t necessary to voice your anti Irish sentiment or display it physically, with their facial expression etc. . One might cherish such a sentiment inside and not reveal it at all due to various factors, one of them the rules of political correctness or English politeness.

I said that Most Brits stereotypically view the Irish as barbarians.

Probably I exaggerated with this most. Let`s replace it with "a significant number" and with that change, I still support my claim. Why? Because stereotypes which came into being centuries ago also take similar time to be debunked. Or at least two or three generations`. It is still too early to say that for the English. The net is full of such comments:

I came to London in the late 1980s and there was a lot of hostility in the form of being called paddies and biddies and general prejudice at that time. There was a later time I felt unaffected by the prejudice - perhaps because I was busy raising children. The problem with some prejudice is that you don't know if someone just doesn't like you or if it's bigotry. - More recently, I have had comments and challenges - even on one occasion a "F**k off to Ireland". I am married to an English guy - who did not support or defend me against this - which made me feel very hurt. It's possible the prejudice never went away - but was just hidden.

More comments by Irish "barbarians" in Britain:

I worked in England on and off for 5 years as an engineer. Personally I would never go back there again because of the undertone of anti-irish racism I witnessed and was at the receiving end of. It's not overt but insidious by way of remarks and it was present on a day to day basis in work, out shopping, socialising and even at the local GP who asked me why I was living in England which was not meant as a question. I was glad the UK left the EU to be honest so we forge closer ties with countries that don't look down upon us as an inferior race.

I see France is on fire tonight.

They really don't like Micron's plans to rob them of their pensions.

• 
  
  

Macron claims he got the right to introduce controversial changes through the won elections.

He uses a clause in their constitution to push laws through without a parliamentary vote on them.

His election win was relatively close and largely due to the unpalatability of his main rival. He may have pushed voters to her now. This pension raid is truly unpopular, especially in the industrial regions which he needs as part of his support base.

Yes, but most people prefer socialist approach. The same in Poland - when rightist PiS is giving out benefits in socialist style, voters are grateful.

Pensions are not 'benefits' when people have paid for them into their pension pot with a clear expectation of when they would receive back what they had paid in.

Spot on!
Of course they are not.
Only a communist would see it that way.......

of course not, but it is a benefit when you can be retired already with 62 and not only with 67 like in Germany.

A good question.
Personally I can't see what the French are complaining about.
And I just retired at 66 and am still capable of work.

Facts:

1) People live longer, much longer. In the 1950s, a person would have an expected life of just a few years after retiring. Now it can be 20+ years.

2) There are less babies being born, for quite some time now. As a result, the proportion of people that are active in the labor market is shrinking.

3) The pension system in France pays people above and beyond what they contributed over their working years. The gap is closed by contributions from those still working.

4) By keeping a retirement age which is completely out of whack with demographics and progress in medicine, France is saddling its younger generations with a heavy tax burden.

5) Money does not grow on trees.

6) Taking money from young people, and giving it to old people, reduces the amount they can spend on a new house, or a new car. You know, the things that power an economy.

7) Old farts don't buy houses, and are often content with driving old cars.

8) Macron is trying to make the French economy more dynamic.

9) Forcing people to work another 4-5 years, produces that much more tax revenue. Not having to pay them pensions at the same time, means less expenditure. Result - more money to invest in things that will make life in France better over the long term.

Try to explain why the rioters are mostly "younger generations". Are they rioting for their grandpas?
Macron is trying to protect them, so I don't get it. Or is rioting now a new form of entertainment?

Some smart person once said that:

"If you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart, and if you are not conservative when old, then you have no brain"

Young people have an amazing capacity for worrying about things they really have no business worrying about. Old people tend to think only of the problems closest to their own hide. So it has been, since the dawn of our species.

In less words - because young people are stupid.

More specifically, young men are stupid (most of the rioters are male). I know this on my own example. Regardless of all the good knowledge I absorbed from smart people, I was still effectively very stupid when I graduated.

Two huge contributing factors, in young males (again based on my own example), is a sex drive which can cloud all reason (how many of those guys are out there to impress some girl), and a lust for violence (testosterone? Older guys not taking you seriously? Not sure, but it's definitely real).

This is why wars can be good sometimes, because they remove this cohort of rabble rousers, or at least gives them an avenue to vent that stuff.

You, as always, are too kind.

That depends on what was promised when they took the money.


Quite. People saved it from their hard-earned wage and have a right to expect good stewardship of that money.

The events in France prove one more time that there should be no official retirement age and no state pension system. People should retire when and only when they can afford it - if someone can afford retiring at 40, that's brilliant; if someone has to work until 75, though sh*t (it means he wasn't sensible and diligent enough throughout his life).*

State pension systems are contributing to widespread financial retardness in society. I know personally many people who count on a single source of income (ZUS pension) for their retirement, claiming that they can't afford to give up a part of their income for PPK, IKE, IKZE or any other form of saving for their retirement. The very same people buy brand new cars on credit (lol!) and go to exotic places twice a year for their holidays (very often on borrowed money as well). Any person who receives a hunger ZUS pension, and has no other pension scheme than that, deserves all the misery they are in. Also, if such person has a history of car loans, credit card usage or any other consumer credit (with the exception of mortgage), their hunger death should be broadcast live on national TV as a warning against what being a financial retard can do to you.

* - all I wrote applies to people who started their professional careers in 1989 or later. Those who lived under socialism should be paid reasonable pensions until they die (as a form of compensation) and when the last of them dies all state pension schemes should die with them.

Why not? People have paid into the schemes with their own hard cash

People fought for pensions.

The French.... really don't like to work, do they?

62 and 64 are untenable as retirement ages in a modern society with extended lifespan and a shrinking labor pool.... (and an increasing welfare class, so....)


I'm not that radical. I do think it mostly should be left up to the individual.

The problem with individualzed pensions is that they only work for a very small number of people, what serves most people best is a system where the working pay for the retired with money that the government can't raid for other reasons... but once the labor pool starts shrinking.... it's gonna be dicey.

I mentioned one reason in my previous post. Also, I don't believe it is appropriate for governments to treat people like mindless cattle and force them to save for their retirement - they should be free to either save or not. This would - among other things - promote thrift, diligence and traditional family model. Also, as Maf mentioned, with large part of the population refusing to have chidren and the labour pool shrinkage, the entire system turns into a gigantic Ponzi scheme.

There are so many ways to save for your retirement these days (both my wife and I will have 5 different sources of income each when we retire) that continuing with wasteful, ineffective, obligatory state system is nonsensical.

Old age pensions, which people fought long and hard for, are nothing to do with your 'mindless cattle'. They are people investing their money together for the future using economies of scale to produce the best return.


Yes, and one that people have paid into is their shared pension scheme.

Yes, and they should be able to pay their money out of the schemes whenever they want. It's their money after all, isn't it? If they are not allowed to do it, it's not much better than a Ponzi scheme (and an obligatory one at that!).


And the pensions they will receive will be peanuts compared to their contribution - and the younger they are, the lower their pensions will be in relation to their overall contribution (ZUS has no scruples about stating it openly and impudently).

Fixed term saving schemes don't work like that though, do they...

Ones where you can withdraw instantly have lower returns.


That's Polish. The issue is in France where some people have paid in for many years.

Yes, if you withdraw early, but in the long term they can have even higher returns (e.g. my IKE pension will be 35-40% higher than my ZUS one).


In Poland people also have paid in for many years, and the state pension systems are equally wasteful and ineffective in most European countries.

Long term is key. Some people, even millions of people, have paid into the French scheme for decades.


Yet people like them, as we can see right now in France.

You may favour a change. Others may or may not. This however is a matter for national conversation and a public vote

As I said earlier, for every such comment there is another with the opposite viewpoint.


Generally, the type of English person who is politically correct or concerned about politeness tends not to harbour anti-Irish sentiments.