Nat is ürlich failed Agenda 2010 because it comes from a completely misguided man. During the entire Hartz legislation has the traditional social democratic meritocracy (anti basically would object to that, had the Social Democrats not next to it the element of solidarity completely lost sight of, as they Grundsicherungsgesetzgebun decided g) with a neo-liberal attitude mixed to the postulated under Kohl credo that power would be worthwhile again, finally has made to prevail. Whole groups of people, from single parents of disabled people up to other so-called hard-to-place, were observed in this legislation the "Demanding and conveyance" completely left outside, especially in drilling for the past five years, almost did not work. The Agenda 2010 had failed because almost all their assumptions are wrong, are consequently also almost all the lessons learned from wrong.
If one looks now that the municipal associations ggw. fight for a constitutional amendment so that the Argen should remain (the Federal Employment Agency has no real interest in it), then but not because it is the service providers to the supposed power from a single source is that in all the above groups of people just _not_ work. No, by all whining how much Hartz IV would cost but especially municipalities: Through the merging of social and unemployment assistance especially the local authorities discovered a massive savings that they have in recent years partly expanded sent in that they they even have a flat rate of accommodation costs relating to a large extent, especially with similar computational tricks which is already the rule unconstitutional sentence was justified.
us not fool ourselves: It was last of all and zuallerwenigst about people actually get back to work (seven million recipients of basic security and the welfare money that would be a rather lofty claim). It was - on the claim that the alleged effects of globalization - one and only aim to reveal, at the bottom of the population a savings potential, enabling businesses made possible by a substantial reduction of the remuneration levels on the low-wage sector until the sharholder value really prmonient in to make the foreground. Therefore one must not even be a leftist that sees itself in the final analysis, a Professor in the sense result is not significantly different. And that's what was politically but also deliberate. What is unique to the SPD as a party and the alleged civil rights Greens can not blame-oriented, is that they are the Basta-Chancellor in his miserable Muskelspielchen in Parliament and is still followed by his confidence in the case have "lie down on the cross" can be.
If I already read today, however, in part, the current government coalition could "wash their hands of it" pilates, and finally it was not created in the Hartz legislation involved, showing once again the consummate political hypocrisy argument. First, the black and yellow all Hartz package of course supported, so it has always corresponded to their political convictions. To another, Who could the current government coalition at the federal level than prevent them to adopt an actual growth acceleration law by the rule sets on the existence of minimum necessary ggw. to the 480, - € would have been increased? As I read again today in SPIEGEL online - and one might almost think it would go directly to the money of the writing editor: What the government is going to cost everything again?
So what! As the speculators have driven the economy almost in the ditch "has no longer a man asked how expensive the whole thing could well be. Since it was at one time only on a "bird's do or die." an economy is in danger, every possible means is right, it is contrary to even the very any market model. Is it "only" seven millions of basic security and social welfare concerned, may be saved funny straight on, the clientele may be yes, on the one hardly defend, on the other it has not the money, the ruling parties for their own purpose tracking smear, as the hotel industry too obvious on a large scale may appear to be in the situation.
Here is the link to the opinion which I will discuss in the next few days, probably even more: http://
bit.ly / anvmbD.
If one looks now that the municipal associations ggw. fight for a constitutional amendment so that the Argen should remain (the Federal Employment Agency has no real interest in it), then but not because it is the service providers to the supposed power from a single source is that in all the above groups of people just _not_ work. No, by all whining how much Hartz IV would cost but especially municipalities: Through the merging of social and unemployment assistance especially the local authorities discovered a massive savings that they have in recent years partly expanded sent in that they they even have a flat rate of accommodation costs relating to a large extent, especially with similar computational tricks which is already the rule unconstitutional sentence was justified.
us not fool ourselves: It was last of all and zuallerwenigst about people actually get back to work (seven million recipients of basic security and the welfare money that would be a rather lofty claim). It was - on the claim that the alleged effects of globalization - one and only aim to reveal, at the bottom of the population a savings potential, enabling businesses made possible by a substantial reduction of the remuneration levels on the low-wage sector until the sharholder value really prmonient in to make the foreground. Therefore one must not even be a leftist that sees itself in the final analysis, a Professor in the sense result is not significantly different. And that's what was politically but also deliberate. What is unique to the SPD as a party and the alleged civil rights Greens can not blame-oriented, is that they are the Basta-Chancellor in his miserable Muskelspielchen in Parliament and is still followed by his confidence in the case have "lie down on the cross" can be.
If I already read today, however, in part, the current government coalition could "wash their hands of it" pilates, and finally it was not created in the Hartz legislation involved, showing once again the consummate political hypocrisy argument. First, the black and yellow all Hartz package of course supported, so it has always corresponded to their political convictions. To another, Who could the current government coalition at the federal level than prevent them to adopt an actual growth acceleration law by the rule sets on the existence of minimum necessary ggw. to the 480, - € would have been increased? As I read again today in SPIEGEL online - and one might almost think it would go directly to the money of the writing editor: What the government is going to cost everything again?
So what! As the speculators have driven the economy almost in the ditch "has no longer a man asked how expensive the whole thing could well be. Since it was at one time only on a "bird's do or die." an economy is in danger, every possible means is right, it is contrary to even the very any market model. Is it "only" seven millions of basic security and social welfare concerned, may be saved funny straight on, the clientele may be yes, on the one hardly defend, on the other it has not the money, the ruling parties for their own purpose tracking smear, as the hotel industry too obvious on a large scale may appear to be in the situation.
Here is the link to the opinion which I will discuss in the next few days, probably even more: http://
0 comments:
Post a Comment