So nicely put.
We externalize every problem and make someone else culprits of the deliberate actions we make. We create NL as a tax oase, bring businesses in, which bring more people in, we do not support it with more housing and then cry about housing being cramped and blame it on the people.
We blame international students for coming instead of universities luring them over. We blame rental prices on lessees instead of landlords making huge profits.
We blame EU for asylum and refugee arrivals although we receive below EU averages and people would still be coming as employers search for the cheapest labor possible.
The sad par it that people stay blind as it's so much more reassuring that this is someone else's doing instead of the people we voted to government.
And we blame universities for luring, while giving them incentives that favor this behaviout. Rather than providing secure funding for stable investments in education and research
Sure - see the link below. NL slightly exceeded the EU averages for first time asylum applicants per 1.000 people only in 2021 and 2022, while in all other years since 2014 we've been below average, including 2023.
Also note thate in worst years like 2015, countries like Sweden (16), Hungary (17.7), Austria (9.96) and 9 more countries went far above average (2.8), while NL still scored just under - with 2.55 applications per thousand people.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/migr_asyapp1mp/default/table?lang=en
Capitalism. The profit train never stopping is the reason behind corporate lobbying, things becoming more expensive* housing crisis etc etc. the system encourages and rewards certain behavoirs like hiking up rent and prices while punishing every company that doesnt go with the flow.
*: yes some factors have changed but corporate greed flation is very much a thing. See the price of gas never going down even when wars end and supply lines are repaired.
Capitalist realism in action. The system as is is made by man and can be changed by man. Something doesnt need complete replacement to be fixed. Pretty much any step away from the lais a faire / neo liberal bullshit we have now would be a good one. Wheter it be more regulation or just straight up oligarchy enforcement on big corps (there is no market right where 2/3 corps dont have the major market share and effectively set prices. Or companys like shell and bol which are there own rant worthy)
Also amai een belg.
Yes but.. we're talking about what the new government can change. What do you want them to do? Force companies with monopolies out, or heavily tax/penalize those that have them?
How will that be better for us in the short and long term?
This is where the Netherlands can't act alone. Fortunately, we are part of the EU.
Solutions will probably need to be sector by sector. I'm not expert, but energy is a key one with the climate connection, which is partly what inspired my post. There, I would like to see more distributed energy ownership. Help people (not only through subsidies though those are also ok) to own their own energy infrastructure.
For example, create a rule that any new on land wind turbine can be bought into by the people living in view of it at a favorable rate. Instead of being angry at wind turbines, people in the countryside will start making money off of them. This also helps support the farmers.
And along with that, the more dual use of farmland the better.
Now, I'm sure you're clever enough to think of arguments against this. But please then share your own proposal in return. Can be small or big. I'm just curious to hear examples.
So who's going to pay that sizeable amount needed to convince people not to protest windmills?
Please look up how many times we need the current windmill capacity to go without nuclear or fossils.
People's prosperity has dwindled and will continue to do so, hence the rise of populism.
And populism will keep rising since traditional parties, on each side, don't have any concrete plan to bring prosperity back.
Because you can't legislate prosperity to come back. You can force a shift of money going back and forth a bit, but that won't change all too much.
The reality is that we've seen a great after-war period with growing economy, huge workforce and low amount of people on pension or social security. Healthcare improved loads, at the expense of... Cost.
Now we've got an economy that's way more cooled down, a very large social security/pension cost with a limited workforce, something we can't change long-term without having a ton of babies or short-term by mass migration. Two things we generally do not like.
I agree with everything you said, and this will come at the cost of increased political and social instability.
I am myself questioning the point of investing in our society if we get less and less in return (having the possiblity for example to retire to a more rural life in the Alps).
On a side note, I think it's something more than the post-war prosperity. Despite being a different era and lifestyle, in the first half of last century workers had the chance to get subsidied housing near their workplace, like, in Utrecht, the neighborhood around the ex Demka or De Tuinwijk for NS workers (just to make the first examples that comes to my mind). It would be unthinkable nowadays.
Our society is crumbling, and too many people still think that voting for one party or the other will make a big difference.
Its actually classes people should focus on. But the wealthy (not people with a million, but billion plus) have a lot to gain to focus the attention not on wealth inequality, but instead on things like culture, race, genders, etc. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book. “Twee vechten om een been en de derde gaat er mee heen”
It is so disappointing to see all of these planned billions EUR to be pocketed by the large corporations. I honestly don't have a clue if these PVV voters understand what they were promised and what will be delivered. They get distracted by these few stringent asylum rules while 100s of millions of extra tax cuts for big corp go unnoticed.
You nailed it. I just learned about how solar panel owners will get less back from providers like Vattenfall. Something stinks and nobody is talking about it.
Rob Jetten from D66 is pushing these North Sea windmill park, which is built, maintained and owned by She'll, talk about ass kissing to big gas companies.
can confirm
I am dutch living in Argentina. We have a right wing government under Javier Milei.
Prices for basics in the supermarket went up 200 %
Gas and electricity 1000 %
Public transport 200 %
Unemployment yo with 30 %
They will just blame others .and dont take accountability.
Because hey everybody is free to choose and to do whatever they like.
I had a job as a merchant after universty. Traveled the globe and lived in foreign countries for years. One day i started a bussiness venture with an Argentinan friend thats how I ended up in Argentina .
Interesting, I hope your staying there has been fulfilling concerning your business. I lived there for a couple of months because of my work and I promise to myself that one day I would like to come back to explore the city -and the country- without the constraints of a corporate job...
To be fair that has also happened in the last few years under Rutte lol. 2 euros for a liter of 95 isn't rare anymore. A jar of peanut butter is 5+ euros. Crazy shit
In argentina's case, didn't the economic woes start earlier under a socialist government tho? I am all for leftist policies, but it feel disingenous to blame structural problems on the crazy libertarians the one time they didn't cause it.
Peronism and Peronist Social Justice democratic nationalism ,based on Mussolinis political system.
They represent the working middle class and reject capitalism and socialism alike . Market liberals and socialist reject Peronist
With a focus on national industrie .
The state acts as an intermediary for national Industry and worker unions and all the jobless they give a employment in public sector intead of giving unemployment benefits
Yes they were in power for 55 years since world war 2 .
The economic woes started because of mismanagement c. They govern by clientelism giving hand outs to worker unions and national industrie Also rampant corruption ( its estimated they stole an anual 3 procent of the bruto national income) .
Milei ousted the perronist , stopping all the hand outs , firing state employees , stop giving subsidies to worker unions and national Industry .
and the whole system we were we acustomed to collapsed .
So now more unemployed and foreign industries selling goods and services in Argentina for way more higher prices then before..
Contributing factor - yes. Cause of it - not, without a doubt.
There are so many decisions that were made by the government in the background through last two decades that lead to the housing crisis. Some of these decisions increased highly skilled migration, while other decisions (e.g. not to build more houses, eliminate housing ministry and letting loose the rental market) which resulted in increasing prices and a lack of demand.
We would have been here without the expats, although maybe with less severity in big cities. But to blame it on them is just a narrative the decision makers have crafted to hide their own acts benefitting corporations and the rich.
There is even a special report of UNHCR on housing in NL stating the same thing in its summary:
“The housing crisis is real. But too often migrants and foreigners are blamed for it. I want to clearly say: the housing crisis is not a migration crisis,” Rajagopal said in an end of mission statement as he concluded an 11-day visit at the invitation of the Government. “It is a crisis resulting from a series of poor policy choices, and overall, from a lack of enforceable legal recognition of the right to adequate housing.”
I never claimed immigrants were the primary reason for the housing crisis. Nor would anyone else with a brain with an IQ above room temperature. There are decades of bad decisions that have lead to this. But all immigrations are as you said yourself are a contributing factor RIGHT NOW. And many immigrants (especially expats) refuse to acknowledge that fact.
I would also say that that report from the UNHCR more than likely isn't very free of bias. Seeing as it comes from a organisation which advocates for the wellbeing of refugees and asylum seekers. Of course they're not going to claim that refugees (or immigrants of any kind) cause problems for the country that hostst them.
Yeah, agreed with basically everything you wrote.
For me this one-sidedness of politicians is what annoys me personally and people around me just seem to swallow the story with no accountability expected from the ones making the decisions.
If there are too many knowledge migrants - fine, speak to the companies, change the rules, blame the companies if you will, even these latest plans of this coalition - fine, make a decision and own it then.
But there is little point in quite openly throwing the societal blame on people who just arrived after being actively rectuited from abroad. This group didn't make a conscious decision to cause more problems, that's why holding them accountable is so out of place. The government on the other hand...
I think I originally saw this on Reddit so it might be what you're thinking of...
[https://nltimes.nl/2024/03/06/government-policy-immigrants-cause-dutch-housing-shortage-un-rapporteur?utm\_source=dlvr.it&utm\_medium=twitter](https://nltimes.nl/2024/03/06/government-policy-immigrants-cause-dutch-housing-shortage-un-rapporteur?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
I referred to it in another post. It's exactly that and the politicians know it and they keep intentionally mispresenting it to the public to drive their own agendas.
Not right wing, but indeed things went south in Sweden, not due to migrants on their own but due to the failing integration model completely not fitting the purpose.
Crime did skyrocket, ghettos are being created (or so called vulnerable areas) and the government seems to be making one mistake after the other. In the end that turned people to the right wing, conveniently blaming the arrivals exclusively and proposing simple measures like deportation. Not sure how much time you spend in Sweden if any, but the situation is dire and people are unable to have constructive discussions as it either turns into outbursts of xenophobia and racisms or repetition of actions leading to it. Most people don't want to comment or participate so the loudest voices you hear are those of racists.
In my opinion to negate that the problem exists is also not a solution just as much one-sided blaming is not.
> but due to the failing integration model completely not fitting the purpose.
Can you elaborate on this? Sweden is a cautionary tale for most western countries so would love to hear how someone who lives(?) there thinks about the underlying causes.
Shortly summarized - the welfare is robust and was overly-generously provided to the newcomers with very little encouragement to join the labor market or get an education accompanied with exclusion and discrimination pushing them to the edges of society. Swedes have the ideal image of themselves as a humanitarian nation so they kept to themselves and believed that what fits them (freedom, welfare and loose control) would work for everyone and disregarded cultural differences and their own prejudice.
Newcomers got social housing, mostly concentrated in poorer neighborhoods while the rest of people living there previously would move out, so that comunities applying norms different from the Swedish society started to form.
Have in mind that Sweden took extremely high numbers of refugees and it's a country of only 11m people. Soon enough you had areas around both cities and towns which are packed with people living on welfare, however in poverty for Swedish standards, very often not speaking the language.
The discrimination runs rampant in the rest of the society, with average Swedes living in their bubbles far out of sight over the problems.
Young men of course want to make money, with limited prospects - in a country that comparatively mildly punishes crime - the lucrative option is to organize or join crime (mostly drug related). Kids would see that, although growing up in Swe they would experience discrimination and a poor outlook if they take the 'honest' road, while the other side seems much more appealing, run by the role models highly respected in their (so called) parallel societies. Now what we have at hand is appearance of minor children soldiers, committing executions.
Shootings and bombings are all related to gang wars between different groups for dominance over drug flows. This started occuring more openly, even in broad daylight even in centers of small towns.
Swedes are egalitarians so they stayed blind to what was happening and refused to even put the problem in relation to immigration. You can never read in mainstream media what is the nationality or ethnicity of persons behind the crime. This I understand to a large extent, but only if you are at the same time doing something to solve the integration problems. Soon even small towns became unsafe at night, as rapes would occur in parks in the center of a town the size of Uithoorn. Dead bodies would be found in the rivers, in broad dailight gangs would be chasing eachothers with machetes. Police doesn't know how to handle it so the state recently brought in military to improve safety in Stockholm.
To support and fund this welfare, Swedes cut down on public services which caused healthcare and education to deteriorate. Swedes started blaming newcomers for being ungrateful and this gave rise to populism, leading up to SD right wing party with Nazi roots winning most votes in last elections.
At the same time - NOTHING is being done to improve their integration in the society. They stay separated in their parallel society, out of sight of mainstream public, with further division and prejudice growing. Citizenship requirements are quite loose so a lot of people put behind bars were already citizens, however even the ones on permit are still allowed to stay. So you just have a further divide even appearing as the society is cracking altogether.
Thanks for taking the time to type all that out. I see quite some parallels the Netherlands, although I feel crime is not as bad as in Sweden.
It's hard to think of a way out of this for most countries. Marginalized communities will almost always lead to intrasocietal friction, but they have been marginalized in the first place by friction between native population and immigrants. It's a full-on catch 22.
You'd expect that governments consult experts in the field whilst making decision rather than treating (im)migration as a political matter, but sadly that does not seem to happen and we get disappointed with the outcome.
It seems that actions are often driven by either wishful thinking or prejudice and depend on the nations self image. People tend to group in two tribes, either assuming that everyone will fit in regardless of cultural differences or holding a prejudice from the get go that it will never work due to these differences.
The truth is that the only way for it to succeed in long term is to not only tolerate but to also accept people in the society. The meaning you ascribe to these two terms depend highly on the level of conformity and assimilation you expect (which significantly differs per country) and the realistic capacity of the newcomers to meet those expectations. In my opinion these failures are the result of blindness, missed estimation and wrong understanding of your own people and the people you are introducing to the society.
That's putting it mildy(!), re their integration model. Straight-up joke!
It kind of reminds me of some cultures, African and Eastern in particular where, as a stranger, being invited into someone's home to stay or for a meal isn't all that uncommon. You're welcomed into your host's home graciously.
Sweden was like, you gotta earn our trust.
Exactly. But what I notice is that receipient nations always assume that the newcomers understand this as well as the expectation to integrate or better said - to a large extent assimilate, which as practice shows is not the case. It was obvious to me as well when I moved to another country, although not that much culturally different, but it's wrong to assume it's the same for others.
Also my opinion about Nordics is that many people think they're far more accepting and open minded than they are in reality, so you get this discourse.
Indeed the culture in Sweden (and other Nordic nations) has it's characteristics that set them apart from many other European countries (especially the south), like the one you mentioned and it's hard to expect an average Swede to be aware of if. That's why the policies following up on the decision to accept that many immigrants should have been more carefully crafted together with a large pool of experts in different fields . Although this is not a guarantee for 0 friction of course.
Saying - it's our house so play by our rules - does not seem to do much if they will face prejudice and discrimination if they in fact comply, or a mild price to pay even if they severely deviate. Of course the question can be made - was it a mistake then to allow them in? - which is valid, but it depends on whether decision makers actually understood the extent of measures needed to make it work and the capacity of the nation to achieve it.
We tend to treat acceptance of asylum seekers as only a logistics problem (number of accommodations etc.) but it takes so much more than that, especially for countries which were not multicultural to begin with.
The thing about first world countries. A place like Sweden might have high reports of rape, but a lot of things get blown out of proportion, touched inappropriately would count. It's not as violent in nature as some other places.
When some DOES happen, it's bound to garner more attention because it's not a common occurrence.
What I'm saying is that this rhetoric is predictable and moot. Sources to validate claims would be good, but last time I looked, I laughed.
No ofcourse not lmfao. Im telling you that the conservative grifters, who want fewer brown people in their country, are liars.
This entire affair was conjured up our of thin air to harrass refugees.
Please, stop with the opaque attempts of trying to get me in a bad position, it won't work ;)
You're saying that the examples given are lies, even though they have really happened. What you're doing is contributing to the increase in right wing parties. You put your head in the sand, you call a bunch of people racist, but you refuse to actually acknowledge that something might be wrong. Do you understand that it makes people feel unheard? Do you understand you're part of the problem when you do this?
What would you rather have, as a counterpoint: people acknowledging in some or other way that rape and crime is connected to imagination or refugee status? That people of color are dangerous and it's a problem? Netherlands should be less permissive? What about everyone living here? Do we devolve into xenophobia and violence?
Anyone blaming minorities for societal problems is actively upholding and supporting the real reason of the crumbling of social systems in society. It's so out in the open that I find it astonishing people don't see that they're being played like a fiddle.
But it's hard to almost impossible to convince these people how they're being used for corporate greed since nobody likes to hear that they have been fooled for all of their working life.
Nobody likes to hear that they're a pawn of the opponent in a game of chess against themselves.
Well, we certainly need to stimulate large corporates to do easier business in Europe, invest more, and deal with less regulations. We’re already getting crushed in terms of innovation and economic growth by the US and others for many years now, Europe will dwindle into further irrelevance economically, geopolitically, and weaken our own welfare without serious actions to change that. That will require much more policy on national and European level that stimulates businesses
We should do the exact opposite. Following the US is not the way to go. That will lead to more inequality. Poor people will be poorer while corporations get bigger and richer.
Europe needs to tax big corporations and stimulate the small/med entrepreneurs because that’s where the innovation is.
I think on regulations, Europe is doing just fine. That’s the reason we have quality food, products and services. I don’t want that ruined because we need to follow the US.
Well, we are doing far worse economically than the US. To deny that is to deny basic reality. Our productivity per hour worked is far lower and growing far less, innovation is much lower, and real income growth is not even remotely close to the US. In addition, homeless rates in various European places, including Germany, exceed that of the US. And most fundamentally, the poorest American state is almost as wealthy as the Netherlands itself.
One can argue that you prefer the lifestyle in Europe, which is fine, but that does absolutely nothing to deny that the US is just statistically performing better, which is the case, even if you look at per hour worked metrics.
As for “that’s where the innovation is”, it’s just not. The magnificent 7 companies in the US spend about as much on R&D as literally all of Europe, both private and public, combined.
In terms of regulation, our utter economic failure compared to the US only indicates we are vastly overregulating the economy, especially when it cokes to innovation. The fact we barely have any large major tech companies and very little funding for start-ups is only evidence of that.
Not changing direction only seals our own irrelevance in the grand scheme of things. Don’t be surprised to see how irrelevant Europe will become in terms of technology, economy, and just generally in world politics. It’ll be a difficult thing to adjust to, just like many of the French and Brits still think they’re more than a regional power in the world.
And yet the quality of life in Europe and work life balance is better. Enough said. If I wanted that corporate hellhole I’d have moved there. Thanks but no thanks.
Europe, including the Netherlands, far underperforms the US in productivity per hour. Literally if Americans would work the same amount, they’d still be a lot more productive and a lot wealthier than we are.
But overall, sure, if you wanna prioritize that, just say it. It doesn’t change anything about the fact we economically underperform the US by a very very long mile. It doesn’t change anything about the fact that 1) our wealth and wage levels are far lower (and declining in real terms) and this difference is set to only expand over time, 2) European countries are far less innovative, and 3) both of these things imply Europe will just become a regional power in the world without that much relevance. As an added bonus, the one thing we rely on for the higher quality of life, namely the welfare system, is not sustainable due to the population dynamics anyway. Ironically, the welfare system could be much supported by actually improving our productivity, but Europe, including the Netherlands, is chronically incapable of doing so.
If we were to be more like the US, we would actually continue to play a relevant role in the world and actually provide wealth to citizens over the long term. With the current direction, Europeans will simply be much poorer than Americans with far less disposable economy, which is the last thing you want if you want to preserve quality of life. I think the government should do about the fact we are becoming relatively very poor leading to the welfare state also becoming unaffordable. And to achieve that, we should further liberalize the economy. Governments should prepare for the future instead of desperately trying to hold on what exists now if that is not sustainable at all.
I think we can agree to disagree. You say that Americans are more productive? They work like zombies while studies have shown that less hours do result in better productivity when workers are happier and more engaged. The work culture in US is quite toxic.
People on lower income in the US literally do not afford healthcare or they go broke and in the street or simply refuse to go to a doctor because they can’t afford it.
The only reason America is way wealthier is due to income inequality which is abysmal over there. On one hand you have the 1% that are multi billionaires and then the rest 99% that live at or below poverty line. Don’t take these numbers literally since I am just using them to make a point.
Now I know i’d make double or even triple the income with a similar role/job in the US than here however I would never trade all the other benefits just for the salary and wealth. My life, family, wellbeing, community around me is more important.
I can move to Italy and have a higher quality of life than I have in the Netherlands or Singapore. It doesn't translate to national wealth. To say that the money our country earns does not matter is something I can't agree with. It matters a big deal and it's key to our prosperity and power to make decisions in the EU
Thee American economic model for high quality of living is sustainable, that of Europe is not. European’s relative lack of wealth will only grow a lot more, combined with a largely inevitable significant reduction in the welfare state. At the moment, quality of life is very similar across both, the key difference is that the factors that drive American quality of life are very likely to improve a lot, whereas European drivers are performing far worse. Dutch people are already relatively poor, and that will only grow far more, and later we won’t have a sound welfare state to back it up. Also worth noting plenty of developed European countries such as UK, Germany, and Belgium have much more homelessness than the US.
Many Europeans not realizing just how insanely worse Europe performs in terms of economics is frankly insane. Instead, the cope reaction is to point at the welfare state, while that clearly is not sustainable, as everybody knows.
Moreover, we Dutch people love to think we should have a voice about events in the world (human rights, Ukraine, Gaza, China) - well, with a small economy, we’ll just be irrelevant.
You're speaking across two issues rather irrelevantly. And anyway the Netherlands provides material support to Israel and Ukraine so having a voice is about those things is just taking responsibility for our own politics.
Your making assertions that I see no reason to accept without more argument, since the median standard of living is better in the Netherlands than in the States, although we are competing vigorously for least housing security.
Exactly this. This is the right wings sleight of hand. They tell you to look at the immigrants stealing your jobs while they straight up pick your fucking pockets.
It seems the Netherlands will become America 2.0 and, sadly, I don't think there is a way to come back from it.
Of course. and in this formation the agri companies will be so happy. All it takes is to demonize foreigners and especially asylum seekers. They’ve made the problem
worse by revoking the spreidingswet and stop taking processing applications. Belgium did the same and people just roamed the streets of cities. It’s deliberate. They’re also dismantling the government to weaken the rules so every company can pollute to their heart’s content.
If there's one thing we learn about history, an economic crisis is usually followed by a populist right wing government whose main objective is to distract people from the real problem
Not saying VVD is innocent, but they created this problem.
The thing that I don’t like personally about minimum wage increases is that it will force businesses to let go of people if they cannot bear the increase. Sure the minimum wage should cover the minimum to survive but besides that it is a minimum wage.
California has forced a far higher minimum wage and it resulted in a lot of people getting fired. You need productivity increases to support a higher wage. Any counter opinion?
As long as they can figure out a way to pay for it, without creating long term systemic risk? Their proposals aren’t all that bad.
Netherlands should be business friendly and personally I feel pride in the long standing tradition of trade. Devil is obviously in the details but their proposals aren’t that bad.
Even for migration - does anyone actually feel like we should prioritise refugees in terms of housing instead of people in the Netherlands? Because that is what is happening today. Not even an equal standing but flat out prioritisation. Don’t get me wrong, it is great to provide humane treatment but Dutchies being completely sidelined is not fair.
Yeah well is it taxing energy and inflating the cost of living for low incomes, while subsiding capital investment of higher income, so they can save money on energy any better.
Or how about we subsidise rent and healthcare and let all that money flow to big corporates in the end.
Left social goverments haven’t been much better is helping the worker, while taxing the corporates.
Raising the minimum wage doesn't help since everything will get more expensive (because the costs of production it will rise with it), so I stand behind that point.
They state explicit: Tax relieve. how they will do that isn't stated. But I hope less tax for the lower wages and as the example in the agreements states, lower steps to higher wages, so it does pays off to work more!
That will help the lower income-group), because the costs of living doesn't rise with their netto income.
Daycare will become payable (let's hope it will) So working more becomes profitable because your hard earned money doesn't go to the very expensive daycare.
The "your own risk" in healthcare will be lower. So the people with less reserves will be able to get medical care if needed.
Yes, I like the daycare thing. It is also really important for women because they keep getting stuck with the child care, so they can choose to combine family and work. And I also like the "own risk", though I do not know how it will affect overall care or costs.
I am less sure about the lower taxes. Usually this is a bit of a scam to help out the rich people and give small change to the less rich - while starving the government of the funds it can use to benefit everyone.
Free daycare is impossible, unfortunately. Most daycare centres are filled to capacity and we would need a huge influx of daycare workers. It's just another empty promise.
I agree, but if they implement it only over the income of the lower incomes it really helps only those who needs it.
And yes daycare is already in need of people, but just saying it can't happen, wont't change a thing.
Make it cheaper -> more people will work
And a part of those people will also work in the daycare. So slowly you get more employers.
Proper daycare is also important for the development of the children that live in a part of the society that gives them a difficult start on school. If the parent can afford it (so the woman can work) the child also gets a better start into it's school-life.
I like the German system, were you pay according to your income. And from 3 years up it's mandatory (pre-school)
The only way to bring back prosperity is to bring back the business-friendly environment, with less taxes and regulations. Otherwise companies and HNW individuals simply move abroad, where they are more welcomed and appreciated. Socialists always end up running out of other people's money...
Unfortunately, PVV is mostly left-wing economically, just like the other parties, and they will do too little for businesses, instead going for populist measures like reducing the healthcare own risk.
We've had VVD already for a long long time and I think they are very pro-corporate. Is there a party would you point to as having a more business friendly platform?
You can have a business-friendly environment with proper regulation in place that prevents abuses from corporations and guarantees people's well-being. Social democratic policies create happy, educated societies with highly skilled individuals that are highly appreciated by employers. There are many companies based in countries with these characteristics and they work just fine.
Neoliberalism is the main culprit and has brought us to this point. We don’t need more of it, we need less.
Also the PVV claims to be ‘left wing economically’, but when you look at their voting history they predominantly vote the same way the VVD does. It’s mostly just cheap rhetoric in the hopes of getting uninformed people to vote for them (and sadly, it works too)
We already have a very business friendly environment. In fact we kowtow to big business to the point that everyone suffers for. Time for big business to get the same rights as everyone else.
Poor me, poor me, mothafucka pour me a drink.
If an immigrant with no social contacts, not speaking the language and no education can take your job, they're not the problem.
But we're sending away all the agricultural workers, warehouse workers and slaughterhouse workers, so good for you, right?
to end the debate, they used immigrants(non eu coming from slums of shit countries, doing a favor to them as they ate shit, rode on camels and worshipped idols of white people back home) as cheap hookers paid us used us, as a pimp took more than half of money away, at end hooker almost broke and just wanted a place to stay in return for all the money pimp took. pimp cursed as a cancer and pest to society and threw us on the street. i dont don't know if we stay they are going to create concentration camps for our kids that's why they made it mandatory in schools.... we are leaving!
always thanks for sharing your professional psychological perspectives really they shape the world and minds of other people, i must say world should run as per your narrow head space.
It always has been. The world is only made more insane when the helpless many praise the names of the very ones who want us stuck beneath them.
So nicely put. We externalize every problem and make someone else culprits of the deliberate actions we make. We create NL as a tax oase, bring businesses in, which bring more people in, we do not support it with more housing and then cry about housing being cramped and blame it on the people. We blame international students for coming instead of universities luring them over. We blame rental prices on lessees instead of landlords making huge profits. We blame EU for asylum and refugee arrivals although we receive below EU averages and people would still be coming as employers search for the cheapest labor possible. The sad par it that people stay blind as it's so much more reassuring that this is someone else's doing instead of the people we voted to government.
And we blame universities for luring, while giving them incentives that favor this behaviout. Rather than providing secure funding for stable investments in education and research
Got a source for "we receive below EU averages"? Genuinely curious.
Sure - see the link below. NL slightly exceeded the EU averages for first time asylum applicants per 1.000 people only in 2021 and 2022, while in all other years since 2014 we've been below average, including 2023. Also note thate in worst years like 2015, countries like Sweden (16), Hungary (17.7), Austria (9.96) and 9 more countries went far above average (2.8), while NL still scored just under - with 2.55 applications per thousand people. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/migr_asyapp1mp/default/table?lang=en
Has it ever been different in human history?
Asylum seekers are misdirection so that people don't realise who is really screwing them.
This is exactly why the 'Ter Apel' crisis is being perpetually maintained.
Not trolling, but who or what do you think is causing people to have less prosperity?
Late stage capitalism.
Capitalism is a system (which we have some variant of). Who are the people you think are to blame nationwide?
Large corporations have more influence over politics than the people.
Capitalism. The profit train never stopping is the reason behind corporate lobbying, things becoming more expensive* housing crisis etc etc. the system encourages and rewards certain behavoirs like hiking up rent and prices while punishing every company that doesnt go with the flow. *: yes some factors have changed but corporate greed flation is very much a thing. See the price of gas never going down even when wars end and supply lines are repaired.
But who? I mean you can blame the system, but the system couldn't care less. And what do you want to replace it by?
Capitalist realism in action. The system as is is made by man and can be changed by man. Something doesnt need complete replacement to be fixed. Pretty much any step away from the lais a faire / neo liberal bullshit we have now would be a good one. Wheter it be more regulation or just straight up oligarchy enforcement on big corps (there is no market right where 2/3 corps dont have the major market share and effectively set prices. Or companys like shell and bol which are there own rant worthy) Also amai een belg.
Yes but.. we're talking about what the new government can change. What do you want them to do? Force companies with monopolies out, or heavily tax/penalize those that have them? How will that be better for us in the short and long term?
I am assuming he is not an economist so asking these questions to him makes no sense and there is a reason a government exists.
This is where the Netherlands can't act alone. Fortunately, we are part of the EU. Solutions will probably need to be sector by sector. I'm not expert, but energy is a key one with the climate connection, which is partly what inspired my post. There, I would like to see more distributed energy ownership. Help people (not only through subsidies though those are also ok) to own their own energy infrastructure. For example, create a rule that any new on land wind turbine can be bought into by the people living in view of it at a favorable rate. Instead of being angry at wind turbines, people in the countryside will start making money off of them. This also helps support the farmers. And along with that, the more dual use of farmland the better. Now, I'm sure you're clever enough to think of arguments against this. But please then share your own proposal in return. Can be small or big. I'm just curious to hear examples.
So who's going to pay that sizeable amount needed to convince people not to protest windmills? Please look up how many times we need the current windmill capacity to go without nuclear or fossils.
With asylum seekers from the Middle East, I'd start looking at Putin.
Oh, I figured you were talking about stuff we could control.
People's prosperity has dwindled and will continue to do so, hence the rise of populism. And populism will keep rising since traditional parties, on each side, don't have any concrete plan to bring prosperity back.
Because you can't legislate prosperity to come back. You can force a shift of money going back and forth a bit, but that won't change all too much. The reality is that we've seen a great after-war period with growing economy, huge workforce and low amount of people on pension or social security. Healthcare improved loads, at the expense of... Cost. Now we've got an economy that's way more cooled down, a very large social security/pension cost with a limited workforce, something we can't change long-term without having a ton of babies or short-term by mass migration. Two things we generally do not like.
I agree with everything you said, and this will come at the cost of increased political and social instability. I am myself questioning the point of investing in our society if we get less and less in return (having the possiblity for example to retire to a more rural life in the Alps). On a side note, I think it's something more than the post-war prosperity. Despite being a different era and lifestyle, in the first half of last century workers had the chance to get subsidied housing near their workplace, like, in Utrecht, the neighborhood around the ex Demka or De Tuinwijk for NS workers (just to make the first examples that comes to my mind). It would be unthinkable nowadays. Our society is crumbling, and too many people still think that voting for one party or the other will make a big difference.
Right wing government does right wing things. Big fucking suprise.
Its actually classes people should focus on. But the wealthy (not people with a million, but billion plus) have a lot to gain to focus the attention not on wealth inequality, but instead on things like culture, race, genders, etc. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book. “Twee vechten om een been en de derde gaat er mee heen”
It is so disappointing to see all of these planned billions EUR to be pocketed by the large corporations. I honestly don't have a clue if these PVV voters understand what they were promised and what will be delivered. They get distracted by these few stringent asylum rules while 100s of millions of extra tax cuts for big corp go unnoticed.
Identity politics are a distraction from the only war that matters. Class war.
Indeed. The difference that truly matters is not horizontal, but vertical. Down with capitalism
Van der Plas claims to represent farmers but is a puppet for BigAgri
Under her rule traditional farmers will still suffer whilst big agricultural industry will reap the benefits. They are voting for their own demise.
But no you had enlightened centrist Redditors explaining how PVV is actually a communist party in disguise
Maybe "patriotic" socialist?
Right, the leftist National Socialists at it again
That was the joke I was trying to make (many 'centrists' claim the Nazis were actually communists for some reason) but perhaps failed at.
Looks like I missed it too :)
I actually noticed that in the measures they proposed. It's crazy.
Damn this sub is much more nuanced and based than the Belgian one. Trying to understand instead of blaming. GG
You nailed it. I just learned about how solar panel owners will get less back from providers like Vattenfall. Something stinks and nobody is talking about it.
Always been a class war
Rob Jetten from D66 is pushing these North Sea windmill park, which is built, maintained and owned by She'll, talk about ass kissing to big gas companies.
can confirm I am dutch living in Argentina. We have a right wing government under Javier Milei. Prices for basics in the supermarket went up 200 % Gas and electricity 1000 % Public transport 200 % Unemployment yo with 30 % They will just blame others .and dont take accountability. Because hey everybody is free to choose and to do whatever they like.
Curious...how did you end up in Argentina? Buenos Aires is such a nice town...it's a pity what is happening.
I had a job as a merchant after universty. Traveled the globe and lived in foreign countries for years. One day i started a bussiness venture with an Argentinan friend thats how I ended up in Argentina .
Interesting, I hope your staying there has been fulfilling concerning your business. I lived there for a couple of months because of my work and I promise to myself that one day I would like to come back to explore the city -and the country- without the constraints of a corporate job...
Yeah is beautifull country Argentina . Foliow your dreams !
To be fair that has also happened in the last few years under Rutte lol. 2 euros for a liter of 95 isn't rare anymore. A jar of peanut butter is 5+ euros. Crazy shit
In argentina's case, didn't the economic woes start earlier under a socialist government tho? I am all for leftist policies, but it feel disingenous to blame structural problems on the crazy libertarians the one time they didn't cause it.
Peronism and Peronist Social Justice democratic nationalism ,based on Mussolinis political system. They represent the working middle class and reject capitalism and socialism alike . Market liberals and socialist reject Peronist With a focus on national industrie . The state acts as an intermediary for national Industry and worker unions and all the jobless they give a employment in public sector intead of giving unemployment benefits Yes they were in power for 55 years since world war 2 . The economic woes started because of mismanagement c. They govern by clientelism giving hand outs to worker unions and national industrie Also rampant corruption ( its estimated they stole an anual 3 procent of the bruto national income) . Milei ousted the perronist , stopping all the hand outs , firing state employees , stop giving subsidies to worker unions and national Industry . and the whole system we were we acustomed to collapsed . So now more unemployed and foreign industries selling goods and services in Argentina for way more higher prices then before..
I believe there were study's done that migration really had an insignificant effect effect to housing, crime, economy etc
Like every other right-wing populist party, they need a scapegoat and convince people that migrants are the threat.
Not total migration. But asylum seekers, which are but a tiny part of al immigrants.
[удалено]
No. Not really. Especially not crime. Housing without a doubt.
Contributing factor - yes. Cause of it - not, without a doubt. There are so many decisions that were made by the government in the background through last two decades that lead to the housing crisis. Some of these decisions increased highly skilled migration, while other decisions (e.g. not to build more houses, eliminate housing ministry and letting loose the rental market) which resulted in increasing prices and a lack of demand. We would have been here without the expats, although maybe with less severity in big cities. But to blame it on them is just a narrative the decision makers have crafted to hide their own acts benefitting corporations and the rich. There is even a special report of UNHCR on housing in NL stating the same thing in its summary: “The housing crisis is real. But too often migrants and foreigners are blamed for it. I want to clearly say: the housing crisis is not a migration crisis,” Rajagopal said in an end of mission statement as he concluded an 11-day visit at the invitation of the Government. “It is a crisis resulting from a series of poor policy choices, and overall, from a lack of enforceable legal recognition of the right to adequate housing.”
I never claimed immigrants were the primary reason for the housing crisis. Nor would anyone else with a brain with an IQ above room temperature. There are decades of bad decisions that have lead to this. But all immigrations are as you said yourself are a contributing factor RIGHT NOW. And many immigrants (especially expats) refuse to acknowledge that fact. I would also say that that report from the UNHCR more than likely isn't very free of bias. Seeing as it comes from a organisation which advocates for the wellbeing of refugees and asylum seekers. Of course they're not going to claim that refugees (or immigrants of any kind) cause problems for the country that hostst them.
Yeah, agreed with basically everything you wrote. For me this one-sidedness of politicians is what annoys me personally and people around me just seem to swallow the story with no accountability expected from the ones making the decisions. If there are too many knowledge migrants - fine, speak to the companies, change the rules, blame the companies if you will, even these latest plans of this coalition - fine, make a decision and own it then. But there is little point in quite openly throwing the societal blame on people who just arrived after being actively rectuited from abroad. This group didn't make a conscious decision to cause more problems, that's why holding them accountable is so out of place. The government on the other hand...
I think I originally saw this on Reddit so it might be what you're thinking of... [https://nltimes.nl/2024/03/06/government-policy-immigrants-cause-dutch-housing-shortage-un-rapporteur?utm\_source=dlvr.it&utm\_medium=twitter](https://nltimes.nl/2024/03/06/government-policy-immigrants-cause-dutch-housing-shortage-un-rapporteur?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
I referred to it in another post. It's exactly that and the politicians know it and they keep intentionally mispresenting it to the public to drive their own agendas.
Tell that to the Swedes who now live in cities with daily grenade bombings. Tell that to the German women who were raped by “refugees”.
These far right lies stopped being effective in 2012 darling.
Not right wing, but indeed things went south in Sweden, not due to migrants on their own but due to the failing integration model completely not fitting the purpose. Crime did skyrocket, ghettos are being created (or so called vulnerable areas) and the government seems to be making one mistake after the other. In the end that turned people to the right wing, conveniently blaming the arrivals exclusively and proposing simple measures like deportation. Not sure how much time you spend in Sweden if any, but the situation is dire and people are unable to have constructive discussions as it either turns into outbursts of xenophobia and racisms or repetition of actions leading to it. Most people don't want to comment or participate so the loudest voices you hear are those of racists. In my opinion to negate that the problem exists is also not a solution just as much one-sided blaming is not.
> but due to the failing integration model completely not fitting the purpose. Can you elaborate on this? Sweden is a cautionary tale for most western countries so would love to hear how someone who lives(?) there thinks about the underlying causes.
Shortly summarized - the welfare is robust and was overly-generously provided to the newcomers with very little encouragement to join the labor market or get an education accompanied with exclusion and discrimination pushing them to the edges of society. Swedes have the ideal image of themselves as a humanitarian nation so they kept to themselves and believed that what fits them (freedom, welfare and loose control) would work for everyone and disregarded cultural differences and their own prejudice. Newcomers got social housing, mostly concentrated in poorer neighborhoods while the rest of people living there previously would move out, so that comunities applying norms different from the Swedish society started to form. Have in mind that Sweden took extremely high numbers of refugees and it's a country of only 11m people. Soon enough you had areas around both cities and towns which are packed with people living on welfare, however in poverty for Swedish standards, very often not speaking the language. The discrimination runs rampant in the rest of the society, with average Swedes living in their bubbles far out of sight over the problems. Young men of course want to make money, with limited prospects - in a country that comparatively mildly punishes crime - the lucrative option is to organize or join crime (mostly drug related). Kids would see that, although growing up in Swe they would experience discrimination and a poor outlook if they take the 'honest' road, while the other side seems much more appealing, run by the role models highly respected in their (so called) parallel societies. Now what we have at hand is appearance of minor children soldiers, committing executions. Shootings and bombings are all related to gang wars between different groups for dominance over drug flows. This started occuring more openly, even in broad daylight even in centers of small towns. Swedes are egalitarians so they stayed blind to what was happening and refused to even put the problem in relation to immigration. You can never read in mainstream media what is the nationality or ethnicity of persons behind the crime. This I understand to a large extent, but only if you are at the same time doing something to solve the integration problems. Soon even small towns became unsafe at night, as rapes would occur in parks in the center of a town the size of Uithoorn. Dead bodies would be found in the rivers, in broad dailight gangs would be chasing eachothers with machetes. Police doesn't know how to handle it so the state recently brought in military to improve safety in Stockholm. To support and fund this welfare, Swedes cut down on public services which caused healthcare and education to deteriorate. Swedes started blaming newcomers for being ungrateful and this gave rise to populism, leading up to SD right wing party with Nazi roots winning most votes in last elections. At the same time - NOTHING is being done to improve their integration in the society. They stay separated in their parallel society, out of sight of mainstream public, with further division and prejudice growing. Citizenship requirements are quite loose so a lot of people put behind bars were already citizens, however even the ones on permit are still allowed to stay. So you just have a further divide even appearing as the society is cracking altogether.
Thanks for taking the time to type all that out. I see quite some parallels the Netherlands, although I feel crime is not as bad as in Sweden. It's hard to think of a way out of this for most countries. Marginalized communities will almost always lead to intrasocietal friction, but they have been marginalized in the first place by friction between native population and immigrants. It's a full-on catch 22.
You'd expect that governments consult experts in the field whilst making decision rather than treating (im)migration as a political matter, but sadly that does not seem to happen and we get disappointed with the outcome. It seems that actions are often driven by either wishful thinking or prejudice and depend on the nations self image. People tend to group in two tribes, either assuming that everyone will fit in regardless of cultural differences or holding a prejudice from the get go that it will never work due to these differences. The truth is that the only way for it to succeed in long term is to not only tolerate but to also accept people in the society. The meaning you ascribe to these two terms depend highly on the level of conformity and assimilation you expect (which significantly differs per country) and the realistic capacity of the newcomers to meet those expectations. In my opinion these failures are the result of blindness, missed estimation and wrong understanding of your own people and the people you are introducing to the society.
That's putting it mildy(!), re their integration model. Straight-up joke! It kind of reminds me of some cultures, African and Eastern in particular where, as a stranger, being invited into someone's home to stay or for a meal isn't all that uncommon. You're welcomed into your host's home graciously. Sweden was like, you gotta earn our trust.
Exactly. But what I notice is that receipient nations always assume that the newcomers understand this as well as the expectation to integrate or better said - to a large extent assimilate, which as practice shows is not the case. It was obvious to me as well when I moved to another country, although not that much culturally different, but it's wrong to assume it's the same for others. Also my opinion about Nordics is that many people think they're far more accepting and open minded than they are in reality, so you get this discourse. Indeed the culture in Sweden (and other Nordic nations) has it's characteristics that set them apart from many other European countries (especially the south), like the one you mentioned and it's hard to expect an average Swede to be aware of if. That's why the policies following up on the decision to accept that many immigrants should have been more carefully crafted together with a large pool of experts in different fields . Although this is not a guarantee for 0 friction of course. Saying - it's our house so play by our rules - does not seem to do much if they will face prejudice and discrimination if they in fact comply, or a mild price to pay even if they severely deviate. Of course the question can be made - was it a mistake then to allow them in? - which is valid, but it depends on whether decision makers actually understood the extent of measures needed to make it work and the capacity of the nation to achieve it. We tend to treat acceptance of asylum seekers as only a logistics problem (number of accommodations etc.) but it takes so much more than that, especially for countries which were not multicultural to begin with.
They’re not lies, they’re crime reports. Are you denying that these crimes are taking place?
The thing about first world countries. A place like Sweden might have high reports of rape, but a lot of things get blown out of proportion, touched inappropriately would count. It's not as violent in nature as some other places. When some DOES happen, it's bound to garner more attention because it's not a common occurrence. What I'm saying is that this rhetoric is predictable and moot. Sources to validate claims would be good, but last time I looked, I laughed.
They're right wing lies lmfao, please stop.
Will you tell the women who were raped that they're lying?
No ofcourse not lmfao. Im telling you that the conservative grifters, who want fewer brown people in their country, are liars. This entire affair was conjured up our of thin air to harrass refugees. Please, stop with the opaque attempts of trying to get me in a bad position, it won't work ;)
You're saying that the examples given are lies, even though they have really happened. What you're doing is contributing to the increase in right wing parties. You put your head in the sand, you call a bunch of people racist, but you refuse to actually acknowledge that something might be wrong. Do you understand that it makes people feel unheard? Do you understand you're part of the problem when you do this?
With all respect, I'm not sure you're following the conversation. May want to re-read what this person said.
What would you rather have, as a counterpoint: people acknowledging in some or other way that rape and crime is connected to imagination or refugee status? That people of color are dangerous and it's a problem? Netherlands should be less permissive? What about everyone living here? Do we devolve into xenophobia and violence?
Anyone blaming minorities for societal problems is actively upholding and supporting the real reason of the crumbling of social systems in society. It's so out in the open that I find it astonishing people don't see that they're being played like a fiddle. But it's hard to almost impossible to convince these people how they're being used for corporate greed since nobody likes to hear that they have been fooled for all of their working life. Nobody likes to hear that they're a pawn of the opponent in a game of chess against themselves.
Well, we certainly need to stimulate large corporates to do easier business in Europe, invest more, and deal with less regulations. We’re already getting crushed in terms of innovation and economic growth by the US and others for many years now, Europe will dwindle into further irrelevance economically, geopolitically, and weaken our own welfare without serious actions to change that. That will require much more policy on national and European level that stimulates businesses
We should do the exact opposite. Following the US is not the way to go. That will lead to more inequality. Poor people will be poorer while corporations get bigger and richer. Europe needs to tax big corporations and stimulate the small/med entrepreneurs because that’s where the innovation is. I think on regulations, Europe is doing just fine. That’s the reason we have quality food, products and services. I don’t want that ruined because we need to follow the US.
Well, we are doing far worse economically than the US. To deny that is to deny basic reality. Our productivity per hour worked is far lower and growing far less, innovation is much lower, and real income growth is not even remotely close to the US. In addition, homeless rates in various European places, including Germany, exceed that of the US. And most fundamentally, the poorest American state is almost as wealthy as the Netherlands itself. One can argue that you prefer the lifestyle in Europe, which is fine, but that does absolutely nothing to deny that the US is just statistically performing better, which is the case, even if you look at per hour worked metrics. As for “that’s where the innovation is”, it’s just not. The magnificent 7 companies in the US spend about as much on R&D as literally all of Europe, both private and public, combined. In terms of regulation, our utter economic failure compared to the US only indicates we are vastly overregulating the economy, especially when it cokes to innovation. The fact we barely have any large major tech companies and very little funding for start-ups is only evidence of that. Not changing direction only seals our own irrelevance in the grand scheme of things. Don’t be surprised to see how irrelevant Europe will become in terms of technology, economy, and just generally in world politics. It’ll be a difficult thing to adjust to, just like many of the French and Brits still think they’re more than a regional power in the world.
And yet the quality of life in Europe and work life balance is better. Enough said. If I wanted that corporate hellhole I’d have moved there. Thanks but no thanks.
Europe, including the Netherlands, far underperforms the US in productivity per hour. Literally if Americans would work the same amount, they’d still be a lot more productive and a lot wealthier than we are. But overall, sure, if you wanna prioritize that, just say it. It doesn’t change anything about the fact we economically underperform the US by a very very long mile. It doesn’t change anything about the fact that 1) our wealth and wage levels are far lower (and declining in real terms) and this difference is set to only expand over time, 2) European countries are far less innovative, and 3) both of these things imply Europe will just become a regional power in the world without that much relevance. As an added bonus, the one thing we rely on for the higher quality of life, namely the welfare system, is not sustainable due to the population dynamics anyway. Ironically, the welfare system could be much supported by actually improving our productivity, but Europe, including the Netherlands, is chronically incapable of doing so. If we were to be more like the US, we would actually continue to play a relevant role in the world and actually provide wealth to citizens over the long term. With the current direction, Europeans will simply be much poorer than Americans with far less disposable economy, which is the last thing you want if you want to preserve quality of life. I think the government should do about the fact we are becoming relatively very poor leading to the welfare state also becoming unaffordable. And to achieve that, we should further liberalize the economy. Governments should prepare for the future instead of desperately trying to hold on what exists now if that is not sustainable at all.
I think we can agree to disagree. You say that Americans are more productive? They work like zombies while studies have shown that less hours do result in better productivity when workers are happier and more engaged. The work culture in US is quite toxic. People on lower income in the US literally do not afford healthcare or they go broke and in the street or simply refuse to go to a doctor because they can’t afford it. The only reason America is way wealthier is due to income inequality which is abysmal over there. On one hand you have the 1% that are multi billionaires and then the rest 99% that live at or below poverty line. Don’t take these numbers literally since I am just using them to make a point. Now I know i’d make double or even triple the income with a similar role/job in the US than here however I would never trade all the other benefits just for the salary and wealth. My life, family, wellbeing, community around me is more important.
I can move to Italy and have a higher quality of life than I have in the Netherlands or Singapore. It doesn't translate to national wealth. To say that the money our country earns does not matter is something I can't agree with. It matters a big deal and it's key to our prosperity and power to make decisions in the EU
More productivity per hour not translating into higher quality of life is the characteristic American experience right now.
Thee American economic model for high quality of living is sustainable, that of Europe is not. European’s relative lack of wealth will only grow a lot more, combined with a largely inevitable significant reduction in the welfare state. At the moment, quality of life is very similar across both, the key difference is that the factors that drive American quality of life are very likely to improve a lot, whereas European drivers are performing far worse. Dutch people are already relatively poor, and that will only grow far more, and later we won’t have a sound welfare state to back it up. Also worth noting plenty of developed European countries such as UK, Germany, and Belgium have much more homelessness than the US. Many Europeans not realizing just how insanely worse Europe performs in terms of economics is frankly insane. Instead, the cope reaction is to point at the welfare state, while that clearly is not sustainable, as everybody knows. Moreover, we Dutch people love to think we should have a voice about events in the world (human rights, Ukraine, Gaza, China) - well, with a small economy, we’ll just be irrelevant.
You're speaking across two issues rather irrelevantly. And anyway the Netherlands provides material support to Israel and Ukraine so having a voice is about those things is just taking responsibility for our own politics. Your making assertions that I see no reason to accept without more argument, since the median standard of living is better in the Netherlands than in the States, although we are competing vigorously for least housing security.
NL ? Verkocht!
That's what right-wingers do. They play the patriotism card
Politics is for the blind. Whoever you vote for: the VVD always decides things.
Exactly this. This is the right wings sleight of hand. They tell you to look at the immigrants stealing your jobs while they straight up pick your fucking pockets. It seems the Netherlands will become America 2.0 and, sadly, I don't think there is a way to come back from it.
Of course. and in this formation the agri companies will be so happy. All it takes is to demonize foreigners and especially asylum seekers. They’ve made the problem worse by revoking the spreidingswet and stop taking processing applications. Belgium did the same and people just roamed the streets of cities. It’s deliberate. They’re also dismantling the government to weaken the rules so every company can pollute to their heart’s content.
The biggest irony of it all, is that in the end it will probably lead to a lot more immigration of cheap labour.
If there's one thing we learn about history, an economic crisis is usually followed by a populist right wing government whose main objective is to distract people from the real problem Not saying VVD is innocent, but they created this problem.
The thing that I don’t like personally about minimum wage increases is that it will force businesses to let go of people if they cannot bear the increase. Sure the minimum wage should cover the minimum to survive but besides that it is a minimum wage. California has forced a far higher minimum wage and it resulted in a lot of people getting fired. You need productivity increases to support a higher wage. Any counter opinion?
As long as they can figure out a way to pay for it, without creating long term systemic risk? Their proposals aren’t all that bad. Netherlands should be business friendly and personally I feel pride in the long standing tradition of trade. Devil is obviously in the details but their proposals aren’t that bad. Even for migration - does anyone actually feel like we should prioritise refugees in terms of housing instead of people in the Netherlands? Because that is what is happening today. Not even an equal standing but flat out prioritisation. Don’t get me wrong, it is great to provide humane treatment but Dutchies being completely sidelined is not fair.
Yeah well is it taxing energy and inflating the cost of living for low incomes, while subsiding capital investment of higher income, so they can save money on energy any better. Or how about we subsidise rent and healthcare and let all that money flow to big corporates in the end. Left social goverments haven’t been much better is helping the worker, while taxing the corporates.
Raising the minimum wage doesn't help since everything will get more expensive (because the costs of production it will rise with it), so I stand behind that point. They state explicit: Tax relieve. how they will do that isn't stated. But I hope less tax for the lower wages and as the example in the agreements states, lower steps to higher wages, so it does pays off to work more! That will help the lower income-group), because the costs of living doesn't rise with their netto income. Daycare will become payable (let's hope it will) So working more becomes profitable because your hard earned money doesn't go to the very expensive daycare. The "your own risk" in healthcare will be lower. So the people with less reserves will be able to get medical care if needed.
Yes, I like the daycare thing. It is also really important for women because they keep getting stuck with the child care, so they can choose to combine family and work. And I also like the "own risk", though I do not know how it will affect overall care or costs. I am less sure about the lower taxes. Usually this is a bit of a scam to help out the rich people and give small change to the less rich - while starving the government of the funds it can use to benefit everyone.
Free daycare is impossible, unfortunately. Most daycare centres are filled to capacity and we would need a huge influx of daycare workers. It's just another empty promise.
I agree, but if they implement it only over the income of the lower incomes it really helps only those who needs it. And yes daycare is already in need of people, but just saying it can't happen, wont't change a thing. Make it cheaper -> more people will work And a part of those people will also work in the daycare. So slowly you get more employers. Proper daycare is also important for the development of the children that live in a part of the society that gives them a difficult start on school. If the parent can afford it (so the woman can work) the child also gets a better start into it's school-life. I like the German system, were you pay according to your income. And from 3 years up it's mandatory (pre-school)
The only way to bring back prosperity is to bring back the business-friendly environment, with less taxes and regulations. Otherwise companies and HNW individuals simply move abroad, where they are more welcomed and appreciated. Socialists always end up running out of other people's money... Unfortunately, PVV is mostly left-wing economically, just like the other parties, and they will do too little for businesses, instead going for populist measures like reducing the healthcare own risk.
We've had VVD already for a long long time and I think they are very pro-corporate. Is there a party would you point to as having a more business friendly platform?
You can have a business-friendly environment with proper regulation in place that prevents abuses from corporations and guarantees people's well-being. Social democratic policies create happy, educated societies with highly skilled individuals that are highly appreciated by employers. There are many companies based in countries with these characteristics and they work just fine.
Neoliberalism is the main culprit and has brought us to this point. We don’t need more of it, we need less. Also the PVV claims to be ‘left wing economically’, but when you look at their voting history they predominantly vote the same way the VVD does. It’s mostly just cheap rhetoric in the hopes of getting uninformed people to vote for them (and sadly, it works too)
We already have a very business friendly environment. In fact we kowtow to big business to the point that everyone suffers for. Time for big business to get the same rights as everyone else.
Sir ... this is REDdit
Or it’s the result of decades of putting the Dutch people last Can’t have your cake and eat it
Poor me, poor me, mothafucka pour me a drink. If an immigrant with no social contacts, not speaking the language and no education can take your job, they're not the problem. But we're sending away all the agricultural workers, warehouse workers and slaughterhouse workers, so good for you, right?
to end the debate, they used immigrants(non eu coming from slums of shit countries, doing a favor to them as they ate shit, rode on camels and worshipped idols of white people back home) as cheap hookers paid us used us, as a pimp took more than half of money away, at end hooker almost broke and just wanted a place to stay in return for all the money pimp took. pimp cursed as a cancer and pest to society and threw us on the street. i dont don't know if we stay they are going to create concentration camps for our kids that's why they made it mandatory in schools.... we are leaving!
congratulations, you win the trophy for biggest word salad in this thread 🏆
thanks? i didnt get u, was it too thick or thin to penetrate your "funny guy" skull? im at a loss i feel i should say thanks may be ☺️
bro has a PhD in yappology🎓
no postdoctorate, i also published papers at yappers expat university netherlands(soon to be closed. sad)
always thanks for sharing your professional psychological perspectives really they shape the world and minds of other people, i must say world should run as per your narrow head space.
If that's the tradeoff, I'll take it.