That’s just not true.

(I still don’t think they did it, but I do think they cheered when it happened.)

warning that the drone strikes risk driving up global oil prices

Good. Where are those sanctions on anyone buying Russian oil anyway? You didn’t hesitate when it was about trade with Iran.

and provoking retaliation,

From a country they are already in all out war with? What, so Russia was holding back until now? Only killing half the civilians and raping half the women they could have?

Fuck these people complaining about oil prices when people are fighting for their lives. Disgusting!

Their leaders are trying to fish in the far right pond. “Climate change isn’t really real”, they’re just trying not to say it out loud to keep the few sensible voters they still have.

I am represented by the entirety of the parliament. But true representation also requires being honest about your intentions so people can make informed decisions about who they want to represent them.

I have a problem with politicians misleading the electorate (yes, I know that’s sadly common).

While I think UvdL is incompetent, corrupt and should be in prison, I am also a democrat and therefor accept that politicians I don’t agree with can and will be elected. What I can’t accept is telling the voter “if you vote for party A, we will put B in office and do C” and then after the election doing a 180, putting X in office and/or doing Y. Because at that point voting becomes roulette instead of an informed decision.

I would have less of a problem if they hadn’t promoted the whole front runner thing in the first place, because then they wouldn’t have falsely advertised their intentions. EU institutions beside the parliament have a legitimacy issue already, stunts like this only emphasize that.

Voters were promised it’d be one of the faction’s front runners in the election.This would have been the better way of doing it, as voters would have gotten an influence on the commission president and would have known what to expect. Then the council said “lol no” after the fact and parliament went with it. Basically our representatives chose to not represent us.

Now she is clearly the EPP candidate so whoever votes for them will know who they vote for,

No they won’t, as is evident by the very fact she got this office in the first place.

The wind always blows somewhere. Diversification of locations across a country or ideally across Europe minimizes reliability issues. The rest can be covered by investment in storage technologies.

Meanwhile constructing nuclear plants would be a 30+ year approach (not even solution) to a <10 year problem, if it could even be done. And that’s highly doubtful, if you look at the massive problems e.g. France has with maintaining it’s aging plants, Britain has with the Hinkley Point C project (built by french experts that should have the necessary routine - this is not a matter of lack of experience) and so on.

and unless we start massive investment in Nuclear/Renewable (Not just one nuclear power plant, every so and on and some parking with solar panels, we need to deal with old power plants closing, and replacing all the fossil fuel used in automotive it’s a huge program) we can’t switch to electrics

Ftfy

Sweden. Beautiful woods and lakes. We go for canoeing almost every summer.

That’s what they aim for.

Yeah, saw off the branch we’re sitting on. What a bright idea.

Well, no, flat prices wound crash in that case & again be affordably.

Only if the supply exceeded the demand which just can’t be assumed - that’s the reason prices are high in cities in the first place. Construction prices have no reason to drop as they are driven by labour and materials. So only wealthy people and companies would have the means to build and companies wouldn’t do so for lack of profits in renting.

saying that ppl can’t afford to buy so they rent is bs if the rent is higher that the mortgage would have been.

Which might happen in some weird fringe cases, but if the owner knows basic maths it usually won’t. You’d set rent at least high enough to repay your own loan on the property and make some profit.

And if it were true why not buy right now? Because the bank won’t give you a loan. And that too wouldn’t suddenly change.

people just need to live somewhere.

For people to build or buy their own homes they need to be able to afford them. They can’t, which is why they rent. If landlords don’t offer flats for rent anymore, people don’t magically have more money to buy or build.

Corporation and private investors build rental properties because they aim to profit from them, and if that isn’t the case anymore, their construction activity slows down and then stops. As can currently be seen e.g. in Germany.

The only way to effectively counter rising rents in cities is public, non profit construction and decentralization efforts (so people don’t all flock to the few places that are hip to live in).

We would see construction grinding to a halt and owners not bothering to rent out their flats anymore because it wouldn’t be worth the trouble.

Income tax is not a thing where you live?

And where did you get this information?

From a study/news article about the study, not from the government.

Paper is patient, and most people don’t read programs or the bpb. Those who do already tend to be on the side of reason.

Propaganda needs to be constantly debunked. Every time Merz says something dumb, somebody needs to stand up and call out his bs. And the reply needs to be catchy enough to make the headline right next to his nonesense. Playing fair and not offending will not work.

I refuse to believe people want to follow right wing misanthropes inherently. They just hear their short, easy to mistake for the truth messages 20 times a day. And if there even is a progressive voice replying, it’s convoluted and beating around the bush. “Wtf, what are you talking about, illegal immigrants? We have some 50.000 of those, chances are most of the other 80 Million people have never even seen one.” Why do I never hear anything like that? Not even on public media.

No, thank the GroKo for this asinine debt ceiling. They were told it would lead to choking necessary investments when they implemented it. Karlsruhe can only decide on the rules as written.

Comes 2025.

No it won’t. They’re saying “we can’t do it before 2025”, that doesn’t mean we’ll get it then. 2025 is an election year, so they’ll use this carrot again in their campaigns. Lindner basically just admitted this.

I don’t think so. All of the parties failed to even try to paint a positive picture of immigration in those past years, or at least clearly communicate the necessity of it: Germany alone needs 400.000 additional immigrants across all levels of qualification a year to keep up the workforce and keep the social systems running, and we’re talking about turning people away. If all you do is stand by and watch instead of speaking up, of course people only have the one narrative to follow.