this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
588 points (98.5% liked)

Europe

2214 readers
607 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Actionschnils@feddit.org 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Yeah, but it not unlikely that "Die Linke" wont get into Parliament because of the "5% Barrier"(A Mechanism that prevents parties from entering the German Parliament, if they are below 5% total votes. There are some complicated exceptions, but basicly this is it). Furthermore many Parties dont want to form a coalation with them and this could be against german constitution ... So this is very unlikely to happen.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

They are almost certain to enter because they'll get three or more direct seats. Which isn't complicated at all. Heck there's plenty of CDU voters who'd vote for Gysi. It also doesn't look too bad when it comes to taking the 5% hurdle directly.

Of course, getting into parliament is not the same as getting into government, that would require a miracle.

[–] Actionschnils@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, Well see :X

[–] foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Actionschnils@feddit.org -5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Especially because its quite complicated or impossible (imho) to a enact a law that does exactly what they promise by not breaking the constitution: Its just populism and a lie

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They are quite aware of the constitution and it's implications. Complicated, sure, but not impossible. I recommend to listen to van Aken talking about the topic.

Calling it a lie is disingenuous.

[–] kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You can't say it'd be against the constituion. That is debatable (and debated, see e.g. Wolfgang Abendroth).

The interpretation of the constitution is subject to powerdynamics as well. And it's the only smart way to design a constitution if it's meant to be the everstanding stable foundation of a society. .. cause you know, those tend to change

[–] Actionschnils@feddit.org -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No I say a law thats works as promised would be (imho) against the constitution

[–] tromars@feddit.org 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Honest question: why do you think it would be unconstitutional?

[–] Actionschnils@feddit.org 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

First of all, lets make one thing clear. Im very fond for the idea of cutting the wealth of the rich for the community. I just dont like the wording in this campaign. Imho it would be much more to convincing to be honest and transparent. Or by speaking less concrete like "tax the rich"

And furthermore: This kinda explainations is not that easy, especially in a foreign language.

Ok, lets try to think this through.

Billionaires usually dont have most of theire money as private wealth. As far as im rember, most of the German Billionaires are "Mittelständler", part of old bussiness-Families or are shareholder as part of their bussines. Sure, they have often have a similar power over their wealth as private owner, but its not the same. And furthermore if they have a lot of "private wealth", they hide it somewhere like, foundations(?, Stiftungen), SubCompanies or oversea.

So we have to cut non-private-Wealth.

Art. 14 wont help much there, because you have compensate to them and imho its hard to proof the weight of the greater needs in the "Güterabwägung" (balancing of the interests?). To see how complicated this kinda stuff is, take a look at the "Deutsche Wohnen enteignen"-campaign and the outcome by now.

So the more suitable way to achieve this goal would be taxes and removing tax-holes. But how do you want to tax only billionairs? Especially when they are "companies", "foundations" etc? Especially without collateral-Damages? Or breaking fundamental rules like the equal treatment principle(?) Besides: even if you finde a possible way, you would be facing a lot of political power in an unfair fight against the billionairs. And because of all the lawsuits it will be taking a long time to get through. And if you would have achieved you goal in the long run, the money will long be gone. Somewhere "far" away.

Its just a short take on this problem, but as a young father, my freetime is limited :>