Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
It might help to understand the political environment of post-war Germany. The two major parties are the CDU, which is a Christian democratic party, and the SDP, which is a social democratic party.
So you have a centre-right party and a leftist party. This is the inverse of American politics.
The CDU, being a Christian democratic party, though fiscally and socially conservative, are responsible for first supporting a social market economy after the war. This established Germany as a hybrid of free-market and socialist economics, or a mixed-economy, but one more entrenched than what we tend to see in the West. And it was only recently that their party leaned more towards a liberalized economy.
That said, most modern Germans are accustomed to an economic system with strong socialist policies. Progressive taxation used for a welfare system and other social programs isn't new to them. So I suppose when they see the system struggling to maintain itself, rather than find ways to shut it down, they'd rather find ways to better fund it to keep it going and help it get back on track.
As a Canadian, this doesn't seem very shocking to me. Many of us would rather find more funding for our healthcare system and other social programs rather than let them crumble.
It is about balance, of course. Canadians and Germans alike have track records of generating a lot of wealth. This is where progressive taxation comes in. At times of economic downturns or even crises, while it might make sense to cut expenses, it also makes sense to keep much of the foundational policies intact to ensure a return to stabilization towards recovery.
Germany has been impressing me lately. Their innovation in green energy on top of their willingness to implement it and move away from other energy types is commendable. And rich Germans asked to be taxed more to keep their social system intact and help the recovery?
Commendable.
|
It is commendable. I'm thoroughly impressed that Germans trust their Government to that level and I'll agree with you about Canada - despite all the mud throwing between parties Canadians still believe in their social programs.
Would anyone here agree, looking at history, that personal investment from well-to-do people has been essential in the development of Democratic society?
I say this is because in my experience business owner are much more involved and plugged into their communities. They are more likely to known what the real issues are and have the resources to address them. As an example: most NGO groups and community boards where I live are populated by individuals from the local chamber of commerce. The backbone of these organizations consist of self-less individuals who sacrifice everything for their cause. And these organizations are always supported by philanthropists. The rich are obvious candidates to help society prosper.