3 ms·

Are you going just by these statistics? It's nice that 60% of Viennese people have access to cheaper (not cheap!) housing in a capital city, too bad for those

Are you going just by these statistics? It's nice that 60% of Viennese people have access to cheaper (not cheap!) housing in a capital city, too bad for those who couldn't get there either because of overdemand or being just outside the bracket, and too bad for those who can't afford to live in Vienna at all. I'm not sure what's interesting about the income inequality index - that just means you can't get rich there to pay the actually large taxes so the state wouldn't need to take the bulk from slightly less poor people instead of the actually rich people. Switzerland has a worse inequality index rating and yet better social services while having lower taxes. HDI is entirely uninteresting in this discussion - that's simply because Austria-Hungary industrialized early, it has nothing to do with the socialist policies there. The neighboring countries like Slovenia or Czech Republic have 1/4 tax rates and HDI is similar, even though both lived through many decades of communist destruction and in case of Slovenia also wars, while Austria was on the western side of the curtain. And of course Switzerland again. People from Czechia and Slovenia used to come to Austria to make some money, that's not the case anymore - now I see many Austrians coming here, especially higher earning people like software engineers. Socialism destroys itself through this kind of brain and capital drain.

alan-hn 2y ago
The concern about the availability of public housing in Vienna for those who are just outside the eligibility criteria or who face over-demand is valid. However, it’s important to note that Austria’s housing policy, particularly in Vienna, is not only about providing cheap housing but also about maintaining a diverse socio-economic mix. This approach mitigates the risk of creating ghettos or economically segregated areas, which can be more detrimental to societal cohesion. Moreover, Vienna's housing model includes a variety of supports such as housing benefits and subsidized rents, which broaden the accessibility beyond just the lowest income brackets. The argument about income inequality and the inability to become rich underestimates the benefits of having a more equal society. While Switzerland does indeed have lower taxes and high-quality social services, its model relies heavily on a specific economic structure that benefits from unique factors like banking secrecy and a strong financial sector, which are not replicable everywhere. Austria’s approach, focusing on broad wealth distribution through progressive taxation, ensures that the benefits of economic growth are more evenly shared among its population, contributing to overall social stability and individual well-being. While historical industrialization does play a role in a country's development, attributing Austria’s high HDI solely to its industrial past overlooks the significant impacts of its current social policies. Comparatively, countries like Slovenia and the Czech Republic have indeed made impressive strides in HDI, despite their histories of communist governance. However, these countries have also increasingly adopted social policies that resemble Western European models, acknowledging the benefits of such systems. The observation that Austrians, particularly high-skilled professionals such as software engineers, are moving to countries like the Czech Republic or Slovenia can reflect a broader European trend of seeking opportunities across borders due to the EU’s labor mobility policies. This movement isn't necessarily indicative of systemic failures in Austria’s social or economic systems but rather of a dynamic European labor market. Furthermore, Austria continues to attract a significant number of Eastern European workers, underscoring its continued economic pull. Comparing tax rates and HDI between Austria and its neighbors without considering the full context of social services and quality of life can be misleading. Lower taxes can sometimes lead to underfunded public services, which might necessitate higher out-of-pocket expenses for citizens, negating the perceived benefit of lower taxes. Austria’s model prioritizes comprehensive welfare provisions, which can lead to higher taxes but also reduces personal financial risk and increases life quality.
- taskforcegemini 2y ago
  >This approach mitigates the risk of creating ghettos or economically segregated areas, which can be more detrimental to societal cohesion. it's not working that well, there are plenty of "hotspots". Districts usually have specific demographies. there are wealthy districts and then there are districts that mostly have people from other countries (turkey, serbia etc)

alan-hn 2y ago

The concern about the availability of public housing in Vienna for those who are just outside the eligibility criteria or who face over-demand is valid. However, it’s important to note that Austria’s housing policy, particularly in Vienna, is not only about providing cheap housing but also about maintaining a diverse socio-economic mix. This approach mitigates the risk of creating ghettos or economically segregated areas, which can be more detrimental to societal cohesion. Moreover, Vienna's housing model includes a variety of supports such as housing benefits and subsidized rents, which broaden the accessibility beyond just the lowest income brackets. The argument about income inequality and the inability to become rich underestimates the benefits of having a more equal society. While Switzerland does indeed have lower taxes and high-quality social services, its model relies heavily on a specific economic structure that benefits from unique factors like banking secrecy and a strong financial sector, which are not replicable everywhere. Austria’s approach, focusing on broad wealth distribution through progressive taxation, ensures that the benefits of economic growth are more evenly shared among its population, contributing to overall social stability and individual well-being. While historical industrialization does play a role in a country's development, attributing Austria’s high HDI solely to its industrial past overlooks the significant impacts of its current social policies. Comparatively, countries like Slovenia and the Czech Republic have indeed made impressive strides in HDI, despite their histories of communist governance. However, these countries have also increasingly adopted social policies that resemble Western European models, acknowledging the benefits of such systems. The observation that Austrians, particularly high-skilled professionals such as software engineers, are moving to countries like the Czech Republic or Slovenia can reflect a broader European trend of seeking opportunities across borders due to the EU’s labor mobility policies. This movement isn't necessarily indicative of systemic failures in Austria’s social or economic systems but rather of a dynamic European labor market. Furthermore, Austria continues to attract a significant number of Eastern European workers, underscoring its continued economic pull. Comparing tax rates and HDI between Austria and its neighbors without considering the full context of social services and quality of life can be misleading. Lower taxes can sometimes lead to underfunded public services, which might necessitate higher out-of-pocket expenses for citizens, negating the perceived benefit of lower taxes. Austria’s model prioritizes comprehensive welfare provisions, which can lead to higher taxes but also reduces personal financial risk and increases life quality.

taskforcegemini 2y ago
>This approach mitigates the risk of creating ghettos or economically segregated areas, which can be more detrimental to societal cohesion. it's not working that well, there are plenty of "hotspots". Districts usually have specific demographies. there are wealthy districts and then there are districts that mostly have people from other countries (turkey, serbia etc)