2 ms·

Poland is a wrong example, it had almost 30 years on uninterrupted growth and has better infrastructure and services than the nearby Germany. Trains are cheape

Poland is a wrong example, it had almost 30 years on uninterrupted growth and has better infrastructure and services than the nearby Germany. Trains are cheaper, better run and more comfortable. Highways are better than German. Even gas stations. I often find myself waiting to cross the border so I can get to the loo in the first Orlen on the Polish side. And don't let me start on housing and taxes. Polish economy even benefitted from the Russo-Ukrainian war: 1. 36 mln-strong Poland welcomed 1mln of mostly well-educated, hardworking Ukrainians. 2. Its military expenses are now double what the US spends in relative terms, giving a non-negligible boost to civil economy. Gosh, it's been a few years I dress exclusively in Helikon-Tex, instead of Patagonia )

User23 2y ago
Could this have anything to do with the differences in the two country’s migration policies?
- sam_lowry_ 2y ago
  First off, Poland benefitted immensely from EU funds. Better infrastructure is better in Poland for the same reason it is better in Spain, Spain just had those funds earlier. As for the migration policies, I think you are pointing in the right direction but the reality is more subtle. Old European countries consider work to be a privilege, Poles, having lived in the Warsaw Pact country, still perceive work to be an obligation. A refugee arriving in Germany can't start working and lives off welfare while his case is settled, which may take years. A similar refugee arriving in Poland has to find a job both to survive and to obtain legal residency. This has the downside of driving down wages but the upside of creating even more jobs. Amazon, Lidl, Zalando and many other labor-intensive businesses set shops just across the border for a reason.
throw0101c 2y ago
> Poland is a wrong example, it had almost 30 years on uninterrupted growth and has better infrastructure and services than the nearby Germany. Not wrong, but I think that when you're growing and building things tend to be "easy(-ier)" than later on when you're maintaining. When you don't have anything it's easy to say "We need X.", but it's harder to justify to folks "We need to maintain X."—there's not as much ribbon cutting for maintenance projects: If there's no highway bridge over some chasm, building the bridge can be obvious. When there's a bridge already there spending (tens/hundreds of) millions to rehabilitate or rebuild it will get more pushback. China had little infrastructure and has built a whole bunch (e.g., high speed rail) over the last few decades: I'll be curious to see how things are in fifty or so years when they have to rebuild things.
ksec 2y ago
>Gosh, it's been a few years I dress exclusively in Helikon-Tex, instead of Patagonia ) Ok this may have been the best sales pitch for Helikon-Tex :)

User23 2y ago

Could this have anything to do with the differences in the two country’s migration policies?

sam_lowry_ 2y ago
First off, Poland benefitted immensely from EU funds. Better infrastructure is better in Poland for the same reason it is better in Spain, Spain just had those funds earlier. As for the migration policies, I think you are pointing in the right direction but the reality is more subtle. Old European countries consider work to be a privilege, Poles, having lived in the Warsaw Pact country, still perceive work to be an obligation. A refugee arriving in Germany can't start working and lives off welfare while his case is settled, which may take years. A similar refugee arriving in Poland has to find a job both to survive and to obtain legal residency. This has the downside of driving down wages but the upside of creating even more jobs. Amazon, Lidl, Zalando and many other labor-intensive businesses set shops just across the border for a reason.

throw0101c 2y ago

> Poland is a wrong example, it had almost 30 years on uninterrupted growth and has better infrastructure and services than the nearby Germany. Not wrong, but I think that when you're growing and building things tend to be "easy(-ier)" than later on when you're maintaining. When you don't have anything it's easy to say "We need X.", but it's harder to justify to folks "We need to maintain X."—there's not as much ribbon cutting for maintenance projects: If there's no highway bridge over some chasm, building the bridge can be obvious. When there's a bridge already there spending (tens/hundreds of) millions to rehabilitate or rebuild it will get more pushback. China had little infrastructure and has built a whole bunch (e.g., high speed rail) over the last few decades: I'll be curious to see how things are in fifty or so years when they have to rebuild things.

ksec 2y ago

>Gosh, it's been a few years I dress exclusively in Helikon-Tex, instead of Patagonia ) Ok this may have been the best sales pitch for Helikon-Tex :)