6 ms·

German economy contracts 0.2% in 2024 in second consecutive annual slowdown

42 points by belter 2y ago

rKand 2y ago
[flagged]
- GiorgioG 2y ago
  If Europe invested more in their militaries they could dictate their own terms with their neighbors.
  - kkzz99 2y ago
    Can't dictate terms with a nuclear superpower.
    - alephnerd 2y ago
      European nations like France and the UK have the nuclear trident (the ability for global MAD). They can dictate more than enough. Also, until the 1990s, Western European armies were VERY professional and capable of military and technological innovation. Hell, the Bundeswehr was well equipped with fairly competitive weaponry made by German manufacturers such as Heckler and Koch, KNDS (Leopard tanks), Rheinmetall, etc
  - qdwejh 2y ago
    The Germany would have to get nuclear weapons. The U.S. knows that perfectly well, that is why it stays and hypocritically complains that the EU isn't doing enough. Also, the U.S. MIC wants to sell to its NATO "allies".
- alephnerd 2y ago
  Maybe Germany should have begun decoupling from Russia in 2014 after the invasion of Crimea. Instead, Germany Inc sold out to Russia and China - with national champions like Deutsche Bank becoming addicted to it's Russian originated business and Volkswagen becoming addicted to Volkswagen China.
  - hirako2000 2y ago
    Better, they shouldn't have decoupled for another decade or two. Given the proximity of all the fossil energy they need for their industries. A big part of the shrink is energy costs, Germany is industrial.
    - alephnerd 2y ago
      Germany was a global leader in solar manufacturing in the early 2010s, but political infighting and lobbying against tariffs from China-dependent companies like Volkswagen undermined their solar manufacturing dominance. The "Made in China 2025" strategy itself is a knockoff of the "Made in Germany 4.0" strategy of the early 2010s.
- boringg 2y ago
  Who turned off the cheap GHG free Nuclear power? Who cheated on the emissions tests for the main exported vehicle? I have to assume you think all of germany's problems aren't of their own making per the tone of your comment.
  - martin_a 2y ago
    > Who turned off the cheap GHG free Nuclear power? Probably the 100th time I have to say this, but it still seems necessary: Phasing out of nuclear power was a decision that was made in 2011 (after the Fukushima incident) and even the power companies didn't want to have their reactors run any longer because they were EOL. "cheap" is also not true if you look over to France and their newly built systems.
    - ckozlowski 2y ago
      True, but there was a bit more to it than that. Anti-nuclear sentiment has always run high in Germany, but Fukushima made it more intense. At the time of the accident, campaigning was underway in Germany. Merkel announced the closure as a way to hold off the Left and achieve a win for her party (It worked.) The Greens had always campaigned hard on this, the timing of Fukushima was a godsend for them, and had the potential to swing the election. Merkel had a tough choice: Keep the reactors online and lose the election, or announce a shutdown and take the wind out of The Green's key issue. She chose the latter, and CDU/CSU won. The reactors weren't EOL. "Cheap" (or "costs") can get complicated to calculate as there's more that Europe factors in than simply the costs of running the plants. Europe doesn't have fantastic energy reserves, so that energy has to come from somewhere. Historically, a large percentage has been oil via the Middle East. That has political and military costs such as how they work with the Arab states, support for the U.S. which maintains security of the Persian Gulf, etc. France's choice of nuclear is influenced in part because of security decisions they made in the 50s and their (until recently) ability to source cheap uranium from Mali. Germany phased out their plants in order to stave off a last minute electoral disaster, which worked. But I'd argue that it was before they were ready. Renewables have promise, but have not reached the point where they are cheap and plentiful enough to power the energy-intensive Germany economy. I'm sure they'll get there eventually, but they're going through a painful phase to bridge that gap thanks to Merkel's decision. Good read: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-germanys-nuclear-phase-out https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-ge...
- sickofparadox 2y ago
  The 'US foreign policy blob' had been warning Germany that basing your energy policy on purchasing fossil fuels (which you are trying to get rid of) from a dictatorship in the hopes it gets them to play nice was a stupid idea and now Germans are paying the price for poorly thought out foreign policy. Good thing they still have those nuclear plants, right?
  - kkzz99 2y ago
    Its funny because from the perspective of Germany, Russia was always a good partner in trade with a win-win situation. But can't rely on your allies not to blow up our infrastructure. The US has always behaved like a bully and a Mafia boss. No matter how low you bow, if Master wants to whip you, he will.
  - martin_a 2y ago
    Energy prices are down a lot from their former maximum [1] and have been replaced by lots of renewable sources, which will pay off long term. Hard price to pay, but it had to be paid at some time. Would have surely been nicer if it had been a slower switch, but former governments didn't want that to happen. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1267541/germany-monthly-wholesale-electricity-price/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1267541/germany-monthly-... [2] https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterprises/Energy/Production/Tables/gross-electricity-production.html https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterpris...
  - qdwejh 2y ago
    If the U.S. had had a moderate Ukraine policy, none of this would have happened. Instead, Germany's energy policy is now based on U.S. dependency in the hope that the U.S. will play nice. Which it does not.
    - ckozlowski 2y ago
      The thing that gets me with arguments such as this is that it talks right over the heads of the Ukrainians like they don't matter. "Oh, the U.S. should moderate it's policy." "NATO shouldn't be pushing East." "The West didn't listen." I hear the same sentiment around the Baltic states: "NATO shouldn't have pushed in, and that angered Putin." Give it up for those repeating those misconceptions and making the argument into one where NATO is pushing, or the U.S. isn't being "moderate" enough with regards to Ukrainian sovereignty. Talk to the Ukrainians, the Lithuanians and Estonians, the Poles, and the Finns. And they'll all tell you the same: It's been Russian imperialism for centuries, be it under the guise of the USSR or Tzar or the current president for life. They don't want to give up their land and populations to become part of Russia's empire. And just a very cursory glance at history will pull examples of this. Finland lost it's second largest city in the 40s, and is still without it. The Baltics and Ukraine only became free in the 90s. The Poles went through multiple stretches of time where they were divide up and didn't exist. Your country gets invaded one day, the occupied lands vacated of their residents, the children re-homed in families elsewhere, but you'd tell them to "moderate" their policy? That further more, they shouldn't be allowed to seek alliances? If someone invaded the U.S., I seriously doubt that line of opinion would obtain support anywhere. It's not about U.S. policy. It's about Ukraine wanting to be independent and Russia wanting it as part of theirs. Simple as that. Don't ask the U.S. about Ukrainian policy like the Ukrainians aren't there. Have some respect, and ask the Ukrainians what they want. Then I dare you to tell them to moderate it.
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  Merkel's plan to buy prosperity for Germany by buying cheap resources from Russia and selling a lot of manufactured products to China failed totally, so to say. Meanwhile Germany didn't invest enough into infrastructure, nor into high-tech industries. Too much reliance on extant branches such as car production. They are sick man of Europe again, and mostly as a result of Merkel-era politics. Any US pressure is small fry compared to their self-inflicted wounds.
  - kkzz99 2y ago
    But the reason it failed is primarily the fault of the US. Forced decoupling from Russia because of NATO expansion and forced trade war with China at the behest of the American Masters.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    Nor into education, I'm at loss where the money went.
    - martin_a 2y ago
      > I'm at loss where the money went Well, I think the number of billionaires has doubled in Germany in the last years, so... Seems like it went somewhere.
    - inglor_cz 2y ago
      Pensioners, the most reliable CDU/SPD voting bloc?
  - rob74 2y ago
    You're assuming Merkel had a plan - I for one, having lived through her 16-year "reign" of stagnation, have doubts about that.
  - qdwejh 2y ago
    No it is not "small fry". Whole industries shut down, it has nothing to do with Merkel. Cheap energy from Russia was sabotaged by provoking the Ukraine invasion. Sabotaging German energy from Russia isn't new. Already Reagan did that. Tony Blair of course also wanted a huge Russian oil deal, but was rebuffed. Perhaps that is the cause for the jealousy.
ArtTimeInvestor 2y ago
I would like to learn more about the situation of the German economy. Is there any industry in Germany that will grow in the coming decade? Has anything important been developed in Germany in the last decade? Have there been any big IPOs in Germany in the last decade? Germany's companies seem to have very low p/e ratios. This means the market expects them to tank. Are there companies in Germany with a high p/e ratio, say over 100? Off the top of my head, I can only think of SAP. A company that I find hard to reason about.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- tharmas 2y ago
  Germany is still a complex economy. They will likely be like Japan over the last 30 years.
- megous 2y ago
  Offense industry.
- jplrssn 2y ago
  I'm not disputing that the German economy has issues, but is a large number of companies with a P/E ratio over 100 really a sign of a healthy economy? Explosive growth can only continue for so long before the bubble bursts.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ArtTimeInvestor 2y ago
    A high p/e just means that the markets expects the company's earnings to grow to a multiple of what they are today. That does not have to be explosive. And there is no reason some "bubble" has to burst.
  - rapsey 2y ago
    Absolutely. It means there are lots of investors willing to fund development of new ventures.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
overstay8930 2y ago
Germans can only blame themselves for kicking the can down the road for 13 years. They were naive with Russia for energy, they were naive with the U.S. for security, and they were naive with China for its economic growth.
- Mashimo 2y ago
  And still don't understand anything digital.
- rkarnal 2y ago
  Unlike the U.S., Germany has no natural resources. U.S. LNG dependency means that it has another master. Except that the previous one never dictated anything to Germany, just like Saudi Arabia never dictates anything. They are not naive with security. Either they fully defend themselves and get nuclear weapons or they keep the status quo. Buying useless F35 (possibly with a kill switch) from the U.S. just enriches the MIC. Germany should have build up a "high tech" Internet industry so it could control which parts of the narrative get flagged and which ones stay up.
  - marcinzm 2y ago
    So which boogey man controlled their uranium access and made them shut down all their plants?
    - rhatsf 2y ago
      If you judge by U.S. Russian uranium imports until well into 2024, the culprit would have been Russia: https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russia-restricts-enriched-uranium-exports-united-states-2024-11-15/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russia-restricts... The U.S. of course is a sovereign nation and can decide for itself how long it trades with countries that it calls "terrorist states".
      - marcinzm 2y ago
        The US imports uranium from 12 countries and has its own deposits. Plus you can stockpile it. It was probably more to prevent Russia from selling to terrorists than a dependency.
marcodiego 2y ago
What I fear: blaming on the immigrants.
- cybrox 2y ago
  Don't blame it on the people, correct. However, it is safe to say that the policies surrounding this sector have failed quite spectacularly in bringing new talent to Germany in the past 10 years.
TacticalCoder 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
zinssmeister 2y ago
Germany’s economy has been heavily dependent on specific sectors, particularly the automotive and machinery industries. These sectors are so vital that any decline in their performance could have significant ripple effects across the economy. However, the global market is increasingly shifting towards electric vehicles (EVs) with advanced software interfaces. Companies like Tesla and Chinese manufacturers have taken the lead in this space, while German carmakers have struggled to adapt to the EV and software revolution. Germany also has been facing two big challenges that have seen limited action: rising energy costs and slowing exports to China, both of which have started around 2020. The decision to rely heavily on Russian energy to sustain its industrial economy has proven to be a bad idea. The influx of low- or unskilled labor into a social welfare system, coupled with the challenges of cultural integration (German culture isn't the sexiest of things), has also turned out to be a bad idea. Bonus issue: Germany’s taxes are high, particularly for individuals and workers. Some of the highest in the world. This gives consumers less $ to consume with.
- pydry 2y ago
  >The decision to rely heavily on Russian energy to sustain its industrial economy has proven to be a bad idea. The decision to rely heavily on American military hegemony has proven to be a far worse idea than piping gas from Russia. Without military sovereignty, they don't get to choose their economic partners. Without the ability to choose their economic partners, they have to accept dictates about their economic relationships. Because of that they have to suffer. The same thing happened with Huawei - America decided that Europe needed to decouple from them so decouple they did. As for the moral argument - what Russia is doing in Ukraine is awful, but what Israel is doing in Gaza (with Germany's blessing) is SO much worse. Germany follows America's dictates on both, so their economic relationship to the genociders is still maintained even though it has very little impact on the health of the Germany economy. Now Trump is in charge, Europe is being told that it still has to fall in line, but it needs to jack up its own military spending as well - America has shifted focus East and isn't all that interested in defending Europe any more (if it ever was).
  - Ruphin 2y ago
amai 2y ago
In other news Germans are richer than ever: https://fakti.bg/en/world/939006-germans-richer-than-ever https://fakti.bg/en/world/939006-germans-richer-than-ever
amai 2y ago
Why does Germany still have so many economic immigrants if the economy is doing so badly?
- snehk 2y ago
  Because the government continues to expand social welfare programs.
  - amai 2y ago
    If bad economy leads to better social welfare programs than we need more "bad economy". It seems to be good for the people. It is strange that sometimes it is forgotten that economic growth as an indicator only makes sense if at the same time it improves life of the people. Economic growth can also be decoupled from people wellbeing, which happens easily if one doesn't fight against inequality and monopolies in capitalistic societies.
    - snehk 2y ago
      No, it's not good for most people. It's only good for those who rely on welfare programs. It's not sustainable as the money has to come from somewhere. The government has never before seen tax revenue but they still cannot pay the bills and they constantly come up with new ideas to take more money from people. Let me give you an example. Regular workers in Germany pay for health insurance - people on welfare don't. It's paid for by the government. The government raised welfare payments and promised the insurance companies that they'd cover the costs of insurance for those on welfare. The government then said "Well, we'll pay amount x" but amount x is not enough. The insurance companies now need money so they've raised the rates for every working person to make up for this.
      - amai 2y ago
        Other people living on welfare is good for you, too. Because if they don’t get welfare, they might turn to crime, drugs and violence to survive. And of course you are overlooking that it can happen to you, that you get sick, workless and poor. The social safety net is there for you, too. And regarding German healthcare: The rich also don’t pay for public health insurance in Germany. And even if they do their amount is lower compared to their income, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsbemessungsgrenze https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsbemessungsgrenze If the insurance companies need money they should and could take it from the rich. And this would be fair and good for everyone.

42 points by belter 2y ago

rKand 2y ago

[flagged]

GiorgioG 2y ago
If Europe invested more in their militaries they could dictate their own terms with their neighbors.
- kkzz99 2y ago
  Can't dictate terms with a nuclear superpower.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    European nations like France and the UK have the nuclear trident (the ability for global MAD). They can dictate more than enough. Also, until the 1990s, Western European armies were VERY professional and capable of military and technological innovation. Hell, the Bundeswehr was well equipped with fairly competitive weaponry made by German manufacturers such as Heckler and Koch, KNDS (Leopard tanks), Rheinmetall, etc
- qdwejh 2y ago
  The Germany would have to get nuclear weapons. The U.S. knows that perfectly well, that is why it stays and hypocritically complains that the EU isn't doing enough. Also, the U.S. MIC wants to sell to its NATO "allies".
alephnerd 2y ago
Maybe Germany should have begun decoupling from Russia in 2014 after the invasion of Crimea. Instead, Germany Inc sold out to Russia and China - with national champions like Deutsche Bank becoming addicted to it's Russian originated business and Volkswagen becoming addicted to Volkswagen China.
- hirako2000 2y ago
  Better, they shouldn't have decoupled for another decade or two. Given the proximity of all the fossil energy they need for their industries. A big part of the shrink is energy costs, Germany is industrial.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    Germany was a global leader in solar manufacturing in the early 2010s, but political infighting and lobbying against tariffs from China-dependent companies like Volkswagen undermined their solar manufacturing dominance. The "Made in China 2025" strategy itself is a knockoff of the "Made in Germany 4.0" strategy of the early 2010s.
boringg 2y ago
Who turned off the cheap GHG free Nuclear power? Who cheated on the emissions tests for the main exported vehicle? I have to assume you think all of germany's problems aren't of their own making per the tone of your comment.
- martin_a 2y ago
  > Who turned off the cheap GHG free Nuclear power? Probably the 100th time I have to say this, but it still seems necessary: Phasing out of nuclear power was a decision that was made in 2011 (after the Fukushima incident) and even the power companies didn't want to have their reactors run any longer because they were EOL. "cheap" is also not true if you look over to France and their newly built systems.
  - ckozlowski 2y ago
    True, but there was a bit more to it than that. Anti-nuclear sentiment has always run high in Germany, but Fukushima made it more intense. At the time of the accident, campaigning was underway in Germany. Merkel announced the closure as a way to hold off the Left and achieve a win for her party (It worked.) The Greens had always campaigned hard on this, the timing of Fukushima was a godsend for them, and had the potential to swing the election. Merkel had a tough choice: Keep the reactors online and lose the election, or announce a shutdown and take the wind out of The Green's key issue. She chose the latter, and CDU/CSU won. The reactors weren't EOL. "Cheap" (or "costs") can get complicated to calculate as there's more that Europe factors in than simply the costs of running the plants. Europe doesn't have fantastic energy reserves, so that energy has to come from somewhere. Historically, a large percentage has been oil via the Middle East. That has political and military costs such as how they work with the Arab states, support for the U.S. which maintains security of the Persian Gulf, etc. France's choice of nuclear is influenced in part because of security decisions they made in the 50s and their (until recently) ability to source cheap uranium from Mali. Germany phased out their plants in order to stave off a last minute electoral disaster, which worked. But I'd argue that it was before they were ready. Renewables have promise, but have not reached the point where they are cheap and plentiful enough to power the energy-intensive Germany economy. I'm sure they'll get there eventually, but they're going through a painful phase to bridge that gap thanks to Merkel's decision. Good read: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-germanys-nuclear-phase-out https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-ge...
sickofparadox 2y ago
The 'US foreign policy blob' had been warning Germany that basing your energy policy on purchasing fossil fuels (which you are trying to get rid of) from a dictatorship in the hopes it gets them to play nice was a stupid idea and now Germans are paying the price for poorly thought out foreign policy. Good thing they still have those nuclear plants, right?
- kkzz99 2y ago
  Its funny because from the perspective of Germany, Russia was always a good partner in trade with a win-win situation. But can't rely on your allies not to blow up our infrastructure. The US has always behaved like a bully and a Mafia boss. No matter how low you bow, if Master wants to whip you, he will.
- martin_a 2y ago
  Energy prices are down a lot from their former maximum [1] and have been replaced by lots of renewable sources, which will pay off long term. Hard price to pay, but it had to be paid at some time. Would have surely been nicer if it had been a slower switch, but former governments didn't want that to happen. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1267541/germany-monthly-wholesale-electricity-price/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1267541/germany-monthly-... [2] https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterprises/Energy/Production/Tables/gross-electricity-production.html https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterpris...
- qdwejh 2y ago
  If the U.S. had had a moderate Ukraine policy, none of this would have happened. Instead, Germany's energy policy is now based on U.S. dependency in the hope that the U.S. will play nice. Which it does not.
  - ckozlowski 2y ago
    The thing that gets me with arguments such as this is that it talks right over the heads of the Ukrainians like they don't matter. "Oh, the U.S. should moderate it's policy." "NATO shouldn't be pushing East." "The West didn't listen." I hear the same sentiment around the Baltic states: "NATO shouldn't have pushed in, and that angered Putin." Give it up for those repeating those misconceptions and making the argument into one where NATO is pushing, or the U.S. isn't being "moderate" enough with regards to Ukrainian sovereignty. Talk to the Ukrainians, the Lithuanians and Estonians, the Poles, and the Finns. And they'll all tell you the same: It's been Russian imperialism for centuries, be it under the guise of the USSR or Tzar or the current president for life. They don't want to give up their land and populations to become part of Russia's empire. And just a very cursory glance at history will pull examples of this. Finland lost it's second largest city in the 40s, and is still without it. The Baltics and Ukraine only became free in the 90s. The Poles went through multiple stretches of time where they were divide up and didn't exist. Your country gets invaded one day, the occupied lands vacated of their residents, the children re-homed in families elsewhere, but you'd tell them to "moderate" their policy? That further more, they shouldn't be allowed to seek alliances? If someone invaded the U.S., I seriously doubt that line of opinion would obtain support anywhere. It's not about U.S. policy. It's about Ukraine wanting to be independent and Russia wanting it as part of theirs. Simple as that. Don't ask the U.S. about Ukrainian policy like the Ukrainians aren't there. Have some respect, and ask the Ukrainians what they want. Then I dare you to tell them to moderate it.
inglor_cz 2y ago
Merkel's plan to buy prosperity for Germany by buying cheap resources from Russia and selling a lot of manufactured products to China failed totally, so to say. Meanwhile Germany didn't invest enough into infrastructure, nor into high-tech industries. Too much reliance on extant branches such as car production. They are sick man of Europe again, and mostly as a result of Merkel-era politics. Any US pressure is small fry compared to their self-inflicted wounds.
- kkzz99 2y ago
  But the reason it failed is primarily the fault of the US. Forced decoupling from Russia because of NATO expansion and forced trade war with China at the behest of the American Masters.
- blueflow 2y ago
  Nor into education, I'm at loss where the money went.
  - martin_a 2y ago
    > I'm at loss where the money went Well, I think the number of billionaires has doubled in Germany in the last years, so... Seems like it went somewhere.
  - inglor_cz 2y ago
    Pensioners, the most reliable CDU/SPD voting bloc?
- rob74 2y ago
  You're assuming Merkel had a plan - I for one, having lived through her 16-year "reign" of stagnation, have doubts about that.
- qdwejh 2y ago
  No it is not "small fry". Whole industries shut down, it has nothing to do with Merkel. Cheap energy from Russia was sabotaged by provoking the Ukraine invasion. Sabotaging German energy from Russia isn't new. Already Reagan did that. Tony Blair of course also wanted a huge Russian oil deal, but was rebuffed. Perhaps that is the cause for the jealousy.

ArtTimeInvestor 2y ago

I would like to learn more about the situation of the German economy. Is there any industry in Germany that will grow in the coming decade? Has anything important been developed in Germany in the last decade? Have there been any big IPOs in Germany in the last decade? Germany's companies seem to have very low p/e ratios. This means the market expects them to tank. Are there companies in Germany with a high p/e ratio, say over 100? Off the top of my head, I can only think of SAP. A company that I find hard to reason about.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tharmas 2y ago
Germany is still a complex economy. They will likely be like Japan over the last 30 years.
megous 2y ago
Offense industry.
jplrssn 2y ago
I'm not disputing that the German economy has issues, but is a large number of companies with a P/E ratio over 100 really a sign of a healthy economy? Explosive growth can only continue for so long before the bubble bursts.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ArtTimeInvestor 2y ago
  A high p/e just means that the markets expects the company's earnings to grow to a multiple of what they are today. That does not have to be explosive. And there is no reason some "bubble" has to burst.
- rapsey 2y ago
  Absolutely. It means there are lots of investors willing to fund development of new ventures.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

overstay8930 2y ago

Germans can only blame themselves for kicking the can down the road for 13 years. They were naive with Russia for energy, they were naive with the U.S. for security, and they were naive with China for its economic growth.

Mashimo 2y ago
And still don't understand anything digital.
rkarnal 2y ago
Unlike the U.S., Germany has no natural resources. U.S. LNG dependency means that it has another master. Except that the previous one never dictated anything to Germany, just like Saudi Arabia never dictates anything. They are not naive with security. Either they fully defend themselves and get nuclear weapons or they keep the status quo. Buying useless F35 (possibly with a kill switch) from the U.S. just enriches the MIC. Germany should have build up a "high tech" Internet industry so it could control which parts of the narrative get flagged and which ones stay up.
- marcinzm 2y ago
  So which boogey man controlled their uranium access and made them shut down all their plants?
  - rhatsf 2y ago
    If you judge by U.S. Russian uranium imports until well into 2024, the culprit would have been Russia: https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russia-restricts-enriched-uranium-exports-united-states-2024-11-15/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russia-restricts... The U.S. of course is a sovereign nation and can decide for itself how long it trades with countries that it calls "terrorist states".
    - marcinzm 2y ago
      The US imports uranium from 12 countries and has its own deposits. Plus you can stockpile it. It was probably more to prevent Russia from selling to terrorists than a dependency.

marcodiego 2y ago

What I fear: blaming on the immigrants.

cybrox 2y ago
Don't blame it on the people, correct. However, it is safe to say that the policies surrounding this sector have failed quite spectacularly in bringing new talent to Germany in the past 10 years.

TacticalCoder 2y ago

[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

zinssmeister 2y ago

Germany’s economy has been heavily dependent on specific sectors, particularly the automotive and machinery industries. These sectors are so vital that any decline in their performance could have significant ripple effects across the economy. However, the global market is increasingly shifting towards electric vehicles (EVs) with advanced software interfaces. Companies like Tesla and Chinese manufacturers have taken the lead in this space, while German carmakers have struggled to adapt to the EV and software revolution. Germany also has been facing two big challenges that have seen limited action: rising energy costs and slowing exports to China, both of which have started around 2020. The decision to rely heavily on Russian energy to sustain its industrial economy has proven to be a bad idea. The influx of low- or unskilled labor into a social welfare system, coupled with the challenges of cultural integration (German culture isn't the sexiest of things), has also turned out to be a bad idea. Bonus issue: Germany’s taxes are high, particularly for individuals and workers. Some of the highest in the world. This gives consumers less $ to consume with.

pydry 2y ago
>The decision to rely heavily on Russian energy to sustain its industrial economy has proven to be a bad idea. The decision to rely heavily on American military hegemony has proven to be a far worse idea than piping gas from Russia. Without military sovereignty, they don't get to choose their economic partners. Without the ability to choose their economic partners, they have to accept dictates about their economic relationships. Because of that they have to suffer. The same thing happened with Huawei - America decided that Europe needed to decouple from them so decouple they did. As for the moral argument - what Russia is doing in Ukraine is awful, but what Israel is doing in Gaza (with Germany's blessing) is SO much worse. Germany follows America's dictates on both, so their economic relationship to the genociders is still maintained even though it has very little impact on the health of the Germany economy. Now Trump is in charge, Europe is being told that it still has to fall in line, but it needs to jack up its own military spending as well - America has shifted focus East and isn't all that interested in defending Europe any more (if it ever was).
- Ruphin 2y ago

amai 2y ago

In other news Germans are richer than ever: https://fakti.bg/en/world/939006-germans-richer-than-ever https://fakti.bg/en/world/939006-germans-richer-than-ever

amai 2y ago

Why does Germany still have so many economic immigrants if the economy is doing so badly?

snehk 2y ago
Because the government continues to expand social welfare programs.
- amai 2y ago
  If bad economy leads to better social welfare programs than we need more "bad economy". It seems to be good for the people. It is strange that sometimes it is forgotten that economic growth as an indicator only makes sense if at the same time it improves life of the people. Economic growth can also be decoupled from people wellbeing, which happens easily if one doesn't fight against inequality and monopolies in capitalistic societies.
  - snehk 2y ago
    No, it's not good for most people. It's only good for those who rely on welfare programs. It's not sustainable as the money has to come from somewhere. The government has never before seen tax revenue but they still cannot pay the bills and they constantly come up with new ideas to take more money from people. Let me give you an example. Regular workers in Germany pay for health insurance - people on welfare don't. It's paid for by the government. The government raised welfare payments and promised the insurance companies that they'd cover the costs of insurance for those on welfare. The government then said "Well, we'll pay amount x" but amount x is not enough. The insurance companies now need money so they've raised the rates for every working person to make up for this.
    - amai 2y ago
      Other people living on welfare is good for you, too. Because if they don’t get welfare, they might turn to crime, drugs and violence to survive. And of course you are overlooking that it can happen to you, that you get sick, workless and poor. The social safety net is there for you, too. And regarding German healthcare: The rich also don’t pay for public health insurance in Germany. And even if they do their amount is lower compared to their income, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsbemessungsgrenze https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsbemessungsgrenze If the insurance companies need money they should and could take it from the rich. And this would be fair and good for everyone.