In the next two years, if you are an American and flying into Europe (meaning the EU, but maybe not the UK).....you will need a entry-slip (note, I didn't say visa).
Basically, the EU (minus the UK if they leave), will require you to have this slip (which will be good for three years), to board the flight in the US and enter Europe.
Cost? Roughly 8 Euro (figure around $10).
Still good for a 90-day visit? Yes.
But in case you were preparing for some last-minute tour.....well, you need to give them four-work-days before the slip will be approved.
Sunday, March 10, 2019
Asylum Story
Focus (the German news magazine) brought up this short story this morning.
The German Labor Ministry (headed by a SPD Party member) has their sights set on increasing asylum seeker benefits.
So if you were an adult (by yourself), you would be receiving 150 Euro a month (instead of the 135 Euro on the current program).
Teenage juveniles (up to 17) would get 79 Euro (currently set at 76 Euro). Kids (regarded as from 6 to 13) would get 97 Euro (instead of 83). And all kids under 6 years old would get 84 Euro (currently at 79 Euro).
Why the adjustment? The German law over this states that you have to review the cost of living and adjust rates. Most folks will admit that it's been three years since the last real review and change.
Easily accepted? One might as well admit that no one wants the suggestion that there's a lot of free money involved and people rush off to Germany to claim asylum. But you have to be honest, just in general, the cost of living has escalated around five to ten percent over the past three years (particularly around fruit and vegetables). Some vegetable items (last fall for example) jumped twenty-percent in a matter of just two months.
The German Labor Ministry (headed by a SPD Party member) has their sights set on increasing asylum seeker benefits.
So if you were an adult (by yourself), you would be receiving 150 Euro a month (instead of the 135 Euro on the current program).
Teenage juveniles (up to 17) would get 79 Euro (currently set at 76 Euro). Kids (regarded as from 6 to 13) would get 97 Euro (instead of 83). And all kids under 6 years old would get 84 Euro (currently at 79 Euro).
Why the adjustment? The German law over this states that you have to review the cost of living and adjust rates. Most folks will admit that it's been three years since the last real review and change.
Easily accepted? One might as well admit that no one wants the suggestion that there's a lot of free money involved and people rush off to Germany to claim asylum. But you have to be honest, just in general, the cost of living has escalated around five to ten percent over the past three years (particularly around fruit and vegetables). Some vegetable items (last fall for example) jumped twenty-percent in a matter of just two months.
Saturday, March 9, 2019
Crime Story
I noticed this via the local news in Wiesbaden (from Wisbadenaktuell).....that it's been sixty days now with the weapons-free zone activity by the cops (midtown area).
What the cops say is that they've stopped around 860 folks in the 'zone' and found 29 folks with 'issues' (meaning confiscations of knives or dangerous weapons).
All of this leads back to some public belief that downtown Wiesbaden is 'dangerous'. From who were around the city in the 1980s would laugh at the perception, but that's the trend in the past decade. Robberies and assaults are up, but the cops suggest that the numbers in the past year or two (with more cops on the beat) have decreased. Curiously, they never show numbers from the 1980s to compare against.
What the cops say is that they've stopped around 860 folks in the 'zone' and found 29 folks with 'issues' (meaning confiscations of knives or dangerous weapons).
All of this leads back to some public belief that downtown Wiesbaden is 'dangerous'. From who were around the city in the 1980s would laugh at the perception, but that's the trend in the past decade. Robberies and assaults are up, but the cops suggest that the numbers in the past year or two (with more cops on the beat) have decreased. Curiously, they never show numbers from the 1980s to compare against.
Gender Topic
This past week....a number of noted Germans (people with status, to include writers, intellectuals, and comedians) stood up and wrote a letter to the general public.
The topic? A blunt 'no' to the cultural war going on, “ridiculous linguistic constructions” which centers on gender discussions. Yes, the agenda to make German absolutely gender-neutral.
Who published the letter? The German Language Association.
The real problem? You come down to three central issues.
1. The German 'the' (der, die, or das) and how each has a set of rules to define their use in the world, and reflet heavily upon the pronoun situation.
2. The German ways of differing between a male engineer or a female engineer, or the thousand occupational divisions. To suggest that you'd add 54 other genders into the equation, and that would create 54 additional nouns and pronoun words to fit each occupation? No, it's just not going to happen.
3. Then to identify the 54 'other' genders without getting personal (remember, Germans having a dividing line between 'du' and 'sie' which means 'you' but in a non-formal or formal way. You'd have to cross the line, and determine is this guy a 'gender-46', or a 'gender-21'? Once they lay out this additional piece of information about their gender, have you crossed the line between sie and du? Do you even want to cross that line?
If I had to pick a country where this gender discussion will never get anywhere.....Germany is number one on the list. You'd have to uproot the whole language, and spend a decade teaching people 54 additional pronouns, and how they'd reflect upon 'you' or 'the'. I just don't think it'll happen.
The topic? A blunt 'no' to the cultural war going on, “ridiculous linguistic constructions” which centers on gender discussions. Yes, the agenda to make German absolutely gender-neutral.
Who published the letter? The German Language Association.
The real problem? You come down to three central issues.
1. The German 'the' (der, die, or das) and how each has a set of rules to define their use in the world, and reflet heavily upon the pronoun situation.
2. The German ways of differing between a male engineer or a female engineer, or the thousand occupational divisions. To suggest that you'd add 54 other genders into the equation, and that would create 54 additional nouns and pronoun words to fit each occupation? No, it's just not going to happen.
3. Then to identify the 54 'other' genders without getting personal (remember, Germans having a dividing line between 'du' and 'sie' which means 'you' but in a non-formal or formal way. You'd have to cross the line, and determine is this guy a 'gender-46', or a 'gender-21'? Once they lay out this additional piece of information about their gender, have you crossed the line between sie and du? Do you even want to cross that line?
If I had to pick a country where this gender discussion will never get anywhere.....Germany is number one on the list. You'd have to uproot the whole language, and spend a decade teaching people 54 additional pronouns, and how they'd reflect upon 'you' or 'the'. I just don't think it'll happen.
On the Topic of Kids
It's not a top hundred German topic, and I doubt if any working-class Germans would get peppy on the subject, but in recent weeks....this intellectual topic of 'not having kids' to save the climate, has come out in women's intellectual circles, within Germany. I don't think the topic started here, but it simply got picked up and passed around.
So the idea goes this way.....less kids equals protecting the environment, and thus saving the world.
A guy's topic? No. It a feminist topic, and outside the circle of working-class women.
Where does this chatter go? You go into a university environment and find that intellectual young women will have this presented to them as a serious topic, and probably a quarter of them will get seriously attached to the subject, believing that they can save the world....just by avoiding having kids.
So you imagine this path, and what comes out of this.
The young lady wraps up her university years, and enters the work atmosphere. In her mid to late 20s.....she wants a social environment and dating. Up front, she wants to put this childless goal to the new guy, which will invite an response.....which most will say, that's not the kind of future I think about. So that guy up and disappears.
Months go by, and a second guy emerges on the scene. Same story.....same response.
Mid-30s come.....another guy or two.....same story, and same response.
Somewhere around age forty, this intellectual woman has reached some stage where she's a bit lonely and now questioning her dedication to the environmental idea of no kids. In simple terms, she's going to some mental health doctor about depression-related issues, and he zeroes in on her lack of a relationship, or the lack of kids. Then suddenly, hundreds of German doctors will come out with some trend 'disorder'....all relating back to intellectual women who made a decision in 2019/2020, and went through twenty-odd years of conviction.
I'm not going to suggest this is crazy, but I can suggest the end-result in twenty years.
So the idea goes this way.....less kids equals protecting the environment, and thus saving the world.
A guy's topic? No. It a feminist topic, and outside the circle of working-class women.
Where does this chatter go? You go into a university environment and find that intellectual young women will have this presented to them as a serious topic, and probably a quarter of them will get seriously attached to the subject, believing that they can save the world....just by avoiding having kids.
So you imagine this path, and what comes out of this.
The young lady wraps up her university years, and enters the work atmosphere. In her mid to late 20s.....she wants a social environment and dating. Up front, she wants to put this childless goal to the new guy, which will invite an response.....which most will say, that's not the kind of future I think about. So that guy up and disappears.
Months go by, and a second guy emerges on the scene. Same story.....same response.
Mid-30s come.....another guy or two.....same story, and same response.
Somewhere around age forty, this intellectual woman has reached some stage where she's a bit lonely and now questioning her dedication to the environmental idea of no kids. In simple terms, she's going to some mental health doctor about depression-related issues, and he zeroes in on her lack of a relationship, or the lack of kids. Then suddenly, hundreds of German doctors will come out with some trend 'disorder'....all relating back to intellectual women who made a decision in 2019/2020, and went through twenty-odd years of conviction.
I'm not going to suggest this is crazy, but I can suggest the end-result in twenty years.
Trump Military Strategy
I'll quote the basis of this story off Stars and Stripes. For a number of months, it's been mostly chatter in the background and appears now to be a fairly serious topic for the Trump administration.
What Trump wants for a future military situation....you (the desiring country) that wants US troops....need to cover the full cost of 'hosting' US troops in your country, and a 50-percent 'premium'.
What this would cover? You would basically be paying for housing, heat, utility cost....then on top of that....the same identical check as a 'premium'.
The chief countries affected? South Korea, Japan, UK, Germany, Italy, Turkey, etc.
The odds of any of those countries signing up to the deal? I would suggest near 'zero'. Maybe if this was the hosting charge by itself, most would go and sign up to it.....but in effect, it's twice that number.
An attempt to just vacate forward deployments that have been locked into place since 1945? Yes, more or less.
Here's the thing....if you lessen the forward nature of the US military, you lessen tensions, and give some hint of a lesser threat. Depending on the 'enemy' (if there is one existing today), this might be a good thing or bad thing.
What'll happen in this case? It's suggested that virtually all of the US military advisers are against Trump's idea, and I suspect most of the countries will just say 'no'.....they would cover hosting costs only, but this 50-percent premium deal is too much.
If Trump is re-elected in 2020? Yeah, that's really the big question. If he wins, I suspect this policy will go forward, and South Korea will be the one first in line to either agree to the deal or discover a 3-year plan to vacate the country. After that....the NATO countries will be the next to discover the deal.
The anti-US crowd in Germany? They'd actually love the deal....to finally be rid of US troops in the country. Journalists? It's a hard position....they'd love the deal for the US to vacate, but whine along every step of the way that it was 'unfair', and the terrible Russians (who sell them natural gas) might invade any day of the week.
What Trump wants for a future military situation....you (the desiring country) that wants US troops....need to cover the full cost of 'hosting' US troops in your country, and a 50-percent 'premium'.
What this would cover? You would basically be paying for housing, heat, utility cost....then on top of that....the same identical check as a 'premium'.
The chief countries affected? South Korea, Japan, UK, Germany, Italy, Turkey, etc.
The odds of any of those countries signing up to the deal? I would suggest near 'zero'. Maybe if this was the hosting charge by itself, most would go and sign up to it.....but in effect, it's twice that number.
An attempt to just vacate forward deployments that have been locked into place since 1945? Yes, more or less.
Here's the thing....if you lessen the forward nature of the US military, you lessen tensions, and give some hint of a lesser threat. Depending on the 'enemy' (if there is one existing today), this might be a good thing or bad thing.
What'll happen in this case? It's suggested that virtually all of the US military advisers are against Trump's idea, and I suspect most of the countries will just say 'no'.....they would cover hosting costs only, but this 50-percent premium deal is too much.
If Trump is re-elected in 2020? Yeah, that's really the big question. If he wins, I suspect this policy will go forward, and South Korea will be the one first in line to either agree to the deal or discover a 3-year plan to vacate the country. After that....the NATO countries will be the next to discover the deal.
The anti-US crowd in Germany? They'd actually love the deal....to finally be rid of US troops in the country. Journalists? It's a hard position....they'd love the deal for the US to vacate, but whine along every step of the way that it was 'unfair', and the terrible Russians (who sell them natural gas) might invade any day of the week.
Why Did the Finnish Government 'Collapse' This Week?
Well, here is the shocker.....of the 5.5-million population.....roughly one out of five is over 65 years old, and the pension/welfare state supporting that one group is in serious trouble. Birthrate increases? It's not happening....so four out of five Finns are working or in school....to support that fifth guy or gal.
Related to the birthrate issue....the cost of providing healthcare for the over-65 crowd, continues to increase. The coalition government had attempted various packages to cut social healthcare cost, but none of these met the agreeable conditions for all three parties making up the coalition.
So a new election occurs, and the parties all have to ramp up their talk over how you arrange a budget, with cuts or no cuts.....to social healthcare mandates. The odds that the election provides a winner, who must forma coalition and the two partners can't agree to the budget crisis? Probably better than 50-percent chance.
Related to the birthrate issue....the cost of providing healthcare for the over-65 crowd, continues to increase. The coalition government had attempted various packages to cut social healthcare cost, but none of these met the agreeable conditions for all three parties making up the coalition.
So a new election occurs, and the parties all have to ramp up their talk over how you arrange a budget, with cuts or no cuts.....to social healthcare mandates. The odds that the election provides a winner, who must forma coalition and the two partners can't agree to the budget crisis? Probably better than 50-percent chance.
Friday, March 8, 2019
The 'Big' Political Rumor
In the past month, this rumor has started up here in Germany....that Chancellor Merkel.....shortly after the EU election (early May) will give notice and retire by June (before the three German state elections in the fall). The emphasis here on the rumor.....is that the new party chief of the CDU, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer (AKK), would hold a party meeting, and hustle up a insider vote, to give her the Chancellor's job, without a national election.
So N-TV (commercial news in Germany) picked up the story this morning. They say various officials within the SPD Party (the coalition partner with the CDU that lead the government) suggest that they will refuse to be part of the coalition in this case, with AKK. They want a new national election.
The normal national election? It would be in the fall of 2021.
What happens in this scenario, if Merkel retires, AKK arrives, and the SPD Party quits the coalition? There are two scenarios that I would suggest.
First, AKK could approach the Green Party and FDP to form up, without calling for a national election. If you remember the fall of 2017....Merkel tried to build a coalition with them, and that 'chat' failed after about eight weeks of talking. The FDP has a fairly negative opinion of the Green agenda, and things just weren't going anywhere.
Would the FDP flip that now? It's hard to say. Maybe the FDP might approach this and demand three particular cabinet positions (Finance Minister might be one of them). Immigration and asylum being a problem for the two to find agreement? Yes, that's another issue.
Second, what about having another national election? Using this scenario of an attempt to get the Greens and FDP to sign up....and that failing....the time schedule would lead to some national election in the October timeframe. In the midst of these three German east German state elections? Presently, the one predicted outcome of the three state elections is that the SPD won't win as much as they did five years ago. That would really hurt the SPD, if there were a national election in the fall. The likely party gaining? The Greens.
All of this, in this second scenario....would lead to the CDU likely coming out ahead, but forced more or less...into a partnership with the Greens (and maybe the FDP).
The odds on Merkel retiring? It's an unknown factor....she hasn't come out to chat on the idea. Might it be a bogus rumor? Yes. In fact, I suspect that the majority of SPD folks would have heartburn in dumping the coalition right now....there's nothing to be gained.
So N-TV (commercial news in Germany) picked up the story this morning. They say various officials within the SPD Party (the coalition partner with the CDU that lead the government) suggest that they will refuse to be part of the coalition in this case, with AKK. They want a new national election.
The normal national election? It would be in the fall of 2021.
What happens in this scenario, if Merkel retires, AKK arrives, and the SPD Party quits the coalition? There are two scenarios that I would suggest.
First, AKK could approach the Green Party and FDP to form up, without calling for a national election. If you remember the fall of 2017....Merkel tried to build a coalition with them, and that 'chat' failed after about eight weeks of talking. The FDP has a fairly negative opinion of the Green agenda, and things just weren't going anywhere.
Would the FDP flip that now? It's hard to say. Maybe the FDP might approach this and demand three particular cabinet positions (Finance Minister might be one of them). Immigration and asylum being a problem for the two to find agreement? Yes, that's another issue.
Second, what about having another national election? Using this scenario of an attempt to get the Greens and FDP to sign up....and that failing....the time schedule would lead to some national election in the October timeframe. In the midst of these three German east German state elections? Presently, the one predicted outcome of the three state elections is that the SPD won't win as much as they did five years ago. That would really hurt the SPD, if there were a national election in the fall. The likely party gaining? The Greens.
All of this, in this second scenario....would lead to the CDU likely coming out ahead, but forced more or less...into a partnership with the Greens (and maybe the FDP).
The odds on Merkel retiring? It's an unknown factor....she hasn't come out to chat on the idea. Might it be a bogus rumor? Yes. In fact, I suspect that the majority of SPD folks would have heartburn in dumping the coalition right now....there's nothing to be gained.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)