As a rule, one speaks of a total loss when an object is completely destroyed and its recovery is objectively impossible. In the insurance world, this case is referred to as a „technical“ total loss. An „economic“ total loss occurs when the item can still be repaired, but the repair is not worthwhile for economic reasons.
Both cases apply to Germany and the dismantling of our country began in 1998. The then Chancellor Helmut Kohl (CDU), was voted out and the Socialists came into government and formed a coalition with the Greens. Jochka Fischer (Greens) became foreign minister and Gerhard Schröder (SPD) became chancellor.
In concert with business, finance, the churches (EKD), the CEO’s of the trade unions, Germany’s left-wing intellectuals (experts), the extra-political left-wing spectrum (APO) and the media, the legislative project, known as „Agenda 2010,“ was made palatable to the German population. The tried and tested recipes were applied, and fearing the future, the voters decided to vote out Helmut Kohl and his CDU (Christian, right-wing conservative) and to help the socialists to power. That was the beginning, and the citizens got worse every year.
The concept of failure – Agenda 2010 – (in bullet points, original text here.):
1. redesign of the welfare state
2. redesign of the health care system
3. redesign of education
4. redesign of infrastructure
The consequences of „redesign“ in the welfare state
1. present and old-age poverty: 1998 – 2005: 1.7 million welfare recipients + 2 million unemployed. 2005 – 2022: 14 million German welfare recipients +2.5 million unemployed
2. total number of „refugees“: 23 million. Transfer payments*
3. open borders
4. largest low-wage sector in Western Europe, poverty wages
5. indirect pension cuts, early retirement
6. privatization of social housing: out of 4.2 million apartments, 3 million apartments were sold underpriced to hedge funds. These became condominiums.
7. privatization of hospitals: the number of clinics and hospitals in Germany has been declining for years. Whereas in 1991 there were still around 2,400, the Federal Statistical Office currently counts 1,914 clinics. Private operators were able to increase their share from 21.7 percent in 2000 to around 37.8 percent of hospitals in 2019.
8. increase in the suicide rate (exact data are concealed)
9. rising inflation rate
10. highest energy prices in the world
11. increasing numbers of homeless people
12. increase in crime
The consequences of the „redesign“ in the health care system
1. overloading of doctors‘ offices and hospitals by refugees
2. unnecessary operations, several hundred thousand annually.
Nowhere is there as much surgery as in Germany. Many hospital bosses instruct their doctors to perform as many operations as possible – those bring the most money.
3. doctor – patient consultation is no longer paid for, contactless medicine
4. billing fraud in private practice doctors, privatized hospitals and spa clinics.
The consequences of „the redesign“ in education
1. kindergartens: overcrowding with children from predominantly Arab families In 2015, 148,000 babies were born in Germany to mothers with foreign citizenship. This means that one in five newborns had a foreign mother – more than ever before in the history of the Federal Republic. According to press reports of the Federal Government, the birth rate is decreasing, but this cannot be true for the simple reason that more and more „refugees“ are coming to Germany. The government wants to take in 1 million „refugees“ a year. Multicultural meals, creeping Islam lessons. Lack of staff and space.
Schools: Overcrowding of children from predominantly Arab families, problem schools springing up, more religious clashes, teachers attacked and beaten up, German students intimidated, intelligence quotient declining (Pisa study), staff and space shortages, digital equipment in short supply.
2. universities: sponsors; economy, pharmaceutical- energy- and automotive industry, curricula are adapted to the wishes of the sponsors, the Bologna reform; Primarily, the originators of the Bologna process were concerned with modernizing universities, standardizing study systems and degrees in order to achieve more mobility, international exchange and transnational quality standards. The Bologna Declaration of June 19, 1999, to which a total of 48 countries have since subscribed, sets out six measures:
– Improvement of the comparability of degrees and the introduction of a
a common diploma supplement to improve transparency
– Two-cycle degree system: a first cycle of at least three years (bachelor’s degree) and a second cycle (master’s degree), which requires completion of the first cycle.
– credit point system based on the ECTS model, which is used in Erasmus exchanges
– promotion of mobility of students, teachers and researchers and elimination of all kinds of obstacles to mobility
– European cooperation in the field of quality assurance
– European dimension in higher education: increasing the content of European-related studies.
The Bologna reform is responsible for the presumed decline of the Humboldtian ideal of education. The once so highly praised freedom of teaching has been abolished. In fact, serious changes have occurred in the wake of the reform that are hardly ever addressed.
These include the devaluation of the baccalaureate. The European path of the Bologna Process ultimately made the graduation possible and enforced it (see: „Bologna – from political process in Europe to study reform in Germany“).
Before the „Bologna Reform“, studies in the Federal Republic of Germany consisted of only one phase. It consisted of basic studies, after which an intermediate examination had to be taken, and then the course of study followed. Only after nine semesters did a major final examination follow, and if the student passed, he or she received a diploma or a master’s degree.
In Germany for example, this meant the abolition of the old Magister, Diplom and Staatsexamens degree programs and the switch to Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees. Since then, studies have been divided into modules, and performance is assessed according to ECTS grades and credits. Now there are academics running around everywhere who are not academics at all.
The consequences of the „redesign“ in infrastructure
Infrastructure refers to all facilities, institutions, structures, systems and non-material conditions that serve the general interest and economic structure of a state or its regions.
Als Infrastruktur bezeichnet man alle Anlagen, Institutionen, Strukturen, Systeme und nicht-materiellen Gegebenheiten, die der Daseinsvorsorge und der Wirtschaftsstruktur eines Staates oder seiner Regionen dienen.
– Finance and insurance
– Media and culture
– Government and administration
– health care
– Information technology and telecommunications.
– Energy supply, electric power, gas supply, district heating, gas station network
– Communications: broadcasting, Internet, fixed network, mobile communications, postal services
– Waste disposal, sewage, recycling, drinking water
– Transportation infrastructure:
o public transport with maritime shipping, inland waterways (inland waterways), railroads (local and long-distance railroads), public passenger transport (local and long-distance passenger transport, long-distance bus), air transport (airports), road transport (roads), ship transport (waterways), navigation radio stations for air and sea vehicles
o Individual transport: traffic routes, bicycle paths, bicycle trails, etc.
– Financial, banking, fiscal and monetary system
- Energieversorgung, Elektroenergie, Gasversorgung, Fernwärme, Tankstellennetz
- Kommunikation: Rundfunk, Internet, Festnetz, Mobilfunk, Postwesen
- Müllentsorgung, Abwasser, Wertstoffverwertung, Trinkwasser
- öffentlicher Verkehr mit Seeschifffahrt, Binnengewässern (Binnenschifffahrt), Eisenbahnen (Nah- und Fernbahn), Öffentlicher Personenverkehr (ÖPNV und Personenfernverkehr, Fernbus), Luftverkehr (Flughäfen), Straßenverkehr (Straßen), Schiffsverkehr (Wasserstraßen), Navigationsfunksender für Luft- und Seefahrzeuge
- Individualverkehr: Verkehrswege, Radwege, Radwanderwege usw.
- Finanz-, Banken-, Steuer- und Währungssystem
– Education system, educational institutions with libraries, schools, universities, colleges, research institutes, etc.
– Welfare services with child care facilities, orphanages, homes for the elderly, women’s shelters, nursing services, etc.
– Health care system with hospitals, emergency services
– Cultural facilities with exhibition halls, libraries, museums, etc.
– Public security: civil protection, police, defense, etc.
– Social security with unemployment, pension and long-term care insurance
– Sports and recreation: sports facilities and fields, parks, playgrounds
- Bildungssystem, Bildungseinrichtungen mit Bibliotheken, Schulen, Universitäten, Fachhochschulen, Forschungseinrichtungen usw.
- Fürsorge-Dienstleistungen mit Kinderbetreuungs-Einrichtungen, Waisenhäusern, Altenheimen, Frauenhäusern, Pflegediensten usw.
- Gesundheitssystem mit Krankenhäusern, Rettungsdiensten
- Kulturelle Einrichtungen mit Ausstellungsräumen, Bibliotheken, Museen usw.
- Öffentliche Sicherheit: Bevölkerungsschutz, Polizei, Verteidigung usw.
- Soziale Sicherung mit Arbeitslosen-, Renten- und Pflegeversicherung
- Sport und Freizeit: Sportanlagen und –plätze, Parks, Spielplätze
– natural and near-natural areas, protected areas, green bridges
– parks, green spaces, roadside greenery, greening of buildings
– natural and artificial water bodies (blue infrastructure)
- natürliche und naturnahe Flächen, Schutzgebiete, Grünbrücken
- Parks, Grünflächen, Straßenbegleitgrün, Bauwerksbegrünung
- natürliche und künstliche Gewässer (blaue Infrastruktur)
Public investment and the state of infrastructure in Germany have been at the center of economic policy discussions for some time. On the one hand, there are complaints that public infrastructure is overloaded in many areas, be it roads and bridges, rail transport, IT infrastructure or power grids. In this discussion, the existence of an ailing infrastructure is usually seen as obvious but not questioned further. Infrastructure report of the federal government here.
„All broken“ is the most accurate description, however. Broken kindergartens, schools, roads and bridges, housing shortages, track closures in rural areas and digital stone age. The highest energy costs and electric cars lack gas pumps and electricity, which would have to be bought from France, for example, because most nuclear power plants have been shut down and the three remaining nuclear reactors will be shut down this year and next. Planned major projects such as the Berlin airport and Stuttgart 21, as well as the Hamburg Elbphilharmonie, take 10 years and more, and are still not finished. The average cost increase is 800%. Digitization is virtually in its infancy, there is a lack of network connections, especially in rural areas, and there are huge numbers of wireless gaps.
German competitiveness has been the subject of debate for several years. In addition to high and inflexible labor costs, Germany’s poor performance in terms of digital infrastructure means that it lags behind in rankings of international competitiveness as a business location (World Economic Forum, 2019). Germany’s debt is estimated at between 3 and 5 trillion euros.
Germany today is a total loss, there is no doubt about that. The goal of Agenda 2010 was redistribution from the bottom to the top, and this policy is still being practiced today. Large companies were generously and unnecessarily supported with taxpayers‘ money, and the small shopkeepers are still waiting for the Corona aid in some places, or the aid money is no more than a drop in the bucket. At the moment, politicians and the media declare that they knew nothing about all this, and that only Corona brought the abuses to light. This is an outrageous lie. Every politician and journalist knew about it, only they avoided to talk and report about it.
One cannot call those responsible by name often enough and demand accountability from them. In a constitutional state, such a thing must not happen.
The management of the employers‘ association in small talk with the management of the joint welfare association. Two profiteers explain the destructive Agenda to us.
PETER CLEVER, Chief Executive of the Confederation of German Employers‘ Associations (2003), press spokesman for Norbert Blüm (CDU), member of the Administrative Council of the Federal Employment Agency.
ULRICH SCHNEIDER, Chief Executive of the Paritätischer Wohlfahrtsverband.
taz: Mr. Schneider, on March 14, 2003, Gerhard Schröder gave his keynote speech on „Agenda 2010.“ What did you think at the time?
Ulrich Schneider: I felt betrayed. We ourselves had been calling for several years for unemployment and social welfare benefits to be merged – but on the condition that the new benefit be significantly higher than the level of social welfare. The SPD had promised this during the election campaign and in talks. But no sooner had the elections been held than Schröder declared: Friends, is not, we do not raise above social assistance level. We, the social associations, felt taken for a ride.
The social associations were the first to convert their jobs into 1-euro jobs, and they ran PSA agencies to rehire laid-off workers through the agencies, but then on a temporary basis and with lower wages.
Mr. Clever, how did the speech go down with you?
Peter Clever: The speech aroused in me the great hope that we would finally reduce the base unemployment rate that had grown incessantly in the post-war years. After all, at its peak there were 5 million unemployed and over 2 million long-term unemployed. Agenda 2010 has narrowed the terrible social divide between those who work and those who are unemployed. In 2012, we had under 3 million unemployed and 1 million fewer long-term unemployed. Surely you can’t badmouth that.
Yes, I do. The unemployment figures in 2012 may have been so, leaving aside the fact that Her Olaf Scholz is a master at fudging statistics related to the work of destruction. The numbers that matter are these: in 2005 we had 1.8 million welfare recipients, and 3.7 million unemployed. In the years 1998 to 2003 (the beginning of the Hart implementation), employers collectively made sure that unemployment numbers went up in order to increase public acceptance of Agenda 2010. Unemployment numbers today are somewhere between 7 and 8 million, and a total of 13 million H4 recipients if family members are included. The millions of migrants who enjoy luxury care, compared to Germans, hardly show up in statistics, nor do the costs. They have been finely chopped up and divided among all conceivable households. This group runs under the radar, much like Corona, no facts, no evidence.
Schneider: This good statistical development comes at a high price. We have seen a swath of devastation in the labor market since Agenda 2010 and since Hartz IV …
Schneider: More than 23 percent of employees now work in the low-wage sector, and the number of temporary jobs has also increased. More and more people can no longer get by on their money. Unemployment figures have fallen – that’s true. But the risk of living in poverty has grown.
Clever: With Agenda 2010, we achieved a strategic turnaround and got many previously marginalized people back into work. It wasn’t the big wrecking ball that smashed the welfare state. Nor do we have a hire-and-fire economy in Germany. Over the past ten years, the average length of service has risen from 10 to 11.2 years. More than one in two temporary employees is taken on directly as a permanent employee. That doesn’t fit in with the picture that critics paint of Agenda policy.
It’s incredible how brazenly this man tries to deny and gloss over the realities.
Schneider: Many qualified people have good conditions, a permanent job, and if they lose it, they are often unemployed for only a short time. But there is a classic split in the labor market. Three quarters of Hartz IV recipients have been receiving unemployment benefit II for more than two years. Nothing is happening. And if we’re going to talk about numbers, let’s talk about the right ones: Realistically, we can assume 2 million long-term unemployed.
He is right, but today there are between 800,000 and 1.8 million unemployed, depending on the statistics and parameters.
One result of Agenda 2010 is that the low-wage sector has grown …
Clever: This is also often exaggerated. 8 million people now earn less than 9.15 euros, which is the official low-wage threshold. That’s a good 23 percent of all dependent employees, including students. Ten years ago, it was 20.6 percent. That hasn’t changed that dramatically.
Schneider: That’s still about 12 percent more …
Clever: Yes, but for these 12 percent, their unemployment previously meant an unchangeable fate. And it’s also true that half of them are no longer working in the low-wage sector after a year. That’s no walk in the park, but starting out is also an opportunity for advancement.
Schneider: First of all, people in the low-wage sector don’t earn 9.15 euros an hour, but 6.60 euros on average. The trend is downward: a few years ago, it was still 7 euros. But the problem isn’t just the money, it’s also the message contained in these 6.60 euros: your work is worth nothing. In addition, we are exploiting our social systems and are rapidly heading toward poverty in old age. (text end)
Important remark on my part; the figures mentioned by the two interlocutors always miss the reality a bit. Mine, which you could read above, if you have read through to here below, are the better ones.
Dr. Angela Merkel came after G. Schröder, 2005 Merkel
And these are the new-old (SPD,FDP, Greens, and the first Turkish minister in the federal government, Cem Özdmir, The Greens. 1 line, second from left