The argument made here relies on several factors that aren’t fixed. The speed and reliability of technological innovation, that isnt able to remain just iterative (the person in the video is talking about it as if it were fixed, or iterative).. The argument that peoples cultures and housing needs can be made more flexible. The argument, that moving people into rural areas where housing is less in demand to some extend also is good for the environment (urbanization usually is keeping energy usage low). And the argument that creating those shifts creates “economic opportunity for everyone” (who cant in principle rely on (non iterative) technological advancement), and not just early investors (with larger bundles of cash in the game).
So to craft a coherent picture out of this - one more aspect is added. “Work will be scarce in the future.” So higher minimal wages are paramount.
Not in my generation.
This is how you downplay a lost generation as part of a bigger picture.
Dont worry, you could always drive people into selling others cheaper forms of housing, or consumption reduction - thats what my generation is getting paid for. Thats what journalism partly is getting payed for (creation of that part of journalism to become a daily segment, while the economic development in those sectors isn’t that advanced yet - maybe, because comparatively journalism always is and was easy to finance).
So I’ll end with the ARTE concept of, europe could be such a nice and cosy place, with consumption reduction, cheap housing, when Boomers are gone (still, thats also not just plain sailing…), and maybe in a generation or two, the free energy infrastructure we are building up will be enough to establish base growth again.
edit2: Chomsky vor zwei Wochen - This is the most dangerous crisis in the world currently, and also the most easy to be settled. (If Minks 2 were implemented.) *seufz*
MOSCOW (AP) — The White House on Tuesday began referring to Russian troop deployments in eastern Ukraine as an “invasion” after initially hesitating to use the term — a red line that President Joe Biden has said would result in the U.S. levying severe sanctions against Moscow.
Several European leaders said earlier in the day that Russian troops have moved into rebel-held areas in eastern Ukraine after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recognized their independence — but some indicated it was not yet the long-feared, full-fledged invasion.
Later, the White House signaled a shift in its own position.
“We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia’s latest invasion into Ukraine,” said Jon Finer, principal deputy national security adviser. “An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway.”
The White House decided to begin referring to Russia’s actions as an “invasion” because of the situation on the ground, according to a U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
The administration resisted initially calling the deployment of troops because the White House wanted to see what Russia was actually going to do. After assessing Russian troop movements, it became clear it was a new invasion, the official added.
edit: Nato: Maybe not an invasion. Combat formations of russian forces on satellite images. Last night more troops moved into the Donbas region. “Yet - it is never too late not to attack”. “Russia has already invaded Ukraine - back in 2014.”.
Also Nato: Already an invasion, because additional russian toops have moved into the Donbas, where they already had been in a covert capacity, but now new contingents were moved there. [Troops did not have military insignias.]
edit2:
Putin fordert Neutralität und Demilitarisierung der Ukraine
Kreml-Chef Wladimir Putin gibt gerade eine Pressekonferenz. Er fordert darin die Neutralität der Ukraine und die Demilitarisierung des Landes.
edit3: Nina Khrushcheva on the decisionmaking surrounding the current situation: click
edit4:
EU-Kommissionspräsidentin Ursula von der Leyen wird auf CNN dazu befragt, warum sie explizit von keiner militärischen Invasion Russlands spricht. Sie bezeichnet Moskaus Vorgehen als “ernsthaften Bruch von internationalem Recht”. Die Gebiete würden schon seit fast acht Jahren besetzt werden, Bewegung russischer Truppen sehe man derzeit “nur” dort. Man beobachte Wladimir Putin und seine Handlungen aber genau, sagt von der Leyen - ein zweites Sanktionspaket stehe schon bereit und wäre “ein enormer Schlag gegen Russland”.
edit5: Biden has reiterated that an invasion took place, announced further financial sanctions, restated that they would help to uphold energy security in coordination with their partners, and that that they would stand and act united with western allies.
Russia denied that they are currently sending in troops -
Moscow: Russia is not planning to send troops to eastern Ukraine “for now” but will do so in case of a “threat”, a foreign ministry official said Tuesday after Moscow’s parliament ratified cooperation deals with Ukraine’s separatist republics.
Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Rudenko said the treaties include the provision of “military aid” but added that “speculation” on troop deployments should be avoided.
“For now, no one is planning to send anything anywhere. If there is a threat, then we will provide assistance in accordance with the ratified treaties.”
Scholz being in line with the US stance, as stressed in that article, still did disregard the difference between what constitutes a red line. Not reported for over a month, if you followed US friendly news sources.
Scholz:
We are ready to take together with our allies all necessary steps. And we have a very clear agreement with the United States government on gas transit and energy sovereignty in Europe. We already also agreed that we will support Ukraine, that we will fight for the gas transit via Ukraine intensely and that we will be very strong if this gas transit would be endangered. Also, it is absolutely clear that in a situation like this all options are on the table. Please understand that I will not get into any specifics, but our answer will be united and decisive.
Correction: Now that difference stopped mattering, with the official german line being, that Germany has to rethink energy security in the european context, and reevaluate based on that.
Russia has assured all conflict partners, that gas deliveries will continue.
src: click
The ECFRs notion that Hungary remained fairly close to the official EU line on sanctions seems to hold true.
Nina Khrushchevas position that Putin could have played into chinas hands by becoming economically dependent on their gas purchases as well as their economic know how on energy extraction projects in Siberia relies on the notion that Putin (himself 🙂 ) made a miscalculation in seeing russia as an equal partner in their venture from decoupling from the west, seems oddly reliant on russia not having been able to interpret signs of public distancing during the ceremonies at the olympic games - and the idea, that an economic decoupling would be the goal here, first and foremost.
Especially, as the european commission is reportedly pressuring for very strong sanctions at the moment, which is almost the anti-thesis to this argument (or fitting the argument, if you see it as a viable pressure point that would change the situation entirely - which is less likely).
Sanktionen der EU-Kommission gehen weiter als erwartet
Die EU-Kommission hat nach Informationen der Deutschen Presse-Agentur unerwartet weitreichende Sanktionen gegen Russland vorgeschlagen. Ein am Dienstag den Mitgliedstaaten präsentierter Entwurf sieht Angaben von Diplomaten zufolge vor, den Handel mit russischen Staatsanleihen zu verbieten, um eine Refinanzierung des russischen Staats zu erschweren. Zudem sollen hunderte Personen und Unternehmen auf die EU-Sanktionsliste kommen.
[…]
Das volle Arsenal der Sanktionsmöglichkeiten wird noch nicht genutzt. Sanktionen gegen den russischen Energiesektor und Ausfuhrverbote für Hightech-Technologie sind für den Fall vorbereitet worden, dass Russland einen Angriff auf die ganze Ukraine startet. Auch Putin wird voraussichtlich noch nicht auf die EU-Sanktionsliste kommen.
Beschlossen werden müssen alle Sanktionen letztlich vom EU-Ministerrat [The first meeting will take place today at 16:00 MEZ.].
Scholzs announcement to freeze progress on Nordstream 2 certification, coupled with the statement that Germany needs to reevaluate their position doesnt seem like Germany is following the proposal of the EU commission in its fullest extent just yet.
edit: Wrong on that one - EU sanctions are in place now, to exactly that extent:
Die EU stehe geschlossen und sei vorbereitet zügig zu handeln, so EU-Kommissionspräsidentin Ursula von der Leyen nach Bekanntgabe eines EU-Sanktionspakets gegen Russland. Die russische Vorgehensweise sei inakzeptable, Russland verstoße gegen Völkerrecht. Moskau habe diese Krise mutwillig ausgelöst und sei für die Eskalation verantwortlich. Die EU-Staaten hätten nun ihr grünes Licht gegeben für Sanktionen gegeben, Vorbild seien die Sanktionen gegen Russland von 2014 nach der Annexion der Krim. Es gehe darum jene zu treffen, die das russische Militär unterstützen und somit die Vorgehensweise in der Ostukraine. Und auch de Zugang Russlands zu internationalen Finanzmärkten zu beschneiden. Von der Leyen begrüßt zudem die Entscheidung Deutschlands, die Pipeline Nord Stream 2 auf Eis zu legen. Es gelte in Europe in Sachen Energieversorgung unabhängiger zu werden, nicht zuletzt mithilfe der Erneuerbaren Energien. Man sei bereit, weitere Maßnahmen zu setzten, sollte die Lage weiter eskalieren, so Von der Leyen.
edit2: According to an Interview with Reinhard Bütikofer, the decision was not as unanimous as previously indicated, but with Germany firmly on the side of imposing the preannounced sanctions to their fullest extent.
The entire piece of reporting is worth to be watched:
Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies um die Nutzungserfahrung für seine Besucher zu verbessern. Bitte informiere dich bei Gelegenheit darüber wie sich Cookies auf deine Privatsphäre im Web auswirken.
