Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured ARD Krimi SPD Köln Directivos

Not a penny for ineffective Stalinists

Shortly before his death, King Frederick II, known as “the Great” or “of Prussia”, ordered that the farmers who are assigned there must all own their goods because they should not be slaves, and I assume that both Designations are no longer considered desirable in Berlin when traffic lights are dominated by green.

- 23 reads.

Not a penny for ineffective Stalinists

Shortly before his death, King Frederick II, known as “the Great” or “of Prussia”, ordered that the farmers who are assigned there must all own their goods because they should not be slaves, and I assume that both Designations are no longer considered desirable in Berlin when traffic lights are dominated by green. But more than 150 years before the Basic Law's property guarantee, the absolutist ruler concluded that his subjects should own property because it would promote their independence. Another 74 years of Federal Republic and a fortunately defunct GDR later, the realization should have prevailed that this idea was wise. That is why it was thought in 1989 that the SED no longer had to be banned separately or that 10,000 of its state criminal bigwigs should be given the choice of whether they would rather work in coal mines or uranium mines for general instruction and joy for the rest of their days: Communism was over . As a result of this omission, SED members and their descendants now have the opportunity to have a say in high inheritance taxes that make the owner feel like a bit of a slave after all, over whose property the state can decide.

This desire for what is commonly known as inheritance snooping is based on the ongoing issue of social inequality in Germany, which is addressed at every opportunity. As if it could ever be fixed! In the years of my work I have become quite aware that not everyone will live in better locations. But before I started this blog, I talked everyone, who mostly didn't want to hear it, into buying real estate, which was very cheap at the time. Of course, in my politeness, I can also understand why people don't do that: my apartment in Berlin, in which I hosted some of today's pioneers of higher inheritance taxes until 2005, cost just 230 euros cold rent with its 80 m². Those were the legendary good times when half the city was empty. Of course, this tempts others not to commit themselves and prefer to continue renting and to make it clear to the owner how lucky he is to be able to find tenants for his shack at all. This left a lasting mark on many people, not in their favour, but that's how they feel. Anyone who bought back then was considered a capitalist exotic, and because I, as the most polite person in the world, treated others to their contempt for my theses about acquisition, I now allow myself a few square meters more living space in a few apartments more than the average. Even if one is scolded for it by politicians, SED central organs and activists.

There were prime opportunities from 2005 to about 2014, 2015: interest rates were low, there were still grossly underdeveloped and overlooked regions, and there was a general belief that Germany was going to shrink. Anyone who bought during this time window and perhaps took out a loan can only be amused by the high inflation. Of course I don't have 1 square millimeter more terrace at Tegernsee than in 2008, and that's why I don't care if the prices there have quintupled since then. If things had gone differently, houses would have lost their value, I wouldn't have complained about that any more than I did about the temporary drop in the market value of Daimler shares between 2007 and 2008. At the time, that was a bit more severe than the Tesla crash that year, but those are the general ones Risks in life that you take by making a decision on your own responsibility. There's no right to complain, either as a bad winner who envies others and would like more, or because of other life choices that didn't result in ownership. But it might have been for a moose pizza on a long-distance trip or owning an expensive Leica, and the market also has its alternatives for these fun-loving contemporaries.

One of the welcome changes of our era is that the residents of such minimum-needs containers are no longer referred to with words like "Barackler" or "Trailertrash", but rather their flexibility and adaptation to modern lifestyle requirements is praised. It fits perfectly into a time when people no longer go bankrupt, but no longer sell anything, are not impoverished, but recognize the limits of growth, and do not freeze and stink, but make a responsible contribution in times of climate crisis and energy shortages. Everywhere people are being prepared for less affluent times, be it posts about comfort in the Middle Ages or the idea that the ideology of Marxism could provide answers to the problems of the present - this is quite justified in view of the desire for distinction of these less washed stink nation. The socially disadvantaged of the academic classes not only like to look down on firecracker buyers to secure their morally superior status without a daily shower. They are also prone to social models that advocate misery, for which the barracks existence... sorry, I'll start again, for which the minimum-needs containers look good.

In this respect, I think that this view of one's own social backwardness and the demand for inheritance taxes against others, which is widespread in the media, is not necessarily perceived as "envy". Once you have had to come to terms with the fact that there is no escape from the tenancy, at some point you will find it right and wish that everyone was like that. Of course that's not possible, the existence of the tenant means the landlord on the other hand: But that's exactly what becomes the object of hate, and in recent years the level of aggressiveness has become a little unpleasant. In fact, the traffic light with the inheritance tax now fulfills an urgent wish of this clientele, because it is difficult to inherit rented properties without plundering them. Look, the house that my parents bought in 1972 had a market value of DM 19,200 at the time, and the allowance for me as a child was DM 70,000. In Willy Brandt's day, with a little design, a parent could own three and a half houses only child can pass on. From January 1st, 2023 – we just had this calculated – this house would be valued at over 650,000 euros because of the relatively large property alone. In the worst-case scenario, an only child would have to pay taxes on 250,000 euros after a tax exemption of 400,000 euros. In addition, there are taxes on the assets that parents with such a house always have to have on the high edge. In 50 years, tax-free inheritance has dropped from three and a half tax-free homes to 61 percent of a home.

And that's just one house. It may hurt some equality fanatics, but in the classic case in my private life, in addition to the parents' additional villa, there is often also the grandparents' house, and if the grandparents were stubborn and didn't move from the old town, this old house is still there too slightly larger, with 50 rooms, servants' quarters and some existing tenants. Such combinations have meant that not only am I writing another article on this last night of the year, but also that one or the other notary has certified in the moonlight what this stuff is made of: The redefinition of the inheritance tax has brought record sales to the industry in the last two months brought, and it is said that it will take months until the land registries have processed the transfers. The collective circumnavigation of the planned robbery will cause scandalous reports in 2023 that the number of millionaires in Germany has skyrocketed. In reality, when ownership is recalculated and distributed more widely, no one has more. It just looks different in the statistics, and the one million mark is very easy to reach with houses in Bavaria. Because you don't sell when you're a good kid, you don't have the liquid assets, just land, which a committee of experts evaluates in this way and that. But as long as politicians claim that we have space that we certainly don't have, and allow the number of people living here to swell and at the same time fail like traffic lights when it comes to new construction: the theoretical assessments will inevitably increase. The one constant in this self-reinforcing crisis is that those who have nothing will continue to have nothing. Except soon even less living space, of course.

An employee in the Reichstag who was employed by the Left Party at the expense of the taxpayer described the inheritance with the word "Spermalotto", which, conversely, means that others are "losers in the sperm lottery" - and that one can also say it like that, after all it doesn't originate by a supporter of capital or upper classes who like to be silenced, but as a self-description of established champions of the right side. But beyond the widespread satisfaction of having quickly eluded the state before January 1st, the prospects for the future are somewhat bleak: Those who build, save and renovate, and those who provide housing will be disadvantaged and released for taxation. But those who go to the drug park, exchange their assets for hashish there and plan their vacations according to their sexual preferences, are completely tax-free and hardly see themselves as the object of state intervention. The state used to think it had to fight drug addiction and help people get property. Back then you could buy model railways for the next generation and build all the pretty half-timbered houses from Vollmer for Christmas in order to prepare them in a playful way. Today you have to tell the children that the state and the media are of the opinion that with a house you also have an obligation to pay others. So why not rent now? Not only does it save you personal risk and repairs, it also keeps you out of the crosshairs of government campaigns.

Germany has a consistently low ownership rate of less than 50 percent, and the promising times of the last 20 years have not changed that. Poor people don't own homes, and those who don't own homes are often poor - and higher taxes on homes, which will drive some to sell, tend to reinforce this trend. All of this is happening because of a couple of hoped-for billions in additional tax revenue, which experience has shown is not being used to increase the wealth of broader sections of society. What I absolutely do not understand, given all the statements that speak in favor of an immensely high inheritance tax: the people who announce this are clearly not doing well financially. Unless they are apparatchiks of the governing parties, they are not privileged. They are the losers in the sperm lottery who have already been left alone with their problems and worries. What leads them to believe that the state, or in this case, the federal states, would do something with the additional income that they would even begin to perceive as an improvement in their personal living conditions? After losing the sperm lottery, why do you think you're suddenly on the winning side with politicians? Politics is currently characterized by the fact that it cuts benefits, increases private hardships and ruins assets with inflation, and even sugarcoats it. What is on the mind of these gullible people? How self-destructive can you be?

Nothing against you personally, of course, and the ownership structure in the land register also guarantees a fairly secure spatial separation. But my impression is that others who are less wealthy can happily reconcile themselves as long as their opponents are guaranteed to have a great deal less wealth. If others already win at the sperm lottery, they should at least lose at the political lottery as well. And it doesn't end with the issues of money, living space and rent: Even those who have no social or regional identity would gladly take it away from others who continue to cultivate their idiosyncrasies and whims. That's why you don't want an inscription on the city palace in Berlin. For this, anti-Semites are brought to Kassel and the universities in the form of the alleged Global South, who are destroying the earlier consensus with their “perspectives”. That's why streets and rooms are renamed and the churches are strengthened by painting the vulva, while local history associations are brought closer to the citizens of the Reich. It's about the grinding down of cultural bastions, and of course the home hearth and the family as the cell of prosperity are not excluded. Blended families with changing partners and self-realization through divorce do not go well with home ownership. That almost guarantees the downfall, but at least you can make sure that it won't be easy for the others either. The results are not socially fair because there will still be people who can eat with a knife and fork, appreciate china and read books. But the social evaluation of cultural achievements can certainly be leveled, like the level of the Abitur in Bremen and Berlin.

Against this background, the hassle of inheritance and the quick but not undignified transmission are merely a displacement of a conflict that has once again shown the importance of the sperm lotto and the decent upbringing of children. Our specifically German problem is that we don't have Putin as our neighbors, but entire factions of cultural washing machine dismantlers in the country, and unfortunately we failed in 1989 to really win the Cold War forever by powerfully breaking it up.

Such inferior opponents take revenge at the first opportunity, and it is probably no coincidence that Karl Marx has moved from the ideology of the “New Germany” to the cover of “Spiegel”. It's not just Marx's economic theory. It is also historical materialism with which this man and his descendants constructed a forced historical process with the aim of expropriating the enemies, throwing them into the gulag and enslaving them without property. You shouldn't have any illusions and not just be satisfied that you got to the notary just in time in 2022.

In 2023 the question is again who is sending whom where and I certainly don't intend to be made from losers in the sperm lottery to losers in the uranium mining lottery, or wherever they would spend one if they took power after the culture ended would have to. To you, dear readers, a Happy New Year and pleasant celebrations. See you in 2023 in old freshness and spolia of old cultures, and don't let the throwing of incendiary devices gall you tonight. They may. Others will do it all next year and not long wonder if society as we know it wants to be burned down.

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.