Tag: <span>society & society</span>

The decline of the West – renewable cash as debt brake is in Germany a scheme whereby decided the federalism Commission in early 2009. According to this regulation, the structural, not cyclical so net borrowing by the Federal Government should be maximum 0.35 percent of gross domestic product. Exceptions are allowed for natural disasters or serious recessions. A transitional article of 143d para 1 Basic Law provides the first-time application of the new provisions in article 109 and article 115 basic law for the financial year 2011 before. Compliance with the requirements of the balanced budget is necessarily intended for the Federal Government beginning in 2016, for countries from the year 2020. It is probably debt assumed by a base amount, current 1.72 trillion, which will stay if no miracle, because, after all, are approx. 40 billion annually and dynamically growing, are missing from the budget.

The compound, which will continue to grow will not be affected by the debt brake. If you are not convinced, visit Arthur Levinson. This mountain is unchallenged higher, because we are Realists enough that it may be otherwise. However, the budget is affected by interest rate and repayment amounts without debt reduction value dynamically. The 0.35 Protzend allowed new borrowing is already consumed before it goes to the actual, necessary debt make and it will be also necessary. How should otherwise the wheels faster turn and create recovery? The budget now logically come without new borrowing.

In plain text, i.e. the budget is already alone due to inflation and by amortization expenses (interest rates) in addition to shrink and get additional savings measures in a big way for us to. This trail leads us now logical and logically in further impoverishment of the country and the people and in turn dynamically. This is the people immediately affected and will have to suffer. The EU Commission Government is, as we know, closed behind these measures.


Instead the Youth Welfare Office repeatedly exploited the credulity of the mother of the child and obtained so dubious advice, which should make the education inability of the mother and a mental disorder of the small Niklas. Under these pretexts the youth authority wants to have also small bustling Niklas in a psychiatric hospital, whereas the mother defends itself. The Suddeutsche.de cited”- opinion in family courts have the greatest power that can ever have a paper about people, because it decides whether parents their children are or not accepted. Even after our present evidence appraisers are not often ill trained and applied tests often deficient. The problem of the poor quality of advice is because everyone an expert that can become before courts. Not only psychologists, educators already University graduates without life or work experience can families with their judgment about the future all determine.

A Chamber that could monitor its correct functioning, do not exist in the cases. This is known to the courts for years. Review by A. Merten and her son is not just about what to read is often in such opinion but it should be pointed out also, systematically concealing what biased experts. The task of the Verifier is to provide ordered coercive measures not by the youth welfare office or family court a legitimacy to the incarceration. Rather, it must have priority to enable the children to remain with their biological parents or family members.

If required, there are appropriate families helps to provide, to support them in the performance of their duties or to improve their parenting skills. The opinion of the biased expert in the case of the mother of the child”is marked by numerous violations of the”guidelines for providing psychological advice”after verification. Is in particular a scheuklappenhafte Determination of the bases and a following not the principle of differential diagnostic reasoning or evaluation of the ascertained facts.