… on May 29, the German city of Aachen plans to honor von der Leyen with the prestigious Karlspreis award, partly for the “impetus she has given to the Green Deal”. The timing could not be more ironic: she’s now dismantling one of the Green Deal’s most meaningful achievements.

Yes these companies are losing money, but they have to pay money to the state also when they are not making money. I agree the angle of buying stuff from Russia equals supporting them is bs, but the Russian state does receive money from eu (for which eu gets gas and oil in return) that they can spend on waging war on Ukraine.

Good find, the data isn’t very trustworthy as it comes from different studies each done on a national level. Also, oldest study is from 1991 (!) and newest is from 2004. Would be interesting to see how it compares to current day data, I guess in some countries a lot more changes happened than others.

Does azaz mean something?

“… is expected to rise …”

To me as a non-native speaker “is seen to rise” is quite confusing. Because nothing has been seen yet. But ok.

$1 250 000 000 000. Damn

When acquiring a new laptop you often end up dealing with an imposed pre-installed Microsoft Windows operating system. Even if you do not want to use it, you still need to pay for the Windows license. This is unfair. The Refund4Freedom initiative guides users in how to get their money back in these cases and demands the end of this practice that limits user freedom.

…

Refund4Freedom is one of a broader set of activities promoting end-users’ rights. For instance, the End of 10 campaign encourages users to keep using their current hardware by switching to Free Software operating systems. This offers an alternative to buying a new device when support for Windows 10 ends on 14 October 2025. By demanding refunds for unwanted pre-installed software, Refund4Freedom supports this transition and helps users avoid unnecessary costs while encouraging device neutrality and user-controlled choices

Very extensive overview, impressive

As a non-native speaker I had to think a moment before I understood the headline, because it’s so utterly bonkers I wondered if I missed a double meaning or something lol

I totally agree with you, but that is often not how reality works. For example Norway when they found oil they put (most of) the income from that in a fund and now only use the interest they earn so it is like an infinite source of income. The Netherlands on the other hand invested their money in infrastructure, social subsidies and other stuff that was useful to the people alive when the money was flowing. Now I don’t want to say one of those choices was the better choice, because that is actually not my point. Because either you save up money when the population is growing (meaning people in that time frame have less benefits), or you spend your money and you have a deficit later on. In either case a group ‘misses out’. The same here, because the population is getting older and less people remain to pay the bill, the working people have less money left. In a perfect scenario when this money was saved up earlier, that money wouldn’t have been spent before. Either way, and I agree the society should take care of it self by organising an economy that benefits the society, you end up in a situation were the expenses have to be paid. The right argument is on whether it is worth spending the money (which I think it is), but the argument made is that it only is a problem for capitalists /in a capitalist society and that is just not true. Also communists or for example hunter gatherer societies would face the problem of increased costs of supporting a part of the population that is to sick and old do work.

Sorry long ramble, but it being true that it’s not a problem when you zoom out enough doesn’t mean it’s true that it’s not a problem for the individuals alive during that time frame.

True, but his pressure was very hard and that is not the only way to put pressure on someone. I don’t think any country should go about it like ‘we will make them do what we want because we are big and powerful’ but I think in this it would be fair to say ‘these are our interests and if you harm them it will make us less willing to do things that are in your interest’.

Don’t know, maybe nowhere.

Running*

Indeed

What dependency on Russia am I missing here?

K

What a nice hat you got there

Demand it with more authority.

You forgot the most frequently asked question:

Can you downvote this comment more than once?

No.

By feeders, medicine dealers, porn producers, bankers, marketeers, casinos, politicians, pyramid schemers, lizard people,