this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
42 points (90.4% liked)

Europe

11231 readers
918 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

According to a report from German media group RND, federal Health Minister Nina Warken has prepared a draft bill that would have adults without children pay a higher percentage of taxes towards publicly-funded elder care.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] fisch@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (4 children)

But why so complicated? Why not have everybody pay the same (percentage) for elder care and reward parents with more child support (Kindergeld)? Rewards are an easier sell politically than penalties. That would be way less controversial.

[โ€“] Raylon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I'd wager this is because more Kindergeld would increase spending - which means either more debt or an increase in taxes somewhere else, and with the current government that's not possible.

And considering the CDU probably has more parents than childless people as voters, i guess that's a demographic they can afford to offend?

Then again, maybe searching for logic in this trainwreck of a government is our mistake to begin with.

This would definitely be better. It'll avoid some scenarios I wrote about in my other comment

[โ€“] Pamasich@kbin.earth 1 points 1 day ago

Probably because even with your solution, there would still be a need to increase the amount everyone has to pay. That's still a hard sell.

By only making some people pay more, you're actually making it an easier sell because that limits the amount of people that will be upset because they personally will be affected. Those that aren't affected can be convinced with arguments.

[โ€“] Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That could also work but then we still have to increase the elder care tax as a whole. In the end the result is the same. Childless people pay more effective tax (taxes - benefits) than parents.

[โ€“] Pman@lemmy.org 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Yes on a financial level it may come out the same, as fisch said but they also said it is less politically toxic to give child benefits than to punish a group in particular for either deciding not to have children or not being able to.