sucius

joined 2 years ago
[–] sucius@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It looks fucking weak and pathetic and the UE should have stood its ground, but apparently it's the same as with the Japan deal. The investments are just smoke, no money allocated, no dates, etc. Just an empty gesture to appease MAGAts Still, pathetic and VdL should be sacked.

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Indian is not a language

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

Ah alright. Got you

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yes, more than 25% are not Jewish

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago (11 children)

It says Israeli, no religion was mentioned.

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The hypocrisy of the Netherlands talking about fiscal resposability while having siphoned off the taxes from most of the continent is something else

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Read the agreement. It wasn't mandatory

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Income tax is one thing, social security is another and the taxes your employer pays as business are another. You're just conflating them all. Some countries have lower social security contributions but have no universal health insurance or you just have to pay out of pocket or it's tied to your work, etc. It's not apples to apples

 

From the EU capital, the president claims that Spain is a country that is "solidary" with NATO, but also "sovereign."

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Taxes I agree. They are proportionately larger than in most of the EU, and services worse.

They are actually below average

https://www.euronews.com/business/2025/05/16/personal-average-tax-rates-in-europe-which-countries-saw-the-biggest-rise-in-2024

Services, I guess that's more a matter of opinion, but having lived in Germany, UK and the US, I think they're OK

[–] sucius@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Nobody knows, the new agreement hasn't been published yet (or at least I can't find it on the NATO website). What's on the NATO website is the previous one and the wording is intentionally very vague, as usual in these kinds of treaties so that everyone can keep doing their thing:

Allies whose current proportion of GDP spent on defence is below this level will:

  • aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO's capability shortfalls. (emphasis mine)
[–] sucius@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (5 children)

mandatory to spend 2%,

It wasn't mandatory

 
President Donald Trump criticized Spain for not agreeing to new defense spending targets adopted by NATO and suggested the country could face tariffs twice as high from the US.
Trump stated that the US is negotiating a trade deal with Spain and threatened to make them pay twice as much, which caused Spain's benchmark stock index to extend its losses.
Spanish officials dismissed Trump's tariff threat, emphasizing that the European Commission handles trade matters for the EU and that individual member states don't negotiate trade deals on their own.
 

‘Nato’s going to become very strong with us,’ says US president, as secretary general calls him ‘daddy’

view more: next ›