Reader’s opinion|If the discussion takes place before the debt, we end up compromising on things that we really wouldn’t be willing to compromise on.
About the elections the other always seems to have a theme that everyone in the chorus opposes – quite often, after the elections, exactly what was opposed is implemented. Before the parliamentary elections, there was talk of ending living in debt, but now the government is taking on new debt at least at the previous pace. In the previous parliamentary elections, a clear majority of the parties were against joining NATO, but only then did the elected parliament take us to NATO almost unanimously. The Greek aid package was opposed until it was approved after the elections. Education cuts, which are always promised not to be done, but after the elections are implemented anyway, have their own chapter.
Now joint debt seems to be one of the top themes of the current EU elections – something that the currently elected commission does not even decide on. I think it’s obvious that we end up with a joint debt, because the debt makes things possible that wouldn’t be possible without the debt.
For example, in a private household, a car is often bought with debt, because the financing of the car purchase is not really possible otherwise, and the immediate need for a car is perceived as great. We have many important unsolved problems on which the EU, for its size, can have a big impact. The problem is that decisions about funding, among other things, get stuck. Joint debt is a way to get around this problem, so that the necessary solutions can be made here and now. Joint debt is talked about as if it were some separate ideological choice. It is not. It is a consequence of other decisions. A decision not to take on debt is a decision not to solve problems caused by other decisions for which debt would be the only solution.
Indebted is often countered by saying that the debt is a burden on future generations. True in itself, but at least equally burdensome are the low level of education, a degraded living environment, an unstable security situation and dilapidated infrastructure. Debt is ultimately a tolerable problem if the living conditions are otherwise in order. The European standard of living is high because money is spent here on things that improve the standard of living.
Debt discussion is also important in itself, but first we should discuss what kind of society we are aiming for. Once the goals have been set, you can think about how to finance them. If the discussion takes place before the debt, we end up compromising on things that we really wouldn’t be willing to compromise on. It is also important to remember that along with new expenses, it is also possible to agree on new sources of income.
Niklas Koppatz
Helsinki
The reader’s opinions are speeches written by HS readers, which are selected and delivered by the HS editors. You can leave an opinion piece or familiarize yourself with the principles of writing at the address www.hs.fi/kiryotamielipidekeisuis/.
#Readers #Opinion #Debt #necessarily #biggest #burden #society
