What is sold as a special fund is in fact nothing more than a linguistically embellished shift of debt to an area that seems politically more comfortable. The term is intended to suggest seriousness and earmarking, but little is left of it on closer inspection. Instead of honest housekeeping, a construction is created that avoids transparency and responsibilityblurred. It is a political instrument designed to refute criticism before it is even formulated and at the same time to create the impression of the ability to act where actually only concealment is done.
The Facade of the Special Asset
The alleged structural aids for regions such as Lusatia are announced in big words, but reality shows a different picture. Instead of sustainable economic development, short-term projects without a sustainable basis are created. The funds flow into measures that appear politically opportune, but rarely offer a long-term perspective. The impression arises thathere a region is less to be strengthened and rather maintained a political narrative that speaks of progress without actually delivering it.
temporary jobs
It is repeatedly claimed that these measures will create new jobs. In fact, these are often artificially created places that only exist as long as money flows from state pots. Once these funds dry up, the jobs will disappear again. A real economic dynamic does not arise in this way. There is a lack of sustainable conceptsentrepreneurial initiative and an environment that enables long-term investments. Instead, a dependency is created that nips any independent development in the germ.
Ideology instead of concept
A significant part of this policy is supported by ideological ideas that have little to do with economic reality. Projects are implemented because they are politically desired, not because they are meaningful or necessary. It is assumed that resources are used inefficiently and opportunities are lost that could actually lead to growth. theReason for state serves as an excuse to legitimize decisions that would hardly withstand a sober test.
The silent acceptance of the system
The lack of consistency in dealing with this practice is particularly problematic. Although the misappropriation of funds seems obvious, there is no serious legal reappraisal. The reasons are obvious: Who is part of the system has little interest in questioning it. Career considerations and institutional dependencies ensure that criticism is rarely oversymbolic gestures. This creates a cycle of self-affirmation in which undesirable developments are not corrected, but continued.
An expensive spectacle without a future
In the end, a system that moves a lot of money, but has little effect, remains. The big promises are in stark contrast to the actual results. Instead of sustainable development, there are short-term effects, instead of real innovation, just managing standstills. The costs are all borne, while the benefit remains limited in a few and, above all, in the short term. It’s aPolitical spectacle that is increasingly losing credibility the longer it lasts.
Screenshot youtube.com
