> Because without the union, you would still take at least 6 hours drive from Porto to Evora, using national roads, preferably during the night unless you wanted to cook between 30 and 40 degrees celsius as I did so many times during may childhood in late 70's, early 80's, instead of the cosy 4h something from taking the motorway.
Is this supposed to be an argument? Yes it's fun to buy nice things. I'm aware of that. Especially with other people's money and work.
> That debt is what allowed many of the infrastructure that is now in place.
And Gen X is the major part of the people paying for it about now.
> even thought most Boomers and Gen Xers across Europe, should know better how living under dictatorships feels like.
Obviously they think it feels better than having the government spend less, which is of course the deal you handed them with: you got to have the government spend more on you and your generation, by promising it would spend less on them and their generation, while taxing them more. Your generation promised that, on their behalf.
They weren't born yet, or at least not politically active, to complain about it.
So why should they, why would they, accept less than you got? Your generation promised their work, and then spent all the money.
Can they do the same to your generation perhaps? Take a similar amount of money back, which would roughly equate to cutting elderly pensions to zero for 30 years or so, well, until the debt is paid off. That would make it be more like if your generation spent it's own money.
Is this supposed to be an argument? Yes it's fun to buy nice things. I'm aware of that. Especially with other people's money and work.
> That debt is what allowed many of the infrastructure that is now in place.
And Gen X is the major part of the people paying for it about now.
> even thought most Boomers and Gen Xers across Europe, should know better how living under dictatorships feels like.
Obviously they think it feels better than having the government spend less, which is of course the deal you handed them with: you got to have the government spend more on you and your generation, by promising it would spend less on them and their generation, while taxing them more. Your generation promised that, on their behalf.
They weren't born yet, or at least not politically active, to complain about it.
So why should they, why would they, accept less than you got? Your generation promised their work, and then spent all the money.
Can they do the same to your generation perhaps? Take a similar amount of money back, which would roughly equate to cutting elderly pensions to zero for 30 years or so, well, until the debt is paid off. That would make it be more like if your generation spent it's own money.