Letter To The Church About Wedding

Arrividerci Cavaliere!

An obituary of Silvio Berlusconi
Rome the day after, it's Tuesday the 11th April. Italy has voted and the result is still not set so well. Time, the government led by Silvio Berlusconi, head of the "Casa delle Libertà" in the House of Representatives, the majority, a time she is the leader of the opposition alliance "Olive Tree" of his challenger, Romano Prodi. In the second chamber, the Senate, there is also confusion about the result. In the course of the day are signs an election victory for the opposition to Prodi. This is explained hastily to the election winner, is hardly the result rather well known. Luxembourg and Paris can not wait to congratulate the winner, there will not be all put to the President of EU Commission President Barroso.
The greatest joy is probably about that now at last one of "their" rules, Italy has finally "left", that's the main thing. "Law" are among the major industrial nations now only the evil U.S., Australia and recently Canada, the former are in Germany (Europe) already long hate object number one, the latter two are in Europe perceived politically difficult. Thus, the major industrial economies Europe again in the same direction politically, Spain, social democratic, Britain is social democratic, conservative France and Germany is somehow both, but the so-called conservatives in Germany and France are only Social Democrats, they bear a different name. And now belongs to Italy, the last major country up to its circle, "right" are now only the bad people in Vienna, Copenhagen and The Hague, but they are so, except Austria, according to European (ie germanofränkischem) understanding anyway just subdivisions of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
When at last is sure that the opposition won the elections even if just, will begin a play, not as we know from Western Europe. Prime Minister Berlusconi says he will not accept the result of choice and insist on recount some votes. It is arguably the last great appearance of a man with the little Italy and Europe even knew what to do.
Who is that Silvio Berlusconi, on his departure from office of the European governments would probably not be particularly sad?
Berlusconi was Italy's prime minister from 1994 already. The 1996 elections he lost, at that time was Prime Minister Romano Prodi, but in 2001 returned Berlusconi, with a majority that has been achieved in the Italian Parliament than ever before. Despite numerous government scandals, many internal conflicts and Berlusconi was able to date continue to govern unchallenged, with a term of 5 years in a row, he is even the longest continuously reigning head of government in the history of the country.
Berlusconi is not a typical politician, the son of a bank employee made a career that can only a few. So he built in the seventies, two satellite towns in his native Milan, then forward-looking projects. For these settlements he established a private TV channel since 1976 from its nationwide media empire grew, he now owns three television channels, with a market share of 45%, also newspaper and magazine stores. His skillful influence over the government removed legal obstacles to building Craxi his company. For its advertising agency Publitalia he forged in 1993, his party Forza Italia. As this then a year later won the election, Europe was shocked. A populist who also is a right, a media mogul, was prime minister of a European industrial country that had everything his European colleagues well accepted yet, but the worst that this man was an entrepreneur. He distinguished himself throughout his career significantly from all others, he learned not from the start in politics. In contrast to all French and most German politicians had this man of practical experience, he knew how to make a company successful, does not he know how to get through the instances of a party boxing. It was difficult to accept most of his colleagues, he was simply none of their own. So relieved they were in fact of his sudden and early political end.
Berlusconi had so ruled, as you would possibly expect from a political thriller. From the first day, he began the system is open for himself and his company to take advantage of the country's fate was of secondary importance. Berlusconi did what did all of his other colleagues, but he did not do it on the infamous Northern European style, but on a very open and direct way. He cut his laws according to their personal needs, he used his media power, as prime minister so he could now control the state media and favoring his company, himself and his friends. The other Europeans could not quite be, because Berlusconi led his people and the rest of Europe only imagine what politics really is and how it works. He caricatured the system in some way and that was the greatest fear of the Europeans. Italy was once more as backward, corrupt and politically immature known, but it took the future development of the democratic system can only anticipate. Berlusconi then disappeared when the demon finally, the relief was great to finally be able to leave Italy, Italy was finally back in Europe and no longer a banana republic. The new prime minister Prodi went on at once the darling of Europe, which later turned out to be an advantage.
Democracy is characterized by elections, Democrats are particularly proud of the fact that the elections allowed for a bloodless change of government and so it was 1996, also in Italy. The Prodi government lost the election and he was back again, Silvio Berlusconi. He, whom they considered long settled for could now govern with a large majority. And he did what he did best. He used the system open. He passed legislation that guaranteed him immunity, he legalized, how to cut it, determines types of tax evasion and he favored his media companies. Although there is no European Zugäbe politician ever, but they were probably all secretly jealous of Berlusconi's power and his perfidious system abuse. Besides himself and his company used the Berlusconi government is not particularly productive time, the political legacy of Berlusconi's poor. In memory probably remain only the nationwide smoking ban and some laws that protect politicians and entrepreneurs from justice. The fundamental problems solved Berlusconi of Italy, on the contrary. The national debt grew further as unemployment, economic growth was even after cheating at 0.1%. The economic balance sheet for Italy is more than thin. Italy, seventh-richest country in the world is, above all by a weak growth said the industry association Confindustria fears even expulsion from the G7 group. In the reign of Berlusconi's industrial production fell by 0.6%, Italy's share in world market halved since 1995, unit labor costs increased by 10%. The debt is 106% of GDP (excluding pensions Germany 68%). This is the conclusion of a country that five years was not governed practically, maybe this was the best that Italy could have happened at all. Italy (not Germany) is the country with the most laws, the difference with Germany is simply that it is the law only on paper, but (according to the Act and the [Un-] sense) hardly anybody holds, one last incredible advantage for Italy, against the law-abiding Germany.
The term of Berlusconi was mainly show. The now nearly seventy years, this was even on the day of the election can not, as his mother (95 years) to the polling station accompanied her. At times, Europe was all better informed about his plastic surgery and his heels, than about the actual work of government. But Italy is also here again just a little ahead. In the mass democratic politics will degenerate to the show, selected the entertaining, not boring, bread and circenis, but now that can afford any bread to dominate the games. The operation of the policy modern democracy degenerates to the entirely self-government circus. The greatest merit of this man is that he has shown Italy and the world how ridiculous the system of modern democracy. As head of government we have just all (fool's) freedom to favor himself and his friends, the power (not just the state-run media) is open to abuse for their own purposes. What we have so far been believed in Africa, achieved thanks to Silvio at the heart of Europe. Next generation of politicians should be grateful to him, grateful for this spill. In future, politicians use their power each direction open, they do not have to do this in secret. Berlusconi is at doing anything unethical or reprehensible, it is a very normal part of a democracy, it is used for personal gain. Berlusconi was in office as prime minister acted very pragmatic, he and his company better off everyone else in his situation would have done the same thing. Berlusconi made his European colleagues just before a mirror, how naive must one be to believe, a Democratic politician doing something for his country. This is the political ideal of parliamentary newcomers, the latest is buried at the end of the first legislature. Politicians remain people who belong to a class, at the expense of others (and often without their consent) to enrich. In this respect, Berlusconi has done just that, what everyone else is doing well. He has hurt his country, but also the reputation of the state, in particular democracy, at least for the latter, we should be grateful to him.

Gators Birthday Cake Designs For Guys

Neukölln ante portas

Why fail a state-led integration policy must

came after a desperate call for help from a Berlin primary school teachers about the integration of foreigners once more into the focus of the Germans (media) public. Now avenge a wrong operation of foreign policy for decades, a policy which was characterized mainly by an illusory and dishonest "multicultural" ideology. What everybody knew a long time, but nobody wanted to admit, was to write the teacher now, so to speak officially. Germany has a problem with the integration of many of its foreigners. A problem that has already long existed, but what for reasons of political correctness could not be spoken. A discussion of this has been the monopoly of political parties on so-called "right margin" and some provincials from the CSU. But now flare up suddenly politicians of all parties with ideas on how to be increasingly getting out of hand current situation back under control. How It is common for politicians find it now seems optimal solution to a problem that they have previously caused themselves and thus create new problems.
After the successful Degermanisierung make the German people by the Frankfurt School had to be sure, anyone who ever spoke to the issue of foreigners in the reactionary corner of the Company. The cowardice of the bourgeoisie and the ducking of the conservatives have done much to give the people of Frankfurt's monopoly on political opinion in the country. As a result of the influx of foreigners was only desirable. Initially, in the fifties, these have been regarded in the industry urgently needed as laborers and it was at first assumed that the "guest workers" to their retirement in their homes returned, but how naive are you have something like this accept? Was not predictable that these people here were propagated and then settle down? This first generation of guest workers who came mostly from Italy, Spain and Greece are still an asset to this country, they are usually well integrated and are also not a problem more difficult was the second wave of immigration. Unlike the first wave, which was still required by the industry, it was the second wave of economic refugees, mainly from poor and backward countries in the European periphery. These people were not necessarily needed as workers, it had become common knowledge that in the prosperous Germany of the 70s without Work could live well. Since this group of people usually only simple activities practiced, language skills were rather secondary. In Germany, even a certain simple tasks, sought and so many more people were allowed into the country. These flows also worked for a time quite well, but she had to fail at the latest at the time when these immigrants were the second wave to take over whole streets. In Berlin Kreuzberg Köln Mülheim remembered today or at best, the weather and the architecture of Germany. Have long since closed ghettos formed here, in which a member of the German cultural sphere no insight can have more. In Germany have developed over the years, parallel societies formed. What the policy did not admit, has long since become a reality. On the one hand, the increasing neglect district Harburg, Linden, and Lierenfeld Ostheim other hand, the retreats of the wealthier (German) population in Harvestehude, Kirchrode, Grafenberg and Degerloch. Who can afford to leave the quarters of the migrants, which in turn results in certain areas that they represent over 80% of the population. The constant leaving home the better-off segments of the population (even the better-off foreigners) leads to an increasing neglect of the city locations between center and Industrial areas, while increasing transfer recipients take account of the better public infrastructure in the cities, a sociological powder keg on which city planners have no answer. At the same time grows in the terrible satellite settlements of the 60's and 70's it was now Neuperlach, New Vahr or Chorweiler a marked lack of perspective by layer, which may participate in social life or no longer wants.
from states such as in Detroit or Paris, we in Germany are still far away, but this does not mean that this must remain for all time to come.
In every major German city has become district, which is not only a fully Turks have created their own infrastructure. There is no need to leave the district at all, let alone to learn the German language. That such people lies with the visit of a German school is a problem actually get to see. Without adequate language skills but no real education and no education, no job. The stated career goal of many foreign children in Berlin Neukölln, according to Spiegel "Hartz IV", why this should be in Offenbach or Ludwigshafen be different?
main cause of the whole problem is, as always, by the State. Only through the extensive benefits of the state, parts of the population possible, a life at the expense of other to lead. The social subsidies cause exactly the opposite of what is expected of politicians from them. Assistance is just no incentive to re-enter the workforce, unemployment in countries with no unemployment benefits (or with very short-term assistance such as in Denmark) is much lower than in Germany. A Rest helps social assistance. Social assistance enables people to lead a simple life (just in two ways). There is little incentive for the recipient to give up that status, why should he, when he has a guaranteed monthly income (the economic effect is like a minimum wage, but without doing anything). Thanks to the all-embracing State "care" grows on (urban) sub-proletariat. A layer of people without regular income from their own power, with low education and among foreigners with bad or not even existing language skills. Any immigration, the first place in the social budget takes place must, however, to fail doomed (although the true reasons such as political correctness does not want to). Most countries have immigration policies operate as required. This takes Canada for example, only people who can demonstrate a job in Canada and speak either English or French; necessary they reach a certain score as immigrants, The sector is also in the training and the school. In addition, there are questions of general education and the history of Canada. Such acceptance criteria are not only in Canada but also in many other countries of this world commonplace, not only in Germany. Recently, in Hesse, a test consisting of 100 questions presented, against which should prove to be an immigrant immigration worthy. These questions were not only ridiculous, but at the moment of publication to learn quite simple memory, the existence of this test would be to anybody a problem. If the state regulate the immigration already has, he should introduce a procedure similar to that of the conscientious objection, a moral test, written and spoken, against which it may have a statement about the language skills of immigrants are taken. Unfortunately, the "multi-cult" are ideologues still strong enough to prevent a sensible immigration policy. The aforementioned Canada is of them being seen as a prime example of a successful integration policy, which is probably due to the fact that they themselves were never in Canada, " multicultural works in Canada and do not need. If you look at even a city like Toronto closely, you will be able to find the fast. Every minority has its own district, is an interaction here is not just a juxtaposition. For the Chinese, there is China Town, this one is helpless with English in the rule, the Portuguese live in the "Rua Acores," the Italians in Litte Italy, and Greeks, Koreans and Poles have larger quarters on their own. The only parts of the population without their own districts are the English and the Germans, as well as most Japanese. This will take place from even a horizontal segregation, it keeps to itself and asks nothing from the other. If every minority has its own Viertal it comes naturally to less conflict, but the what is emerging here, one can not call it a successful integration. The advantage of Canada is simply that the country itself, in contrast to Europe, not a very long history and if it has no genuine population, it is just a country of immigrants, this can not get out of hand so massive conflicts, most recently in France. But Canada will have to deal because of the increasing illegal immigration still critical of its social structure. That there such excesses, as used in France, is of course unlikely.
France is the prime example of the failure of a nationalist-motivated immigration policy. Immigrants in France speak French as a rule all, everything they have with that country but also not common. Since the (youth) unemployment in France traditionally because of socialist experiments of the government very high, these people lack any perspective. But even here there is a welfare state that cemented the feeling of being liquid at its receivers yet. Again, why make an effort, the state will pay eventually. And the state of this problem is solved again with new programs and initiatives, and thereby makes everything a lot worse. A foreigner will still not become a resident in which he hands over to a domestic passport, even in Germany, the inflationary use of the naturalization solved no problems, only created new ones, because offenders can not deport foreigners with a German passport is more, there is no a pressure medium. In this context, the percentage of foreigners mentioned. German politicians like to point out that Switzerland has a much higher proportion of foreigners, when Germany and in Switzerland were less problems with foreigners. But the fact is that the Swiss government is not so lavish with the release handle of citizenship, such as Germany or France. It is not easy to be Swiss, even so, the proportion of foreigners in Switzerland is very high. The majority of these foreigners are now, but German and Italian, derived from a related culture and therefore have not noticed. Unlike Germany, where you can enter today Hinz and Kunz and similar citizenship presents, Switzerland will be shown on only people they really need. As long as foreign policy in Germany, however addressed always behind the facade of political correctness, as long as one is here treading water.
must first pay for the schools, thanks to the compulsory education they are forced to an army unwilling and unable to take students. If the state here would be useful active, then by removing the compulsory education and privatized education. Compulsory education is forcing people to learn things that they do not want to learn, it is self-explanatory, that such a system at best is indifferent towards him in the worst But the case met with hatred and contempt. Private schools have more opportunities to exert much pressure on students and their parents. Their teachers were motivated and could be reluctant or disruptive students from classes or simply exclude the same school. It may arise but also schools for particular support needy students, as there were schools for gifted students. The free market for education would provide exactly the offer that is in demand, not just any school unit with a unit of learning material with hardly motivated teachers who have no incentive to improve the system and also by the aggressive to suffer behavior of students they can not have discipline. If the school system in Germany, private and voluntary, it would never come to such failures, as now in Berlin. And these excesses on the one hand the tip of the iceberg, and for the way in the development of the state school system of the future show. A call for the abolition of primary school is no place, therefore, the problems shifted only to the secondary schools and junior high students now excluded from the labor sector, which then ended again in the abolition of the secondary school and we immediately introduced the comprehensive school. Now there is this whole school in some states already, these are precisely the countries in which the students are worse deal than in Baden-Wuerttemberg and Bavaria and the with the university entrance so wasteful, is that even for professionals, such as hotel management, now the school is required. That in such countries no secondary school students and high school students have little perspective is evident.
blame here but also the economy, which makes the training of youth to take place at the expense of taxpayers by many activities in which a few years ago a real education followed by vocational training enough now a university degree is required. A career as Werner Wenning, Bayer has to put down (from the industrial business Chairman of the Board) is now no longer possible. Here also is the main culprit, as it could be different, with the state. The state structure of the universities allowed the education of many students at public expense, without having an indicator which are needed by which subject how many graduates. In fact, not too few people study here, but too many. Here, too, privatization can not only improve research and teaching, but also reduce the number of students, contributing to the re-evaluation of conventional vocational training. Unfortunately, too many politicians still dream of the good of public education to which there is a civil right. Does this People about basic economic knowledge, but they know that education is just not a public good (because this does the exclusion principle) and hence there is no reason to burden the public with the costs of this.
If an employer, for any reason whatsoever, but would not employ domestically trained person, so there's no reason that it is this force organized abroad. This is the private nature of immigration, here determine the company who gets a job that does not have the state who can come, regardless of whether or not he has a job, or. Immigration policy is just not for the state, but the economy. Who a country an economic advantage to be welcome everywhere, who visits a country only to exploit the welfare systems need not be surprised if he of much of the population distrust suggests. Can solve the problem of integration with the abolition of all state benefits (and to nationals and foreigners) from now on, both groups were under the economic compulsion to participate in society and something to pay for those. But by the preselection of the economy would ensure that only just come into the country those who can provide an economic value. These foreigners were now guests just as they behaved well. They would ensure that they are not noticeable in the society is negative, it would integrate (not assimilate), because they were aware that their guest status would be compromised at the slightest sign of undesirable action. Such a migration is necessary and useful, but avoids the undesirable side effects of mass immigration of vulnerable and poorly educated people. Nothing speaks against the presence of foreigners, but they should (or indeed all residents) have an interest, even their own initiative to provide better economically and socially.
The fear that such a policy would bring immigration full stop or a monotonous population structure could produce, is inappropriate. A look into history reveals that it is up to the "invention" of the nation state and its consequence of the welfare state possible was free and without papers and settle down, find always wanted one. In the supposedly backward Middle Ages there was a movement of persons harm of which we today can only dream of, this has not at any time.
course, an employer would have the ability to discriminate against certain groups in hiring (with the associated costs for him), but a wise employer when hiring not an expert on the origin, appearance or beliefs eighth, but on their skills. Should he still discriminate against what is his right, the candidate is still open the way to self or to another employer. In contrast to states of entrepreneurs not to be expected, however, that they develop in the immigration preferences for a particular ethnic group, after all are dependent on labor and not to vote.

Literature:
Immigration: Hoppe, Hans Hermann "democracy of God of none", p.273 ff, S.295 ff
Hoppe, Hans Hermann, "Natural order, the state, and the immigration problem" Journal of Libertarian Studies 2002
Education: Rothbard, Murray "A New Freedom", p.123 ff
Blankertz, Stefan "The Economics of the Welfare State ', p.109 ff
discrimination: Blankertz, Stefan" The Economics of the Welfare State, "p.95 ff