Crisis policy for the few and against the many
Perhaps the goal of the traffic light coalition in this gas crisis has simply been misunderstood. Perhaps she wants to unite the notoriously divided German economists' guild with a gas levy and a reduction in VAT.
In any case, the verdict of the economists is as unanimous as it is devastating: Any effort to save gas will be torpedoed if a lower VAT rate makes it cheaper across the board. And it is simply bold to have a surcharge levied that not only supports troubled importers of Russian gas like Uniper, but also invites unrestrained crisis profiteers to further enrich themselves: energy traders, who are making huge profits thanks to the price records, want something from the surcharge money Get customers - instead of finally being hit with an excess profit tax. Meanwhile, Olaf Scholz promises that the reduction in VAT will fully compensate for the increase in the cost of the levy for citizens. That's not true.
The government seems really keen on “popular uprisings” (Annalena Baerbock) in the fall. There would have been simple, good alternatives to the gas policy measures chosen. It is possible to cap the price of a basic consumption that everyone needs for a life of dignity. If consumption exceeds this basic level, the high prices will kick in – that is the incentive to save gas. The gas price cap has been under discussion since at least February, and those in government are familiar with the concept. Nevertheless, the crazy idea of the contribution became reality.
Why? Quite simply: the gas price cap secures basic needs and punishes heavy consumers. Those who have a lot of money use a lot of energy, because they have more living space, among other things. The traffic light spares the rich. This is not only due to the FDP, no matter how wacky Christian Lindner's performances may be. The Green Winfried Kretschmann has just boasted about his electric car, his photovoltaic system and his pellet heating system and advised washcloths instead of a shower. In certain spheres of this society, all connection to the life that millions of people lead on a daily basis without high income and without assets has been completely lost. Hence this policy against the many and for the few.
