I'll grant you my jumping to conclusions. It is not everyday, Tessa, that I read about a person following her wallet with a tax-evasion move, while also having a long history of serious globe trotting, and then turning out to belong to the bottom 5% of society.
In England or the US, it is highly unlikely to find anyone resembling your story. So, jumping to another conclusion, you are able to tell this because you had good education growing up in Germany.
As before, we both agree on education being crucial in life. But where you declare education a requirement for democracy to function well, I declare democracy being inclusive a requirement for providing good education to all.
I heard this from a European, who said that the US is the leader of the first world and the leader of the third world. It is true that the best and the worst of education is found right here. Since our democracy is elitist (our voting system discriminates against voters at the bottom), we ended up with an education system put in place for everyone at a relatively low level. Meanwhile, the rich and the super rich can augment that education until their desires for their offspring are met. It is painful how the discriminating part of our voting system delivers that same discrimination while ‘caring’ for society.
You alluded already how the brain-drain of well-educated folks from other nations help close the gap here in the US (and other rich nations). I believe this is particularly painful where developing nations spent a lot of money for educating their children who then run off to better paying nations.
https://medium.com/the-national-discussion/and-the-winner-is-the-losing-party-c683c1d739e5
This article is about the single-winner form of democracy. It shows that the Losing Party is actually indeed the winning party.
In Germany, this is not the case. While the system is the same as here at first, it is subsequently adjusted to be more proportional in outcome. This is important for education. If the uneducated cannot get represented at the tables (like in the US), then they can also not demand in their natural numbers good education for their children. In political Germany, parents can demand that education for their children more in their natural numbers.
In US History, it has been dramatic periods that established decent political decisions. Roosevelt hijacked the system and pushed through his New Deal, which benefited society to an extreme level. LB Johnson made additional strives during a very turbulent time for the US. Meanwhile, the more selfish parts of the US wait for other economic crises and achieve then the lowering of the established decent standards.
Did you know that the official poverty level of the US is about equal to 40% of the median income here? The international standard for poverty is 50% of the median income. In the EU, it is set at 60% of the median income. If the EU were to use the USA definition of 40%, it is extremely likely that it would not capture anyone in substantial numbers as living in poverty in the EU. So, they raised the bar of the definition to get a good grip on the bottom part of EU society. Here in the US, they keep the definition as low as possible because they (the rich) don't want one-third of the population to know that they live below the EU definition for poverty.
It shows quickly how the elite is able to play both political parties to the elite’s benefits. By installing a super-low definition for poverty, they fool those that live in poverty thinking they are perhaps even middle-class, who then complain wildly about the low level of education for their children.
Spin is the result of having just two parties going for the win; in the end they both end up lying. With four or more parties, there will always be one party speaking its own truth, and not spinning it.
--
I do want to congratulate you still for finding a way forward and for your success on Medium. But it looks like the higher German taxation system helped you get your good education that enabled you to write well and trot that globe.
