I think this is the biggest factor. Ambitious people who want to become rich do not have any opportunities in Germany. It is good for people who are content with a middling but comfortable life. That's why most ambitious people leave.

▲

parheric 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Bang on... it's initially about opportunity. But when that runs out, people move on.

And with the offer of DE citizenship where you're not giving up your birth citizenship, most people will take it, and move somewhere else in EU with a shiney new DE passport.

▲

FinnLobsien 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This has been true, but I think that promise of middling comfort is being eroded.

▲

rdtsc 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Germany. It is good for people who are content with a middling but comfortable life. That's why most ambitious people leave.

Just curious how well does that work? I assume it’s being able to have a job, have a place to live, travel once a year. Medical care not tied to employment but hopefully easily accessible?

▲

4gotunameagain 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is not a bad thing. Wealth inequality is destructive for societies.

▲

rawbot 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I agree with the feeling, but the market doesn't. Inflation in the last 8 years has been slowly strangling families. And that's without mentioning the fact that owning an apartment or home is basically impossible without inheritance or being upper-class.

So for most middle-class families, the work grind will continue for the rest of their life, until retirement (if it even exists by then), without anything to show for it (owning the place you live in). How are people even going to be able to pay for their rent between retirement (67 years old) and assisted living (+75 years old)?

▲

odiroot 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And you believe Germany somehow avoided it? Nice one.

Don't worry, wealthy people manage fine in Germany and multiply their capital.

It's just a glass ceiling on a middle class.

▲

ecshafer 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is a level where it's probably bad (France, Russia, China prior to revolutions). But wealth equality (Russia, China, Cambodia, all of eastern Europe, Cuba, etc. AFTER revolutions) seems to be infinitely more destructive.

	▲	TFYS 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The issue is concentration of power. Wealth inequality is just one way destructive levels of power concentration can happen. We need low wealth inequality along with truly democratic government.

▲

whateverboat 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah, these people are not looking to become super rich. They are coming from very poor backgrounds (compared to median wealth in Germany) and they want to reach upper middle class levels (wealth wise, not income wise) for those countries.

▲

inigyou 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It has to be balanced against forward progress.

▲

Arnt 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Uh-huh.

A small town where I've lived was very much like its neighbours, but one particular neigbour was different in two clearly visible ways: ① there were (still are) more rich people in that neighbour and ② it was much easier to get financing for starting and growing companies in that neighbour.