ro-_-b
Joined 9 years ago
Joined 9 years ago
Germany is a car country: most ways to work, gym, etc in the average German city are done by car. Makes it easy to drive the extra mile to the cheapest supermarket.
Austria is much better for using public transport or the bike. In this case you won't make the extra way to stop at the cheapest grocery. And in the areas in Austria where people use cars population density is so low that not a lot of competition between supermarkets exists
The reasons IMO are: * less price sensitivity: German people are extremely price sensitive, they discuss and compare prices all the time. In Austria people care way less about this on average. Supermarkets take advantage * higher logistics costs: population density in Austria is less than in Germany. Furthermore, many supermarkets are located in areas hard to reach like mountain areas. Higher logistic costs translate to higher prices * VAT is slightly higher in Austria * unqualified labor that works in supermarkets and logistics makes slightly more money in Austria than in Germany * there indeed is a higher supermarket tensity in Austria than in Germany. Supermarkets of the same company appear more appealing in Austria than in Germany: nicer presentation of food, cleaner, way less people in the line waiting. All this makes them more expensive
For all these reasons mentioned above prices are higher. I argue it's mostly related to consumer choices. If they would care so much about prices and so little about esthetics as in Germany then prices would come down. If people would start to walk the extra mile for the cheaper supermarket prices would come down.
a) this vaccine is not highly effective at preventing the disease (especially after 6 months+)
b) long term effects have not yet been studied
c) fatality is still much lower than for diseases where vaccines are mandatory
I'm vaccinated myself twice by I feel extremely uncomfortable to force other people to vaccinate. I don't think liberal democracies should go this path.
"The rocket held 440 tons of jet fuel, which has a high carbon content, meaning it releases a lot of carbon dioxide into the air when burned. If SpaceX meets its target of launching a rocket every two weeks, then the company will be releasing roughly 4,000 tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year, Whittaker calculated."
Source: https://www.globalcitizen.org/fr/content/space-x-bad-for-the....
It does not prevent the virus from spreading It does not protect against certain variations that we are seeing like in South Africa
This means that the pandemic will still be there next winter some how. Likely not as bad as it is now. But it won't be over yet as a thread for societies. Remember most emerging/developing countries are not expected to receive vaccinations any time soon.
They'll be able to update the vaccination but many people will lose trust in them unfortunately
Means that our economies & currencies will be in trouble
Remote work will break through. After 2 years nobody is used to anything else anymore
Many people will permanently lose their job/business, but software companies will continue to do extremely well (although there will be some regulatory crack down on the largest companies)
We have seen mutations due to minks recently which could make the vaccinations ineffective. These mutations might have been controlled but similar situations may arise in the next years.
For these reasons I am not entirely sure this is the beginning of the end.
OOH stands for owner-occupied housing. I am aware of the fact that the US accounts far better for housing expenses in its CPI than Eurozone countries do.