Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

Include civil servants - align pensions to the level of retirement benefits. A big step towards improvement.

A lot more water will still flow down the stream

That doesn’t improve anything, it’s very simplistic and pure election campaign rhetoric (e.g. from Mr. Heil). Precisely the inclusion of civil servants has already been examined by numerous economists, and the models regularly showed that it would become more expensive for everyone:
“With the demanded inclusion of civil servants in the statutory pension insurance, time would be bought. The price would be medium-term higher personnel expenses for public employers, long-term a pension contribution higher compared to the status quo as well as even higher tax subsidies.” and further “The price for more equality would be a redistribution to the detriment of the members of the current insured collective.”
The conclusion: “Since Hubertus Heil is a recognized social expert, he of course knows this problem. In this respect, one should primarily understand his words as election campaign rhetoric. This proposal is certainly not a well-founded contribution to put the finances of the statutory pension insurance on a more solid basis.” (Rürup in Handelsblatt 07/30/2021 with good and widely shared reasoning).

Furthermore, the state would probably not find any civil servants at all… outdated technology, poor promotion opportunities, 41-hour workweek (work-life balance???) and so on. Applicants have already silently stood up and left when being informed about the 41-hour workweek and lack of home office options.

As said… there are reasons why things are the way they are.

41-hour week for civil servants :D I know quite a few since my better half works in the public sector. No one gets over 20... those who were previously active in the private sector for many years also affectionately call it ABR - job creation pension

In our construction area, someone got an offer to pave a driveway 12x5m including curbs: 12,000€
We had 8, same size, and it's perfectly level, we have a "ramp"

41 hour week for civil servants :D I know quite a few since my better half works in the public sector. No one works over 20... those who were previously active in the private sector for many years also affectionately call it ABR - job creation pension

Oh... a friend of clichés and platitudes :rolleyes: Well... how are you supposed to argue against the private experiences of a single person? *Irony off* If it were generally true, the number of applicants would be skyrocketing. You would have to advise your children to become civil servants because you earn so well by sleeping and have a fat pension. And if you go to the tax office, you don’t even pay taxes... :p I’m curling up with laughter :mad:

I always find it interesting that the prices on the portals are referenced. At least in my area, the properties found there are the ones that don't get sold under the table. There's usually a reason for that!

Since we are currently in the situation of wanting to sell our house, we will probably go through the real estate portals. "Under the table," many seekers quickly become very alert. They might think they can get a bargain. Why should a seller, without asking other interested parties, sell to the first bidder below market value? I believe "under the table" is rarely cheaper than through the real estate portals. For example, if someone from our extended social circle inquires, we have a price expectation for the house (based on bank and broker assessments). If we get that, I gladly forgo the route through the portals, but not below my price expectation. It is true that the prices sometimes listed on the portals (also with brokers) are sky-high. They then remain posted for months as price examples, and some uninformed people assume that these are achievable values. Brokers are another matter. €40k+ for a €500-600k house. At an hourly rate of €100 (and there are no training or other regulations), you would have to work 400 billable hours. ... There may be houses that sit like lead on the shelves where this happens. But from what I see, I would not expect more than 100 hours per house, and that is already a high estimate.

That does not improve anything, is a very simplistic view and pure election campaign rhetoric (e.g., from Mr. Heil). Exactly the hiring of civil servants has already been examined by numerous economists, and the models regularly led to it becoming more expensive for everyone:

"Scientists," especially in the area of forecasts and possible scenarios and models, demonstrate a lot. Everything is very much "would have / could / should" with assumptions X, Y, Z. There are plenty of other "scientists" who come to different conclusions. Aside from the idea of a unified pension insurance, it should be said that the costs for distribution and administration in private pension insurance consume about 20% of the amount invested. In the statutory pension, it is at least 1.3%. But it is inefficient and expensive, and unfortunately a private corporation cannot make money from it because it all benefits the insured. That is why Georg, Maschi, Riester, and co. devised back then that private provision would be subsidized with tax funds so that, in the end, the insured would receive at least slightly less than with the statutory system, while at the same time 20% commission remains.

Include civil servants as well - align pensions with the retirement level. A big step towards improvement.

How does this lead to more money in the pension funds? Civil servants who pay into the pension funds then want,
completely incomprehensibly, to have a pension as well.

Oh... a friend of generalities and platitudes :rolleyes: Well... what can you argue against the private experiences of a single person? *Irony off*
If that were generally the case, the number of applicants would be skyrocketing. One would have to advise their children to become civil servants, since you earn so well by sleeping and get a fat pension. And if you go to the tax office, you don't even pay taxes... :p I'm laughing so hard right now :mad:

Haha yes I would advise my children and no not only my experience but if you can't read well and don't have a counterargument you can try it with insinuations ;)

Oh yes, of course excluding fire brigade, police etc.