How long have you been saving equity for your house?

The average student can, and from my experience (10 years ago) also did, work up to 20 hours per week during the lecture period.

That's right. 20 hours during the lecture period and 40 hours during the lecture-free period.

Also total nonsense. Please add: "Normal students whose maintenance was paid by their parents." When I studied, I worked more than those in the dual study program and did a full-time study alongside it.

Yes, I responded with the same quality as the previous post. You also cannot judge how much the dual student worked during the practical phase. I can only speak for my company, but it was not done with a 40-hour week. I actually don’t want to discuss this, but only contradict the claim that the dual student is paid by the employer to party.

Please don’t fall into stereotypes: dual study programs also exist in the evenings alongside a full 40h/week.

For me, that is more like a part-time study. That’s how I completed my master's. 40-hour week and evening lectures. I wouldn’t do it a second time and the workload is indeed not comparable to the "normal" (?) dual study program.

I do not want to defend those here at all costs, but the top 10% bear about 50% of the tax burden (if I remember correctly)

That’s roughly correct.

According to the Socio-Economic Panel, Institute of the German Economy 2018:

2.5 million taxpayers with monthly income >20,000€ paid 99.2 billion € including solidarity surcharge
2.0 million – 15,000-20,000€ – 33.9 billion €
3.9 million – 10,000-15,000€ – 46.9 billion €
11.3 million – 5,000-10,000€ – 81.2 billion €
29.9 million – 1-5,000€ – 59.5 billion €
26.6 million – 0€ – 0€

What supports the statement of is a publication by the Federal Ministry of Finance, which shows that the group with an annual income between 70,000 and 250,000€ pays the highest average rate. With increasing income beyond that, the rate dramatically decreases to less than half—so much so that a millionaire on average pays income tax at roughly the same rate as someone with an annual income of 50,000-60,000€.

Therefore, there is no contradiction in these statements according to the data.

It is completely irrelevant what we paid for our studies in the past or not when it comes to looking ahead. What I take from various studies is that education in Germany is apparently strongly dependent on the financial situation and educational level of the parents. I find that fundamentally concerning, and it starts long before university.

My situation in the early 90s is not comparable to today. I was lucky to be supported by my parents and received the equivalent of [BaFög]. In addition, I worked quite a lot, had a newly built three-room apartment as a student in the south of Augsburg with a föhn view of the Alps, and a leased new small car. However, I did not finish my studies and just got by. Others got through fine and also worked alongside, while yet others took a very long time. Studying today is probably scheduled somewhat more demanding, so working alongside is different than 30 years ago.

I believe that hardly any investment pays off economically as much as the one in education. The return, however, comes later than a legislative period. Maybe the quarterly thinking of capital companies has long since arrived in politics. In any case, I am of the opinion that we place too little focus on this.

What supports the statement by is a publication by the Federal Ministry of Finance, in which it can be seen that the group with an annual income between €70,000 and €250,000 pays the highest average rate. With incomes increasing beyond that, the rate drops dramatically to less than half again – to the point that an income millionaire, on average, is at the same level of income tax rate as someone earning €50,000-€60,000 annually.

So, there is no contradiction in the statements according to the numbers.

I can roughly confirm all of that. Why many of these wealthy people pay proportionally less also has a reason. Usually, these very high incomes come from capital assets. These are taxed at a flat rate of 25%, and that’s that. Everyone can see that on their tax assessment. An employee who earns 500k on their payroll card or someone who has 1 million from renting and leasing pays proportionally according to the top tax rate as well. You can’t lump everyone together. :) Whether it is great to tax such high capital incomes at only 25% is up to each individual to judge, but I don’t think anyone jumps for joy when they sell stocks and 25% is withheld from the profit at first. I don’t want to defend everything here but just explain a little, but considering the absolute sums, I personally believe that a great deal already goes to the treasury from this side and one shouldn’t always complain about it.

I am familiar with the 25% capital gains tax. The group averages below 8% overall, if I correctly interpret the published figures from the Ministry of Finance.