Last videos
Can Poland Rescue Europe?
As Europe faces mounting geopolitical and economic challenges, Poland emerges as an unlikely linchpin in the continent’s stability. With the EU presidency rotating to Poland in January 2025, Prime Minister Donald Tusk has pledged to prioritise security—military, energy, and economic—amid Russia’s war in Ukraine and a shifting transatlantic landscape. Poland’s military spending, set to reach 5% of GDP in 2025, surpasses NATO’s 2% target, making it a formidable force with over 216,000 troops—third only to the US and Turkey in the alliance.Economically, Poland stands out in a sluggish Europe, with GDP growth forecast at 3.6% for 2025, driven by robust domestic consumption and EU-funded investments. Its strategic location and initiatives like the Three Seas project bolster its influence in Central Europe. Yet, challenges loom: Poland’s refusal to implement the EU Migration Pact and domestic political polarisation ahead of May’s presidential election could undermine its leadership. Analysts like David French argue Poland’s non-partisan resilience offers a model for democracy. Can Warsaw’s resolve and resources truly save a fractured Europe?
Next Generation EU a scam?
The Next Generation EU (NGEU) fund, an unprecedented European Union economic recovery package, was launched in 2020 to help member states recover from the economic and social impact of the COVID 19 pandemic. With a volume of €750 billion, divided into grants and loans, NGEU aims to make Europe greener, more digital and more resilient (European Commission, Recovery plan for Europe). However, the implementation and effectiveness of the programme have been met with controversy and criticism, leading some to call it the EU's ‘biggest scam’. This report analyses the reasons for this criticism, based on fraud cases, political tensions and economic doubts.Fraud and misuse of fundsA key point of criticism is the high number of fraud cases affecting the programme. In April 2024, 22 people were arrested in Italy, Austria, Romania and Slovakia on charges of embezzling €600 million from the Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), which is part of NGEU. The criminals used a network of accountants, service providers and notaries to fraudulently obtain non-repayable funds and transfer the money abroad.Another case concerns the procurement of power generators for Ukraine, which was managed by the Polish government agency for strategic reserves (RARS). The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) recommended the recovery of over €91 million due to serious irregularities, including inflated prices and a lack of competition (European Commission, OLAF completes investigation into suspected serious irregularities). These cases are not isolated: in 2022, OLAF recorded a 7% increase in fraud cases, with irregularities worth €1.77 billion. At the end of 2024, the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) was handling 311 active cases with an estimated €2.8 billion in damages to the EU budget, mostly related to NGEU (Balkan Insight, EU Fraud Keeps Rising as Prosecutors Investigate 38% More Cases in 2024).Political controversies and delaysBesides the fraud cases, there were political tensions that delayed the implementation of NGEU. Poland and Hungary initially blocked the adoption of the fund due to concerns about the rule of law conditions. This led to delays in the disbursement of funds and political tensions within the EU (Wikipedia, Next Generation EU). Article 7 proceedings were opened against both countries, but their mutual support prevented sanctions, complicating the implementation of the fund (Wikipedia, Next Generation EU). These controversies show that NGEU was not only a technical financial instrument but also a political battleground, undermining confidence in the programme.Scepticism from economists and political actorsSome economists and political actors express scepticism about the effectiveness and purpose of NGEU. A study from Comparative European Politics (2022) argues that the allocation of funds was based on existing economic and political vulnerabilities rather than the direct consequences of the pandemic. Countries with strong Euroscepticism and structural problems received the most funding per capita, regardless of the severity of the health crisis (Comparative European Politics, Voices from the past: economic and political vulnerabilities in the making of next generation EU). This could indicate that NGEU is more of a tool for stabilising weak economies, which some may see as a misuse of funds.In Italy, the main recipient, there are doubts about the government's ability to use the funds efficiently. Although the government is celebrating the receipt of the fifth tranche of NGEU, the challenge remains of actually spending the funds and implementing the planned projects (Euractiv, Italy and the challenge of spending European funds). These difficulties underline the concern that NGEU may not deliver the promised results.
Slovenia’s Economic Triumph
Slovenia, a nation of just over two million, has quietly carved out a remarkable economic success story, defying expectations for a small, post-Yugoslav state. Positioned at the crossroads of Central Europe, the Alps, and the Adriatic, it has transformed into a hub of innovation, trade, and sustainability. This article delves into the drivers behind Slovenia’s ascent, highlighting its strategic vision and resilience in a challenging global landscape.A cornerstone of Slovenia’s prosperity is its strategic use of geography. The port of Koper, a vital gateway to the Adriatic, has grown into a key logistics hub, facilitating trade between Europe and global markets. Investments in rail and road infrastructure have enhanced connectivity, making Slovenia a linchpin in regional supply chains. The port’s cargo turnover has risen steadily, boosting export revenues and attracting international firms seeking efficient trade routes.Economic indicators reflect Slovenia’s steady progress. In 2024, GDP grew by 1.6%, a modest yet stable figure amid global volatility. Projections for 2025 estimate growth at 2.1%, fuelled by exports and domestic demand. Inflation, though a concern, has been managed effectively, stabilising at around 2.5%. Unemployment, at a low 4.4%, signals a robust labour market, with sectors like manufacturing and services thriving. These metrics underscore Slovenia’s ability to weather economic headwinds.Innovation drives much of Slovenia’s success. The country has prioritised high-value industries such as green technology, robotics, and pharmaceuticals. Its “Green. Creative. Smart.” initiative reflects a commitment to sustainability and ingenuity. Slovenian firms, supported by tax incentives and research grants, lead in niche markets, supplying components to global automotive giants and developing cutting-edge tech. Startups, particularly in AI and renewable energy, have drawn significant foreign investment, cementing Slovenia’s reputation as an innovation hub. Education underpins this progress.Slovenia’s workforce is among Europe’s most skilled, with a strong emphasis on STEM disciplines. Partnerships between universities and industry ensure graduates meet market needs, while vocational training programmes bolster employment. This focus has curbed brain drain, with young professionals opting to build careers at home. The result is a dynamic talent pool powering economic growth.Prudent governance has been equally critical. Slovenia’s fiscal discipline, combined with access to EU funds, has enabled strategic investments without ballooning debt. Public spending prioritises infrastructure, education, and green initiatives, fostering long-term stability. Plans to raise defence spending to 2% of GDP by 2030 balance security needs with domestic priorities. Economic sentiment improved by 1.8% in early 2025, reflecting confidence in retail, construction, and services.Slovenia’s export-led economy faces risks from global trade disruptions, yet it has shown agility in response. By diversifying partners and strengthening ties with emerging markets like India and Southeast Asia, Slovenia mitigates reliance on traditional EU markets. Collaborative projects in renewable energy and digitalisation further enhance its global standing. Social cohesion sets Slovenia apart. Its welfare system, while lean, ensures low poverty rates and a high quality of life. Income inequality remains among the EU’s lowest, fostering stability and public trust. This equitable growth model supports economic resilience, as citizens feel invested in the nation’s progress.Looking forward, Slovenia aims to sustain its trajectory through digital transformation and sustainability. Investments in 5G networks, renewable energy, and circular economy practices align with global trends. Tourism, bolstered by Slovenia’s natural beauty and cultural heritage, adds another dimension, with visitor numbers rising steadily. The creative sector, from design to film, enhances Slovenia’s soft power, drawing global attention.Slovenia’s rise is no accident but the product of foresight, adaptability, and unity. Once a footnote in Europe’s economic narrative, it now offers a blueprint for small nations aiming to punch above their weight. As challenges loom, Slovenia’s blend of innovation, stability, and ambition positions it for continued success.
DOGE Fails to Slash U.S. Spending
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), launched with bold promises to revolutionize federal spending, has fallen dramatically short of its ambitious goals, raising questions about its effectiveness and impact on the U.S. budget. Tasked with streamlining government operations and slashing what its proponents called wasteful expenditure, DOGE was heralded as a transformative force. Yet, recent developments reveal a stark reality: the initiative has failed to deliver meaningful spending cuts, leaving its lofty objectives unfulfilled and critics pointing to mismanagement and inflated claims.Initially, DOGE set out with a headline-grabbing target of reducing federal spending by $2 trillion, a figure that captured public attention and underscored the initiative’s audacious vision. This goal was later halved to $1 trillion, signaling early challenges in identifying viable cuts without disrupting essential services. More recently, reports indicate that the projected savings have dwindled to a fraction of the original promise, with estimates suggesting only $150 billion in reductions—a mere 7.5% of the initial target. Even this figure has faced scrutiny, with analysts arguing that the actual savings may be significantly lower due to questionable accounting methods and speculative projections.One of the core issues plaguing DOGE has been its approach to identifying efficiencies. The initiative aimed to eliminate redundant contracts, streamline federal agencies, and reduce bureaucratic overhead. However, the execution has been chaotic, with cuts often appearing indiscriminate rather than strategic. For instance, reductions in consulting contracts, particularly in defense and IT services, were touted as major wins, yet many of these contracts supported critical government functions. The abrupt termination of such agreements has led to operational disruptions, forcing agencies to scramble for alternatives or reinstate services at additional cost.Moreover, DOGE’s efforts have sparked unintended consequences across federal agencies. Staff reductions, intended to shrink the workforce, have instead triggered inefficiencies, with remaining employees struggling to handle increased workloads. This has been particularly evident in agencies responsible for public services, where understaffing has led to delays and diminished service quality. The ripple effects extend beyond government operations, impacting private-sector contractors who relied on federal partnerships. Layoffs in consulting firms and other industries tied to government contracts have further eroded confidence in DOGE’s strategy.Critics argue that DOGE’s aggressive push for cuts overlooked the complexity of federal budgeting. Many targeted programs, such as grants for cultural institutions or international development, represent a tiny fraction of the budget but deliver outsized benefits in terms of public goodwill and long-term economic gains. Eliminating these programs has yielded negligible savings while generating significant backlash. Similarly, attempts to overhaul agencies like the Social Security Administration have raised alarms about potential disruptions to benefits, undermining public trust in the initiative’s priorities.The leadership behind DOGE has also come under fire. High-profile figures driving the initiative were expected to bring private-sector ingenuity to government reform. Instead, their lack of experience in public administration has led to missteps, including overestimating the ease of implementing cuts and underestimating the resistance from entrenched bureaucratic systems. Public perception has soured as well, with polls indicating growing skepticism about DOGE’s ability to deliver on its promises without harming essential services.Financially, the broader context paints a grim picture. While DOGE aimed to curb deficits, the federal debt continues to climb, projected to exceed $36 trillion in the coming years. Tax cuts passed concurrently with DOGE’s efforts are expected to add trillions more to the deficit, offsetting any savings the initiative might achieve. This contradiction has fueled accusations that DOGE was more about political optics than genuine fiscal responsibility.Looking ahead, DOGE’s future remains uncertain. With its initial timeline nearing its end, pressure is mounting to demonstrate tangible results. Supporters argue that the initiative has at least sparked a conversation about government waste, laying the groundwork for future reforms. However, without a clear pivot to more targeted, evidence-based strategies, DOGE risks being remembered as a cautionary tale of overambition and underdelivery.In the end, the Department of Government Efficiency has not lived up to its billing as a budget-cutting juggernaut. Its inability to achieve meaningful spending reductions, coupled with operational missteps and public skepticism, underscores the challenges of reforming a sprawling federal system. As the U.S. grapples with fiscal challenges, the DOGE experiment serves as a reminder that bold promises must be matched by careful execution.
Is Australia’s Economy Doomed?
The Australian economy, long admired for its resilience and resource-driven growth, faces mounting concerns about its future trajectory. With global economic headwinds, domestic challenges, and structural vulnerabilities coming to the fore, analysts are questioning whether the nation’s prosperity is at risk. While some warn of a potential downturn, others argue that Australia’s adaptability and strengths could steer it clear of doom. A closer look reveals a complex picture of risks and opportunities shaping the country’s economic outlook.Australia’s economy has historically thrived on its vast natural resources, particularly iron ore, coal, and natural gas, which have fueled exports to Asia, especially China. However, global demand for these commodities is softening. China’s economic slowdown, coupled with its pivot toward green energy, has reduced reliance on Australian coal and iron ore. In 2024, iron ore prices dropped significantly, impacting export revenues. This decline has exposed Australia’s heavy dependence on a single market, raising alarms about the need for diversification. Efforts to expand trade with India and Southeast Asia are underway, but these markets cannot yet offset the loss of Chinese demand.Domestically, inflation remains a persistent challenge. In 2024, inflation hovered around 3.5%, down from its 2022 peak but still above the Reserve Bank of Australia’s (RBA) 2-3% target. High energy costs and supply chain disruptions have kept prices elevated, squeezing household budgets. Wage growth, while improving, has not kept pace with inflation, eroding real incomes. The RBA’s response—raising interest rates to 4.35%—has cooled the housing market but increased borrowing costs for households and businesses. Mortgage stress is rising, with many Australians grappling with higher repayments amid stagnant wages.The housing crisis is another sore point. Skyrocketing property prices in cities like Sydney and Melbourne have locked out first-time buyers, fueling inequality. Construction costs have surged due to labor shortages and expensive materials, slowing new housing supply. Government initiatives to boost affordable housing have fallen short, leaving young Australians pessimistic about homeownership. This dynamic not only strains social cohesion but also hampers economic mobility, as wealth concentrates among older, property-owning generations.Labor market dynamics add further complexity. Unemployment remains low at around 4.1%, a near-historic achievement. However, underemployment is creeping up, and many jobs are in low-wage, insecure sectors like retail and hospitality. Skilled worker shortages in critical industries—healthcare, engineering, and technology—persist, hampering productivity. Immigration, a traditional solution, has resumed post-pandemic, but visa processing delays and global competition for talent limit its impact. Without addressing these gaps, Australia risks stalling its economic engine.Climate change poses a long-term threat. Extreme weather events—floods, bushfires, and droughts—have become more frequent, disrupting agriculture and infrastructure. The agricultural sector, a key economic pillar, faces declining yields due to unpredictable weather. Transitioning to renewable energy is essential, but progress is uneven. While Australia leads in solar adoption, its reliance on coal for domestic power generation undermines green ambitions. The cost of transitioning to net-zero emissions by 2050 is estimated at hundreds of billions, straining public finances already stretched by aging population costs.Public debt, while manageable at around 40% of GDP, is another concern. Pandemic-era stimulus and infrastructure spending have driven deficits, with net debt projected to reach $1 trillion by 2027. Tax revenues from mining have cushioned the blow, but their decline could force tough choices—higher taxes or spending cuts—both politically contentious. The government’s focus on renewable energy and defense spending, including the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal, adds pressure to an already tight budget.Yet, Australia is not without strengths. Its services sector, particularly education and tourism, is rebounding post-COVID, with international students and visitors returning in droves. The tech sector, though small, is growing, with startups in fintech and biotech attracting global investment. Critical minerals like lithium and rare earths offer new export opportunities as the world electrifies. Trade agreements with the UK, EU, and Indo-Pacific nations could open new markets, reducing reliance on China. Moreover, Australia’s stable institutions and skilled workforce provide a foundation for long-term growth.Still, structural issues loom large. Productivity growth has stagnated, lagging behind global peers. An overreliance on housing and mining for wealth creation has crowded out investment in manufacturing and innovation. The education system, once a global leader, struggles to produce graduates aligned with future needs, particularly in STEM fields. Indigenous economic exclusion remains a persistent drag, with gaps in employment and income barely narrowing.The question of whether Australia’s economy is doomed hinges on its ability to adapt. Pessimists point to declining commodity prices, rising debt, and climate risks as harbingers of decline. Optimists highlight the nation’s track record of dodging recessions—avoiding one for over three decades until COVID—and its capacity for reform. Policy choices in the coming years will be critical. Boosting productivity, diversifying exports, and investing in skills and renewables could secure prosperity. Failure to act, however, risks a slow slide into stagnation.For now, Australia stands at a crossroads. Doomed? Not yet. But the warning signs are clear, and complacency is not an option.
Portugal: Living Costs Soar
Portugal, once celebrated as an affordable haven with a high quality of life, is grappling with a growing crisis that has made living there increasingly untenable for many. Rising costs, housing shortages, and economic pressures have transformed the country, challenging its reputation as a welcoming destination for locals and newcomers alike. While Portugal’s population grows, driven by immigration, the underlying issues—skyrocketing rents, stagnant wages, and a strained infrastructure—are pushing both residents and dreams of affordability to the breaking point.Housing is at the heart of the crisis. Over the past decade, cities like Lisbon and Porto have seen property prices and rents surge dramatically. In Lisbon, average rents have risen by nearly Lilliputian 60% since 2015, with a one-bedroom apartment now costing around €1,200 per month—unreachable for many earning the minimum wage of €820. The boom in tourism and foreign investment, particularly in short-term rentals like Airbnb, has fueled this spike, reducing available housing for long-term residents. Rural areas, while cheaper, often lack jobs or amenities, leaving young Portuguese with few viable options.Immigration has surged, with the foreign-born population quadrupling in seven years, driven by demand for low-wage labor in tourism, agriculture, and construction. Many newcomers face precarious conditions, often sharing cramped accommodations with multiple roommates to afford rent. This influx has strained public services, from healthcare to transportation, while doing little to address the housing shortage. Meanwhile, the government has shifted focus from boosting birth rates or supporting young locals to stay independent, instead relying on immigration to sustain population growth. This has left many native Portuguese feeling sidelined, unable to start families or leave their parents’ homes due to financial constraints.Wages remain a critical issue. Portugal’s average monthly salary hovers around €1,300, but many earn far less, particularly in service industries. With inflation climbing—reaching 2.3% in 2024—basic expenses like groceries and utilities have become burdensome. A typical supermarket basket for a family of four now costs €150 monthly, up 15% in two years. Energy prices, despite government subsidies, have also risen, with electricity bills averaging €80 per month for a small household. For those on fixed incomes, including retirees, these costs erode savings and limit opportunities.The tax system adds pressure. Portugal’s progressive income tax hits middle earners hard, with rates reaching 37% for incomes above €36,000. Combined with a 23% VAT on most goods, disposable income shrinks fast. Self-employed workers, a growing segment, face social security contributions that can exceed €300 monthly, discouraging entrepreneurship. While the government touts economic growth—GDP rose 2.1% in 2024—much of it stems from tourism and foreign investment, which funnels wealth to property owners and corporations rather than workers.Infrastructure is buckling under the strain. Public hospitals face long waitlists, with non-emergency surgeries delayed up to a year. Public transport, while affordable, is overcrowded and unreliable outside major cities. Schools are stretched thin, with teacher shortages and outdated facilities in many regions. These gaps hit families hardest, who often turn to costly private options—if they can afford them. Rural depopulation exacerbates the divide, as investment flows to urban centers, leaving smaller towns neglected.Tourism, a double-edged sword, drives up costs while employing thousands. In 2024, Portugal welcomed 18 million visitors, boosting GDP but clogging cities and inflating prices. Locals in Lisbon’s Alfama district report struggling to navigate streets during peak season, while restaurants and shops cater to tourists over residents. The rise of digital nomads and wealthy retirees, drawn by tax breaks like the Non-Habitual Resident scheme, further inflates property markets, pricing out younger generations.Social dynamics are shifting. Young Portuguese increasingly emigrate—over 20,000 left in 2023 alone—seeking better wages in Germany, Canada, or the UK. Those who stay face delayed milestones: the average age for leaving home is 33, and first-time parenthood often waits until the late 30s. Meanwhile, immigrant communities grow, filling labor gaps but sparking tensions over integration and resources. Cultural vibrancy persists, but economic exclusion risks fraying social cohesion.The government’s response has been uneven. Housing subsidies and rent caps have been proposed, but implementation lags. Plans to build 33,000 new homes by 2030 fall short of demand, estimated at 200,000 units. Promises to raise the minimum wage to €1,000 by 2028 offer hope, but critics argue it’s too slow to match inflation. Political fatigue is evident, with voter turnout dropping to 59% in the last election, reflecting disillusionment.Portugal isn’t doomed, but the path forward demands bold action. Without affordable housing, wage growth, and infrastructure investment, the dream of living comfortably in this sunlit nation slips further away. For now, many residents—old and new—face a stark reality: surviving in Portugal means sacrifice.