← Back to context

Comment by FabCH

6 days ago

One interesting point for me is that, IMHO, the propaganda on the „no“ side wad _abysmal_.

The counter arguments are awful and they are presented awfully and not even in such high quantity as you would expect.

I think it has a good chance of passing just because of that.

And then political shitf***y will begin with „we don’t know how to turn this into law!“, which is not good for the basis of democracy…

I agree, but it's also a lot easier to promise a silver bullet to everything than to propose improvements to the actual, hard problems.

Yes infrastructure are strained, but it's not like nothing is being done. It's just that it take decades, and will be too little, too late.

Same thing with housing. Every one is saying we need to make the procedures more efficient, but when it comes time to actually makes changes, there's no consensus to drop anything.

They could have done better, but it would have been very easy to make nothing but empty promises. I prefer they didn't.

Although I thought weird that SVP brought the "we will need to increase retirement age" themselves. It's actually pretty likely, but sounds like a massive own goal so close to the vote given how unpopular it is.

> don't know how to turn this into law

For one time, we can be grateful that the breakdown in direct democracy is gonna save us from an own goal.

  • I‘d rather they didn’t.

    Undermining democracy itself is far more dangerous than whatever the impact of this referendum would be.

I'm sure blaming the "propaganda" will help you about as much as it helps Americans after voting for their anti immigration party nonsense.

Not to be underestimated is the fact that the healthcare argument (I got like 5 flyers of a boomer in a wheelchair with a sad looking face with some nurse standing behind) is coming on the backs of boomers voting themselves the 13th AVS, which already pissed a lot of people off and is either going to lead to a pretty significant VAT rise or more direct taxes.