[ad_1]
The wish is justified, but the means are not
Speaking of the pandemic situation, the economist considered that the worst of times had passed, since most people are now sick or vaccinated.
“We have to look at the general trends, they are improving anyway. 1,345 people died from COVID-19 in January and 32 in July, 45 times less. (…) The government’s desire to vaccinate as many people as possible. understandably, but communication with the public is poor. By promoting vaccines, the government is bending the stick somewhere, which is why people are reacting angrily.
Imagine a person who is sick but has COVID-19, but has a little fear of vaccination because for some people, the reaction to the vaccine makes the condition worse. If you are retired like me, and you have little contact, you get sick easily, so those diseases are not very scary. Suddenly they tell him that if he does not get vaccinated, he will not be able to go to the store to do the shopping or he will not be able to go by public transport to visit his mother, he will not be able to cut his hair. Isn’t that rude coercion? We used to live in freedom, we forget about Soviet times, but suddenly something like that comes back. After all, even in January for Maximum It was possible to enter, and now it will not be, “he said on the program.
© DELFI / Josvydas Elinskas
According to R. Rudzkis, the Government’s desire to vaccinate the population is justified, but the measures are not, it lacks subtlety: “There are no people in it who identify with the role of an ordinary person. This government, unfortunately, tends to oppose the people, dividing them into black and white, good and bad.
The government must represent all people, from all walks of life, not just those who agree with the government’s opinion. (…) Efforts should be made to vaccinate as much as possible, but not by force. In Soviet times, coercion was equally motivated, for the most part. That is the typical principle of an authoritarian state. “
The economist points out that society is devastated by poor communication between the ruling majority and the general public: “It is hysterical, too direct, dominant. This communication is unusual in modern democracies. “
Lithuania turned out to be too brave and determined
Speaking of the migration crisis, the economist praises the government for its current decisive actions, but is reprimanded, as they say, for its irresponsibility at the beginning of the crisis.
“Did Lithuania really need to be at the forefront of the fighters and carry the battle flag? This had to be left in the hands of other countries that do not have a border with Belarus. It turned out to be too bold or arrogant. Perhaps it is useful, because it forced take urgent measures that did not exist before. In a year or a half, there will be a wall that we need. You just have to understand that no wall will protect you completely, “he emphasizes.
Belaruskalij will probably stop transiting fertilizers from December, the Lithuanian railways and the port will lose part of their orders and revenues. According to the economist, we have already lost some because oil shipments are no longer exported. It is only a matter of time before another cargo reaches Russian ports.
“The Belarusian government could not do that so quickly, it needs to be prepared. It could not decide to export fertilizers through the ports of St. Petersburg tomorrow, even though the place is not ready and there are no warehouses. It does not happen in an instant. However, whether we ban exports or not, the cargoes would still be abandoned. Of course, this will be a blow to the Klaipeda port and railways, but at the macroeconomic level we will only lose about 0.5 percent. Gross domestic product, “he says. .
It does not understand Lithuania’s actions with China.
Speaking about the growing tensions with China, the professor notes that even before the opening of the embassy in Taiwan, Lithuania took an unexpected step: it withdrew from the cooperation of 17 European countries with China. This step is incomprehensible to him.
“I do not understand these actions, I do not know why it is necessary. It should be understood that within five years, China will have enormous economic power in the world, and it is not alone: a huge bloc of countries is forming and emerging around it. China will create about a third, and perhaps even more, of the global product. Why should little Lithuania, which is export oriented, have a conflict with all this huge market? I can’t explain it, ”says R. Rudzkis.
[ad_2]
