I actually spend quite a lot of time in Leuven these days, and looking at some of those houses and the general state of Belgium today … I can’t say that’s not likely to be true.
It’s just that the place kinda struck me as safe. I guess it’s not.
Belgium has some of (if not the) lowest income inequality in the OECD due to our very harsh income tax (highest median tax wedge of the OECD, yes even including the nordics). With quite a few asterisks attached to that statement of course because our fiscal system is a complete mess so if you’re special kinds of well off (e.g. you make your income on capital gains) you’ll be taxed very little.
How low income inequality doesn’t correlate to very high standards of living like it does in the Nordics… Well I’ll leave it to historians and economists to hash it out. The answer you get will almost certainly reflect that person’s personal politics. Harsh industrial decline is worth mentioning though.
Wallonia is measurably poorer than Flanders, but both regions are developed western economies. The US has a murder rate 535 % of Belgium’s, and I don’t see anyone warning students away from studying there (or well, not until the past few months).
That judge should be investigated and the prosecutor should definitely appeal, and besides there is a lot of work to do safety-wise, especially for women to be able to feel safe, but that’s hardly a problem specific to Leuven or Belgium.
Regardless of why he got suspension of penalty, if you read anything about the case it wasn’t because he or his parents are rich. Personally I think there’s more nuance than the clickbait headlines. I think he should not have gotten the penalty suspended but I can understand why that happened. The shortened motivation for this does read like ragebait ofcourse. His future should not have been as important as his cooperation, verifiable truthfulness and the fact he did abuse the state of someone who could not consent. Where that balance ends for punishment ends I find hard to say. But to reduce it to that he’s rich is just populist nonsense.
What the actual fuck.
Don’t worry, that’s not the real reason. The real reason is most likely that the perpetrators family is rich and the victim’s family isn’t.
Latest case of affluenza. He needs the Brock Turner treatment. You remember the rapist Brock Turner, right?
The article doesn’t mention this rapist’s name, though.
None of them do. The closest I could find were the initials “R.V”.
Little coward is probably afraid of getting the Brock Allen Turner treatment.
If he’s been convicted, he shouldn’t have a choice about that.
I actually spend quite a lot of time in Leuven these days, and looking at some of those houses and the general state of Belgium today … I can’t say that’s not likely to be true.
It’s just that the place kinda struck me as safe. I guess it’s not.
Belgium has some of (if not the) lowest income inequality in the OECD due to our very harsh income tax (highest median tax wedge of the OECD, yes even including the nordics). With quite a few asterisks attached to that statement of course because our fiscal system is a complete mess so if you’re special kinds of well off (e.g. you make your income on capital gains) you’ll be taxed very little.
How low income inequality doesn’t correlate to very high standards of living like it does in the Nordics… Well I’ll leave it to historians and economists to hash it out. The answer you get will almost certainly reflect that person’s personal politics. Harsh industrial decline is worth mentioning though.
Wallonia is measurably poorer than Flanders, but both regions are developed western economies. The US has a murder rate 535 % of Belgium’s, and I don’t see anyone warning students away from studying there (or well, not until the past few months).
That judge should be investigated and the prosecutor should definitely appeal, and besides there is a lot of work to do safety-wise, especially for women to be able to feel safe, but that’s hardly a problem specific to Leuven or Belgium.
Regardless of why he got suspension of penalty, if you read anything about the case it wasn’t because he or his parents are rich. Personally I think there’s more nuance than the clickbait headlines. I think he should not have gotten the penalty suspended but I can understand why that happened. The shortened motivation for this does read like ragebait ofcourse. His future should not have been as important as his cooperation, verifiable truthfulness and the fact he did abuse the state of someone who could not consent. Where that balance ends for punishment ends I find hard to say. But to reduce it to that he’s rich is just populist nonsense.
deleted by creator