Nykiai’s pseudo-debate spiel – Business News

In the field of foreign policy and national security, with the exception of one contender, Eduardas Vaitkäus, who neatly adheres to the “general line of the party”, it is difficult to see major differences in positions. The discourse was dominated by knowledgeable and better informed Gitanas Nausėda, Ingrida Šimonytė, rational Dainius Žalimas and Giedrimas Jeglinskas – although the breadth of the latter’s assessment showed that the tight uniform of an officer hides under the presidential campaign suit.

The president’s foot was somewhat disturbed by the overestimation of his great role in history, which has already become his calling card, which unconsciously “emerges” when he keeps mentioning his personal acquaintances with famous politicians of European countries.

It is forgotten that people are not blind and they especially appreciate a person’s modesty. Their love and respect is greater, the more often a person who has climbed the highest career ladder is able to descend into their everyday life without exalting himself.

After two evenings of debates – on matters of foreign policy and increasing the country’s security – there was still hope for a concrete and pragmatic vision for the country’s economy, but it was after this part that it became clear that the last debate was not even worth waiting for. Because where there are no strong economic foundations, it is not worth looking for visions, which are usually characterized by empty promises, hitched to the carriage of populism. They could be attributed to nothing but visions or favorable circumstances. But this is no longer the domain of rational elections, but of the presidential lottery.

We saw the failed debate on economic issues on the air of LRT this Monday – and after all, it should and could have become a “game-changing topic”, because the content of Lithuania as a welfare state depends on it. Paradoxically, the 7 contenders for the nation’s leaders (I. Šimonytė did not participate in the show because she had gone to the meeting of the prime ministers of the Baltic countries with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz) got bogged down in the details of fragmented economic issues.

The national broadcaster was partly to blame for this, instead of focusing on solutions that ensure the competitiveness and modernity of the Lithuanian economy, it led the participants to non-constructive economic pop topics that tickled the emotions of the citizens recently. There was no talk at all of business as the backbone of economic well-being, as if it were an eternal sin in this land of Mary, save for a few desperate attempts to inject the “earner more must pay more” argument into taxation.

Only G. Jeglinskas at some point offered to “return to the strategic discussion”, but did not receive any reaction or support from the participants. These pseudo-debates were dominated not by the intelligent insights of intelligent men, what they would do or propose (if they became president) so that the citizens of Lithuania would live in a prosperous state, but by personal attacks and unsubstantiated criticism of opponents and even ignorance of the issues under discussion.

Perhaps, this time D. Žalimas was surprised by his rationality, which was served by his professional skills – he seemed the most logical and often spoke “on topic”, even on such a specific issue as the Social Insurance Fund and the purpose of its reserve. He was the only one who pointed out that all the manna promised by the candidates to the voters is impossible without increasing the productivity of the economy.

The current president G. Nausėda also felt good in the discussion, perhaps the only one who expressed a more restrained position on taxes and increasing pensions, pointing out that their increase is hardly possible without increasing taxes. Although his barely controlled irritation in response to Igna Vēgėlė’s direct criticism caught the eye.

And others made sweet promises to the voters, without bothering too much to explain from whom they intended to finance their generosity and, obsessed with gambling, competed, each offering more to people to withdraw money from pension funds or even to abolish them altogether, apparently seeing a global phenomenon in the future, when the rich and a happy old age will be ensured by the state-owned Lithuanian “Sodra” for everyone. Although most likely the gentlemen, without feeling responsible, have calculated that they will have to spill the cooked porridge on other politicians. In addition, there is always the tried-and-tested option of other presidents, at the decisive moment, to throw this headache over to another “mortalist” Government – after all, the implementation of such mundane problems is not the concern of a high-ranking president, right?

E. Vaitkus was the most predictable with his incompetence and slogans on economic issues, who “reasoned” something about VAT instead of his approach to real estate tax. While talking to the applicant, you thought that maybe the doctor was being misled by his advisor Zigmas Vaišvila, who kept jumping up and down in the studio and obsessively fiddling with some type of papers. Unlike the other candidates, at least we know who would be sitting in the back seat to him in Daukanta Square…

Maybe it would really be better for Lithuania if the future president continued to stay away from the country’s domestic politics and focus on the constitutional functions of forming his foreign policy, because it became obvious from the debates that, instead of looking for synergy with the Government, while nurturing the country’s competitive economy that enriches all of us, the contenders ready to take on the role of Santa Claus, albeit with a holey gift bag.

EDITORIAL ARTICLE (editorial) – an essay reflecting the opinions of the editorial office, written in its name, often without specifying the specific author, often responding to some events, facts, trends. It is characterized by a small, often the same volume for all editorial articles in the publication, a concise presentation of ideas, thesis-like argumentation, and elements of journalistic rhetoric are used. It is customary to present conclusions, summaries that reflect the editorial’s provisions. / Encyclopedia of Journalism /