fbpx

Author: Fred Roeder

More Effective E-Cig Regulations Could Save Approximately 200 Million Lives

A recent study of 61 countries and their e-cigarette regulations, has indicated that setting place more effective vape regulations could save the lives of almost 200 million people.

A recent study conducted by The World Vapers’ Alliance (WVA) together with the Consumer Choice Center, examined 61 countries and their subsequent e-cig regulations. The research team used the UK’s progressive tobacco harm reduction policies, which endorse the use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation as a reference point. Then they analysed how many current smokers would be encouraged to switch in each of the other countries, if they had access to such a permissive framework.

After compiling data from these countries, the research team concluded that with a regulatory regime which facilitates and encourages e-cigarettes as a means to quit smoking, 196 million of current smokers in those countries could switch to vaping.

Director of the World Vapers’ Alliance, Michael Landl, said that this data indicates just how great the potential of e-cigarettes is for public health. “While the benefits of vaping as an alternative to smoking have been known for some time, today’s research shows just how significant the potential is: almost 200 million lives saved. If COVID has shown us anything, it’s that our health is paramount and regulators that want people to quit smoking need to be led by science and ensure that ideology takes a back seat to pragmatism.”

The results speak for themselves

Infact in the UK, approximately 25% fewer people smoke today than they did in 2013 when vaping became popular, and the nation is even boasting the lowest smoking rates recorded since cigarettes came on the scene. France, Canada and New Zealand whose approach is more similar to the UK, are also seeing positive results. On the other hand, Australia, one of the countries with the toughest vaping regulations, has witnessed only a mere 8% decline during the same period.

“Smart rules on advertising e-cigarettes to smokers, displaying e-cigarettes at the point of sale for cigarettes, lower rates of taxation for e-cigarettes, and public health bodies endorsing the evidence of vaping being at least 95% less harmful than traditional smoking, everything that the UK has done right, can help save the lives of thousands of smokers by helping them switch to vaping,” said Fred Roeder, Managing Director of the Consumer Choice Center, said about the report.

The PHE’s latest report on vaping

In the UK, Public Health England (PHE) is renowned for recommending switching from smoking to vaping, and  progressive frameworks for vaping have been introduced accordingly. Carried out by researchers at the renowned King’s College London, the organization’s seventh independent report on vaping in England, was commended by tobacco harm reduction experts.

The report highlighted the following points:

  • “Vaping is the most popular aid (27.2%) used by smokers trying to quit in England in 2020
  • More than 50,000 smokers stopped smoking in 2017 with the aid of vaping
  • 38% of smokers believed that vaping is as harmful as smoking while 15% believed that vaping is more harmful”

Originally published here.

Resilience: Prepping for the next virus

Looking at the history of viruses, we would be negligent to think that we can relax and stop worrying about viruses by overcoming the current pandemic

Novel viruses emerge regularly and, in some cases, make it into the human body and potentially causing harm to our health. HIV, Ebola, and SARS were and are just a few new viral threats in the last four decades.

Research on treating the diseases they cause or even finding a vaccine against them has been slow but recently more promising.

Traditionally, it took a few decades from identifying a virus to have an effective vaccine ready to be administered. As an example: Over three decades and $500 billion had to be spent to get close to curing HIV.

All of this dramatically changed with Covid-19.

While Covid-19 poses one of the most devastating public health challenges globally, scientists broke records by finding (multiple) effective vaccines against it within sometimes days and not decades. So while the coranavirus took countless lives, placed billions of people into lockdown, and the global economy in turmoil, there’s a silver lining given the pace of biotechnological innovations protecting us from this threat.

Health systems have several tools on hand to combat a viral threat: Using masks, disinfecting surfaces, social distancing, or applying existing drug treatments to new viruses. But when it comes to creating a general immunity among the population, there’s only one alternative to a large proportion of the population contracting the virus: mass vaccinations.

Thanks to massive advances in gene-editing technology and a deeper understanding of how to utilise messenger RNA to teach the human body to fight viruses, companies like Moderna and BioNTech developed their highly effective vaccines within days. This breakthrough came definitely at the right time and might have reduced the severity and shortened the duration of the pandemic by a significant factor.

Looking at the history of viruses, we would be negligent to think that we can relax and stop worrying about viruses by overcoming the current pandemic. On the contrary, we should utilise the lessons learned in the last year-and-a-half and tweak our regulatory approach to biotech innovations so that these vaccines can make it to patients even faster.

While it took Moderna merely 48 hours to come up with a vaccine, still, it took ten months of regulatory approvals, clinical trials, and other bureaucratic hurdles to overcome before their vaccine could get administered to regular patients. If we look at the lives lost, psychological isolation of people in lockdown, and the economic costs of each day, week, and month between discovering a vaccine and its authorisation, we should ensure to streamline this process as much as possible.

Most existing regulatory frameworks are built on the assumption that it takes at least a decade to develop a vaccine and hence not made for fast and computer simulation-supported development of mRNA vaccines.

A more agile framework would give AI tools and computer predictions a more prominent role to shorten clinical trials. It would also embrace global reciprocity: If one reputable authorisation body has greenlighted a vaccine, patients in other countries should automatically get access to it as well. 

The UAE has recently shown that it approves some of the most innovative medical products as fast or even more quickly than the European Union or the United States.

Reciprocity in vaccine approval facilitates healthy competition among medicines agencies across the world in which pharmaceutical companies run trials and seek approval in those jurisdictions that embrace this agile approach.

Agencies that miss out on this will see fewer trials run in their countries and lose out on attractive biotech investments in their region. Smart regulation will not only create new and booming biotech clusters but also, and even more importantly, allow us to overcome the next pandemic within months and not years. Millions of lives could be saved and billions if not trillions of economic output secured.

Preparing for the next pandemic means developing and embracing a regulatory toolkit that gives as many vaccine developers and manufacturers the air to breathe they need to get these relatively inexpensive lifesavers to the people. The UAE should be at the forefront of this and embrace the most agile vaccine approval framework.

Originally published here.

Wie der Zugang zu Corona-Impfstoffen beschleunigt werden kann

Die Corona-Pandemie hat gezeigt: die Zulassungsverfahren für neue Medikamente sind zu bürokratisch und zu langsam. Abhilfe könnte eine wechselseitige Anerkennung von Zulassungen durch die Behörden schaffen.

Nun also die Deltamutante. Kaum hat sich die Stimmung der Menschen im Gefolge der Corona-Lockerungen gebessert, droht mit der jüngsten Mutation des Corona-Virus ein Rückschlag im Kampf gegen die Pandemie. Dabei war Experten von vornherein klar, dass auch das Corona-Virus mutieren wird. Neuartige Viren tauchen immer wieder auf, mutieren und schaffen es in einigen Fällen, in den menschlichen Körper einzudringen und unserer Gesundheit potenziell zu schaden. 

HIV, Ebola und SARS waren und sind nur einige der neuen viralen Bedrohungen in den letzten vier Jahrzehnten. Die Forschung zur Behandlung der Krankheiten, die sie verursachen, oder sogar zur Entwicklung eines Impfstoffs gegen sie verlief langsam, aber in letzter Zeit immer vielversprechender. In der Vergangenheit dauerte es ein paar Jahrzehnte von der Identifizierung eines Virus bis zur Freigabe eines wirksamen Impfstoffs, der verabreicht werden kann. Ein Beispiel: Über drei Jahrzehnte und 500 Milliarden Dollar mussten aufgewendet werden, um der Heilung von HIV nahe zu kommen. All dies hat sich mit COVID19 dramatisch geändert.

Während COVID19 eine der verheerendsten Herausforderungen für die öffentliche Gesundheit weltweit darstellt, brachen Wissenschaftler Rekorde, indem sie (mehrere) wirksame Impfstoffe innerhalb von manchmal Tagen und nicht Jahrzehnten fanden. Während also das Coranavirus zahllose Menschenleben forderte, Milliarden von Menschen einschloss und die Weltwirtschaft in Aufruhr versetzte, gibt es angesichts des Tempos biotechnologischer Innovationen, die uns vor dieser Bedrohung schützen, auch einen Hoffnunsschimmer am Horizont.

Bürokratische Hürden

Gesundheitssysteme haben mehrere Werkzeuge zur Hand, um eine virale Bedrohung zu bekämpfen: Die Verwendung von Masken, die Desinfektion von Oberflächen, soziale Distanzierung oder die Anwendung bestehender medikamentöser Behandlungen gegen neue Viren. Aber wenn es darum geht, eine allgemeine Immunität in der Bevölkerung zu schaffen, gibt es nur eine Option: Massenimpfungen.

Dank massiver Fortschritte in der Gen-Editing-Technologie und einem tieferen Verständnis dafür, wie man Boten-RNA nutzen kann, um dem menschlichen Körper beizubringen, Viren zu bekämpfen, haben Unternehmen wie Moderna und BioNTech innerhalb weniger Tage ihre hochwirksamen Impfstoffe entwickelt. Dieser Durchbruch kam definitiv zur richtigen Zeit und könnte die Schwere und Dauer der Pandemie bedeutend reduziert haben.

Mit Blick auf die Geschichte der Viren wäre es fahrlässig zu glauben, dass wir uns mit der Überwindung der aktuellen Pandemie entspannen und aufhören können, uns um Viren zu sorgen. Im Gegenteil, wir sollten die Lehren aus den letzten anderthalb Jahren nutzen und unseren regulatorischen Ansatz für biotechnologische Innovationen optimieren, damit diese Impfstoffe noch schneller zu den Patienten gelangen können.

Während Moderna nur 48 Stunden brauchte, um einen Impfstoff zu entwickeln, gingen dennoch zehn Monate mit behördlichen Genehmigungen, klinischen Studien und anderen bürokratischen Hürden ins Land, bevor der Impfstoff regulären Patienten verabreicht werden konnte. Wenn wir uns die verlorenen Menschenleben, die psychologische Isolation der eingeschlossenen Menschen und die wirtschaftlichen Kosten jeden Tages, jeder Woche und jeden Monats zwischen der Entdeckung eines Impfstoffs und seiner Zulassung ansehen, sollten wir alles tun, um diesen Prozess so weit wie möglich zu straffen. 

Schnellere Zulassung durch Reziprozität

Die meisten bestehenden regulatorischen Rahmenbedingungen basieren auf der Annahme, dass es mindestens ein Jahrzehnt dauert, einen Impfstoff zu entwickeln und sind daher nicht für die schnelle und computersimulationsgestützte Entwicklung von mRNA-Impfstoffen gemacht. Ein agileres Rahmenwerk würde KI-Tools und Computer-Vorhersagen eine prominentere Rolle einräumen, um klinische Studien zu verkürzen. Es würde auch eine globale Reziprozität beinhalten: Wenn eine seriöse Zulassungsbehörde grünes Licht für einen Impfstoff gegeben hat, sollten Patienten in anderen Ländern automatisch auch Zugang erhalten. 

Reziprozität bei der Impfstoffzulassung erleichtert einen gesunden Wettbewerb zwischen den Arzneimittelbehörden auf der ganzen Welt, in dem pharmazeutische Unternehmen Studien durchführen und die Zulassung in jenen Ländern beantragen, die diesen agilen Ansatz unterstützen. Regierungen, die dies verpassen, werden weniger Studien in ihren Ländern sehen und attraktive Biotech-Investitionen in ihrer Region verlieren. Eine intelligente Regulierung wird nicht nur neue und boomende Biotech-Cluster schaffen, sondern auch, und das ist noch wichtiger, es uns ermöglichen, die nächste Pandemie innerhalb von Monaten und nicht Jahren zu überwinden. Millionen von Leben könnten gerettet und Milliarden, wenn nicht Billionen an Wirtschaftsleistung gesichert werden.

Sich auf die nächste Pandemie vorzubereiten, bedeutet, ein regulatorisches Instrumentarium zu entwickeln, das Impfstoffentwicklern und -herstellern die Luft zum Atmen gibt, die sie brauchen, um diese relativ preiswerten Lebensretter zu den Menschen zu bringen.

Originally published here.

It’s time for a single market for savings and investments

Give savers more options.

Saving to invest is an important factor in how consumers build capital. In fact, in many European countries it is seen as a virtue to be meticulous savers, as opposed to lavish spenders. If only governments would act in the same way…

That said, how Europeans save can vary significantly from our American friends. In fact, less than 15% of Europeans (often merely 1% in Central and Eastern Europe, 15% in Germany, up to 40% in the Netherlands invest directly or indirectly in stocks. By contrast, up to half of American households have purchased stocks directly or equity through funds, most of the time as a long-term saving commitment. One reason is that while working with financial services across state lines is seemingless in the United States (think the federal 401k retirement accounts scheme), Europe is on a higher level of complication. 

The S&P 500 Index had an average annual growth performance of 8%. Most Europeans can only dream of such annual yields that double one’s investment every nine years. The compound effects of this are even more significant. If a 29-year-old invests €40,000 at such an annual performance rate in stocks, she has €640,000 at age 65, and that does not even include additional cash injections into her investment account. For comparison, the average wealth of adults in Western Europe is around €250,000 (with a much lower median wealth).

But when we think of “investors” or buying and trading stocks in Europe, we picture wealthy individuals and large corporations. But in fact, lower-middle-class consumers can have their share in the world economy and guarantee themselves long-term growth if we ease the burdens on them purchasing stocks. Instead of propagating fear, legislators and regulators should embrace small-scale private investments and provide consumers with information. For too long, we have seen investors painted with a broad brush. Only in popular shows such as Shark Tank and Dragon’s Den have investors anywhere near the necessary appeal towards the more general public. At the same time, in parliaments across Europe, the mere word is side-eyed with suspicion.

In understanding the average European, buying shares is reserved for a financial elite or individuals with fortunes and large companies.  In reality, all classes of people can have a share in the global economy and secure long-term growth if we ease the burden on them when they buy shares. 

Instead of spreading fear, legislators and regulators should encourage small private investments and provide information to consumers. For too long, stock market investing has had a negative connotation. Unfortunately, it is only through popular shows such as Shark Tank and Dragon’s Den that people are discovering the appeal of investing. 

The European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) is currently under review. Legislators should take advantage of the situation to make it easier for people to invest, not more challenging to do so because of new regulatory changes. Legislators should create a true single market for equity investments and lower the barriers for companies offering equities and exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

Historically, stock markets have outperformed other types of savings systems. Currently, only a tiny proportion of Europeans are enjoying single-digit growth in their retirement savings. European policymakers should create a culture of citizen-shareholders through smart regulation and stop denigrating financial markets, as they can bring wealth to a large share of European savers.

Originally published here.

April 2020

Hello,

We at the Consumer Choice Center are excited to share this first comprehensive annual report with you.
Download Annual Report 2019
The year 2019 was definitely our best years so far. 
We were able to promote choice and evidence-based policies on four different continents and change policies and regulations towards more innovation and choice in several countries.

We helped to preserve streaming and payTV in Brazil, made cannabis more accessible for consumers in Canada, promoted smarter alcohol regulation in the several US States, and showed the risks for consumers of 5G infrastructure providers that are de facto controlled by the Communist Party of China. We wrote several policy papers on innovative topics such as ‘The Consumer Case for Intellectual Property’, ‘The Return of Supersonic Passenger Travel’, and ‘The Gene Revolution: Make Britain a Biotech Bonanza’.

Our indices on Europe’s most passenger-friendly airports and railway stations got hundreds of media hits and were even prominently featured in the annual reports of bluechip companies. Our reports also helped consumers to plan their trips and navigate airports and railway stations around Europe, choosing those more friendly and open for innovation. 

The current COVID-19 crisis shows how much the legacy model of civil society engagement is challenged by social distancing and self-isolation. Fortunately, we at the CCC have always had a large digital component in our campaign strategies.

We have been a remote organization from the beginning on, and our daily work routine has not much changed. In late February, our web traffic began exploding as more and more people started staying home and reading up on policy suggestions on how to tackle this public health crisis. 

Right now. we see that more digitization, liberalization, and the sharing economy are usually the catalysts that enable our society to cope with all the restrictions imposed on us. We are happy to take on the fight to ensure smart rules such as the online ordering of alcohol, expansion of retail shopping hours, and fast-tracking of innovative medicines and devices, much beyond COVID-19. At the same time, we will fight against bad policies and proposals that are being considered or implemented in times of crisis: Some of them are ideas such as infringing on intellectual property rights, banning alcohol consumption, and limiting consumers’ freedom of movement.

The next twelve months will be challenging but we as a team are very eager to fight for our core principles: consumer choice, unbiased evidence, and innovation. On behalf of the Consumer Choice Center Team,



Fred Roeder
Managing Director 
Consumer Choice Center

Stop the bailouts

The rulings on KLM, TAP, and Condor should be just the beginning

The airline RyanAir has successfully challenged the bailouts of the Dutch airline KLM, the Portuguese company TAP, and the German carrier Condor. The crusade of RyanAir CEO Michael O’Leary seems to show effects, as the €550 million bailout for Condor has been put on hold – despite the court not asking the money back immediately from the airline – while others are hanging in the balance.

TAP and KLM have seen the same things happen to them. In all three cases thus far, the justification of the European Court of Justice has been that the bailout funds hadn’t been sufficiently justified by the member states in question. Ryanair welcomed the two rulings as an “important victory for consumers and competition”. The state aid had violated the principle of the internal market in the EU and reversed the liberalisation of air transport. They led to unfair competition by inefficient companies. Europe’s largest low-cost airline has filed a total of 16 lawsuits against state aid to competitors with the Luxembourg court, including the billions in aid to Lufthansa. However, the EU court had rejected lawsuits against state funds for the Scandinavian SAS, Finnair and Air France. The Irish company had taken legal action in May 2020 to denounce on the one hand guaranteed loans granted by Sweden, in particular to the Scandinavian company SAS for an amount of 3.3 billion crowns (308 million euros).

In the case of France, as in the case of Sweden, it considers that the aid measures are indeed aimed at remedying the damage caused by this extraordinary event to airlines in both countries. The State aid is also considered to be “proportionate”.

One point where the ECJ judges in the Condor case see a need for clarification is the question of the costs for the insolvency proceedings. This had to be extended after the cancellation of the PGL (Polish Aviation Group). The EU Commission had not sufficiently explained why it had included the extended insolvency period when calculating the damage to Condor from the Corona crisis, the judges explained. In principle, the Commission itself has stipulated that only damages directly caused by the pandemic – such as cancelled flights – may be compensated with taxpayers’ money. Moreover, it had not been explained why the planned sale to PGL had failed because of the pandemic. On this point, improvements could solve the headaches of Condor, but it’s not a given.

The problem with only attacking the precise justifications is that while the ECJ temporarily suspends the bailouts, the court does not strike down the principle of airline bailouts at all. Most of these airlines demanded funds in just a few weeks after the lockdown measures began, showing that they were all short-stripped for cash to begin with. Why should taxpayers fund companies that do not secure themselves sufficiently for times of crisis? After all, individual citizens or small companies would also be asked to pay their bills – and if caught spending money they do not have, would be called fiscally irresponsible. How airlines balance (or rather not balance) their books is their business alone, and not that of the taxpayer.

Originally published here.

Regulate vaping to keep youth vaping incidences to a minimum, says consumer advocacy group

Regulating vaping can help keep youth vaping incidences to a minimum, said a UK-based consumer advocacy group.

In a statement today, the London-based Consumer Choice Center (CCC) said that in the UK, where vape is regulated, youth vaping incidences have been minimised.

It cited a report in 2021 by Action on Smoking and Health, which examined the use of e-cigarettes or vape among youths in Great Britain, that found that a large majority of 11 to 18-year-olds have never tried or are unaware of e-cigarettes (83%). This finding has remained consistent since 2017.

It said the survey further found that vaping is much less common among youths who have never smoked. A large majority of “never smokers” aged 11-18 years, 94.1% in total, have either never vaped (87.9%) or are not aware of them (6.2%).

In its recent policy note entitled “Age Restrictions of Vape Products”, CCC recommended the following:
• Introduce smart regulations and enforce strict age restrictions on vaping devices and liquids at the points of sale
• Use modern age verification technology for online sales
• Learn from other industries such as alcohol and fireworks on how to improve compliance rates
• Retail and industry should be encouraged to be more proactive with the enforcement of rules
• Do not punish legal adult vapers for the lack of enforcement of age restrictions

CCC managing director Fred Roeder said that instead of taking drastic measures such as banning vape, which will only drive more consumers to illegal products on the unregulated black market, a more coordinated approach by both regulators and industry can and should be explored.

“We believe that the regulations with strict enforcement on no-sale to the underage marks the distinction between consenting adult consumers and those who have not reached the legal age to make these decisions,” he said.

He also cited examples from the UK on how controls are put in place to stop the underage from purchasing products with age restrictions.

An example of such a solution is AgeChecked, a UK-based secured online age verification system that requests a buyer’s full name, billing address, and date of birth when placing an order.

This information must be entered as it will appear on the buyer’s driver’s license, electoral roll, or be used for a UK credit card, he said.

Originally published here.

Israel comes first in global Pandemic Resilience Index

Israel’s health system was named the most resilient to COVID-19 in the world in a recently released Pandemic Resilience Index. The index, published by global consumer advocacy group Consumer Choice Center, surveyed 40 countries about their health systems’ preparedness and resilience to the pandemic.

The index examined five factors: vaccination approval, vaccination drive, time lags that put breaks on giving vaccines, critical care bed capacity and mass testing. While Israel did not have the highest number of intensive care unit beds per capita or a high average of daily COVID-19 tests, it “is a clear winner when it comes to the speed of vaccinations” – which led to its top spot on the global list.

Second place went to Israel’s neighbor, the United Arab Emirates, which also had a high vaccination rate. The United States, the United Kingdom and Bahrain round out the top five places, while the bottom three went to Australia, New Zealand and Ukraine.

“The pandemic has put health systems globally to an emergency test and exposed both their strong and weak sides,” said Fred Roeder, CCC’s managing director and the index’s co-author. “In particular, that concerns hospital capacity, planning abilities, and the existence of a regulatory system that is able to act fast and efficiently when it comes to testing and vaccination, among other things. Moving forward, we hope our index will help policymakers identify weak spots in our health systems so we can be better prepared for future crises.”

Originally published here.

Israel comes first in global Pandemic Resilience Index

Israel’s quick vaccination rollout landed it the top spot in the global survey, followed by its new ally, the United Arab Emirates.

Israel’s health system was named the most resilient to Covid-19 in the world in a recently released Pandemic Resilience Index. The index, published by global consumer advocacy group Consumer Choice Center, surveyed 40 countries about their health systems’ preparedness and resilience to the pandemic.

The index examined five factors: vaccination approval, vaccination drive, time lags that put breaks on giving vaccines, critical care bed capacity and mass testing. While Israel did not have the highest number of ICU beds per capita or a high average of daily Covid-19 tests, it “is a clear winner when it comes to the speed of vaccinations” – which led to its top spot on the global list.

Second place went to Israel’s neighbor, the United Arab Emirates, which also had a high vaccination rate. The United States, the United Kingdom and Bahrain round off the top five places, while the bottom three went to Australia, New Zealand and Ukraine.

“The pandemic has put health systems globally to an emergency test and exposed both their strong and weak sides,” says Fred Roeder, CCC’s Managing Director and the index’s co-author. “In particular, that concerns hospital capacity, planning abilities, and the existence of a regulatory system that is able to act fast and efficiently when it comes to testing and vaccination, among other things.”

“Moving forward, we hope our Index will help policymakers identify weak spots in our health systems so we can be better prepared for future crises,” he added.

Originally published here.

DUBAJAUS VIZOS IR STARTUOLIAI: SUŽINOKITE APIE NUOTOLINIUS DARBUOTOJUS, PABĖGUSIUS IŠ UŽRAKINTO PASAULIO

Daugiau jaunų specialistų ir pradedančiųjų renkasi Dubajų savo namais – tarp pagrindinių vairuotojų taikant naujai sušvelnintas vizų taisykles ir greito skiepijimo programą.

Nacionalinis Kalbėkitės su Vokietijos buitinės technikos prekės ženklo įkūrėju, Didžiosios Britanijos programinės įrangos kompanija ir Lietuvos kelionių agentūra, kartu su kitais skaitmeninius nuotolinius darbuotojus, kurie žengė šį žingsnį.

Daugelis jų apsilankė per žiemos uždarymo įkarštį Europoje ir dabar nusprendė grįžti.

„Buvo daug žmonių, kurie čia atvyko praėjusį rudenį ir keletą mėnesių išbuvo dėl apribojimų savo šalyse“, – sakė Fredas Roederis, Londone įsikūrusio „Consumer Choice Center“ direktorius.

“Šiuo metu Dubajuje vyksta kardinalios pertvarkos, nes vis daugiau aukštos kvalifikacijos specialistų pradeda tai vadinti savo namais” Fredas Roederis, Vartotojų pasirinkimo centras.

– Nebuvo jokios kitos vietos, kur galėčiau eiti, kuri Covido laikais siūlė tas pačias laisves.

Daugelis šių lankytojų dabar visam laikui žengia šį žingsnį.

„Šiuo metu Dubajuje vyksta drastiški pokyčiai, nes vis daugiau aukštos kvalifikacijos specialistų pradeda tai vadinti savo namais“, – sakė jis.

Gerbiamas sveikatos ekonomistas Roederis reguliariai skelbia pasaulinį atsparumo reitingą, kuris parodo, kaip šalys sėkmingai susidorojo su pandemija, kuri praėjusią savaitę JAE užėmė antrąją vietą pasaulyje. 

Ji taip pat gyrė JAE už geresnį vakcinavimo kampanijos rezultatą, palyginti su Europos Sąjungos šalimis.

Kampanija, kurioje vienu metu siūlomi kadrai visų amžiaus grupių žmonėms, reiškia, kad atvykėliai gali gauti kadrus, kai tik bus paruošti jų gyvenamosios vietos dokumentai, o tai paprastai trunka tris ar keturias savaites.

„Nors laisvė yra labai didelė, vis tiek matai žmones, besilaikančius taisyklių, nematai, kad daugybė kitų šalių žmonių laikytų kaukes“, – sakė dabar Dubajuje gyvenantis vokietis ponas Roederis.

Vyriausybės sprendimas suteikti gyvenamosios vietos vizas nuotoliniam darbui daro ją labiau pageidaujamą vietą, ypač jauniems žmonėms.

Naujausi turimi duomenys iš Dubajaus turizmo kovo pabaigoje rodo, kad 1700 žmonių kreipėsi dėl nuotolinio darbo vizos. Programos nuoroda čia – Su priimtiniausiu. Pirmą kartą žmonėms leidžiama gyventi JAE ir dirbti užsienyje esančioje įmonėje, kuri čia neturi bazės.

Be to, 16 000 užsienio keliautojų nusprendė pasinaudoti nemokamu miesto vizų galiojimo pratęsimu sausio mėnesį, CNN Travel sakė Dubajaus turizmo vadovas Issamas Kazimas. Tradiciniai vizų metodai, kurie tinka vietos verslui, laisvai samdomiems darbuotojams ir pradedantiesiems, yra vis dar populiarūs.

Originally published here.

Fun Police

ConsEUmer Podcast

Consumer Choice Center Cast

Follow us

Facebook-f Twitter Instagram Linkedin Youtube Spotify

Contact Info

712 H St NE PMB 94982
Washington, DC 20002

info@consumerchoicecenter.org

© COPYRIGHT 2024, CONSUMER CHOICE CENTER

Scroll to top
en_USEN
it_ITIT pt_BRPT fr_FRFR es_ESES de_DEDE en_USEN