[hardlianotion]

I don't know, but would a significant component of Poland's growth stem from the fact that it is still a significant net recipient of EU funding?

[inglor_cz]

So are sluggish economies like Hungary.

Again, it is not the amount of money you receive as whether you can use them in a productive way. Poland invested heavily into infrastructure and was able to reduce the NIMBY problem that is so prominent in Czechia or Germany and leads to decade-long paper wars over every railway, road and housing project. Of course they now reap the benefits.

As a neighbour, I am a bit frustrated by the difference that is becoming ever more visible. CZ is stuck in a bad vetocracy, hopefully the new government, populist as it may be, will change it a bit. (One reason for my hope is that the Mayor party is in opposition. They were the biggest fans of the vetocracy, because it gave power to regional politicians.)

In general, if you can learn from somebody, adapt the good things and not the bad ones. If you are allowed to choose, of course. But that requires some degree of freedom.

[hardlianotion]

For sure net funding isn't everything, but I am inclined to think it is something significant.

[nubg]

That's German propaganda. The Poles have more common sense when it comes to welfare and work ethic. Most Ukrainians that went there are working and not even complaining (I mean why would they? they are a normal hard-working people), while in Germany most of them are on welfare (one gets spoiled very fast when you get free money and have no obligations).

[hardlianotion]

1% of GDP (assuming my calculation isn't nonsense) when growth is between 3-4% isn't insignificant.

[hardlianotion]

Net EU funding appears to be roughly 1% of GDP (source being random internet searches and rough calculation).