POL Politiek
Discussies en diepgaande gesprekken over de politiek in de breedste zin van het woord kun je hier voeren.
Een interview met Guy Standing over het precariaat. Het precariaat is ontstaan door het neoliberalisme en bestaat grofweg uit mensen met een laag salaris die geen vast werk hebben en ook weinig sociale zekerheid kennen. Ze weten zich niet vertegenwoordigd door de traditionele politieke partijen en stemmen als ze dat doen daarom vaak populistisch.
quote:‘Jobs, jobs, jobs is geen progressief project’
De gele hesjes zijn voor Guy Standing een teken dat het precariaat ontwaakt als klasse. De Britse econoom hoopt dat het protest zal zorgen voor een beter begrip van wat het precariaat precies wil. "Denken dat geluk voor die klasse uit jobs zal komen, is madness".
Weet je wat? We privatiseren de uitkeringsinstanties want de markt is altijd efficiënter:
UWV werkt wachtlijsten illegaal in rap tempo weg: 1900 mensen krijgen levenslange uitkering
Dus ook de neo-liberalen willen een basisinkomen.
UWV werkt wachtlijsten illegaal in rap tempo weg: 1900 mensen krijgen levenslange uitkering
Dus ook de neo-liberalen willen een basisinkomen.
Free Assange! Hack the Planet
[b]Op dinsdag 6 januari 2009 19:59 schreef Papierversnipperaar het volgende:[/b]
De gevolgen van de argumenten van de anti-rook maffia
[b]Op dinsdag 6 januari 2009 19:59 schreef Papierversnipperaar het volgende:[/b]
De gevolgen van de argumenten van de anti-rook maffia
Het UWV is niet geprivatiseerd. Je artikel is nu juist een voorbeeld van iets dat alleen zal gebeuren als het niet om je eigen centen gaat.quote:Op woensdag 20 februari 2019 17:39 schreef Papierversnipperaar het volgende:
Weet je wat? We privatiseren de uitkeringsinstanties want de markt is altijd efficiënter:
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Bernie Madoff, Schiphol...quote:Op woensdag 20 februari 2019 17:43 schreef nostra het volgende:
[..]
Het UWV is niet geprivatiseerd. Je artikel is nu juist een voorbeeld van iets dat alleen zal gebeuren als het niet om je eigen centen gaat.
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Wat is daarmee?quote:
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Spoelen al lachend andermans geld door de WC, en aangezien ze het parlement toch wel omkopen is het dikke prima.quote:
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Ja goed, dit wordt een beetje lukraak wat (rechts)personen roepen, daar kan ik niet zoveel mee.quote:Op woensdag 20 februari 2019 19:45 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:
Spoelen al lachend andermans geld door de WC, en aangezien ze het parlement toch wel omkopen is het dikke prima.
Schiphol is overigens nog steeds een staatsbedrijf en Madoff zit levenslang vast.
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Gelukkig heeft het linkse Amsterdam de privatisering van Schiphol geblokkeerd ja. Dan zou het al helemaal een vrijstaat binnen een staat zijn.
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Er is zeker wat voor te zeggen om Schiphol niet te privatiseren inderdaad.quote:Op woensdag 20 februari 2019 19:59 schreef Klopkoek het volgende:
Gelukkig heeft het linkse Amsterdam de privatisering van Schiphol geblokkeerd ja.
Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Far across the moonbeam I know that's who you are
Volgens mij kun je beter zakendoen met Shell dan met Lukoil, Aramco of PDVSA.quote:
https://twitter.com/peterkwint/status/1098228718240178176
Dit moet een grap zijn.
Power is a lot like real estate, it's all about location, location, location.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
Ken geen bedrijf wat zo goed voor het personeel en hun families is als Shellquote:Op woensdag 20 februari 2019 21:53 schreef GSbrder het volgende:
[..]
Volgens mij kun je beter zakendoen met Shell dan met Lukoil, Aramco of PDVSA.
In Baden-Badener Badeseen kann man Baden-Badener baden sehen.
Of Ken Saro-Wiwaquote:
[..]
Ken geen bedrijf wat zo goed voor het personeel en hun families is als Shell
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Eens, de Nigeriaanse dictatuur heeft er een potje van gemaakt.quote:
Op
Power is a lot like real estate, it's all about location, location, location.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
Dat zijn allemaal staatsbedrijven uit niet-democratische landen. Neem dan Statoil.quote:
[..]
Volgens mij kun je beter zakendoen met Shell dan met Lukoil, Aramco of PDVSA.
Zo vermoeiend dit. Zelfde tactiek als links gelijkstellen aan Cuba.
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Je lijkt die Tucker Carlson wel. Leuk.quote:
[..]
Eens, de Nigeriaanse dictatuur heeft er een potje van gemaakt.
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Statoil, het bedrijf dat in Iran aan omkoping heeft gedaan?quote:
[..]
Dat zijn allemaal staatsbedrijven uit niet-democratische landen. Neem dan Statoil.
Zo vermoeiend dit. Zelfde tactiek als links gelijkstellen aan Cuba.
Of Statoil, dat in Canada voor forse milieuschade heeft gezorgd bij de Athabasca teerzandvelden?
En Statoil, de staatsonderneming die met de winning van Britse olievelden stopte toen de UK de belasting wilde verhogen en ze vervolgens een MI6-chef aannamen als strategisch adviseur?
Power is a lot like real estate, it's all about location, location, location.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
The closer you are to the source, the higher your property value.
quote:Berlin Builds an Arsenal of Ideas to Stage a Housing Revolution
The proposals might seem radical—from banning huge corporate landlords to freezing rents for five years—but polls show the public is ready for something dramatic.
[...]
The view from nowhere.
SP-FvD-PVV?twitter:WNLVandaag twitterde op zondag 24-02-2019 om 11:31:23 SP-leider Marijnissen wil arbeidsmigratie beperken: "Het probleem ligt bij de open grenzen die we in Europa hebben." #WNL https://t.co/eiy2Vlb50U reageer retweet
SP-leider Marijnissen wil arbeidsmigratie beperken: "Het probleem ligt bij de open grenzen die we in Europa hebben." 
[ Bericht 62% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 24-02-2019 15:57:15 ]
Ze reageren alle drie op de grenzeloosheid van het neoliberalisme (wat de sociale / politieke orde ondermijnt), maar niet om dezelfde reden / grief.quote:SP-FvD-PVV?twitter:WNLVandaag twitterde op zondag 24-02-2019 om 11:31:23 SP-leider Marijnissen wil arbeidsmigratie beperken: "Het probleem ligt bij de open grenzen die we in Europa hebben." #WNL https://t.co/eiy2Vlb50U reageer retweet
The view from nowhere.
Privacy voor de elite (de Peter Thiels van deze wereld), kennisoverwicht over de rest. Kennis is macht.
Met dank aan de usual suspects
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
However, this isn’t where I think the heart of the problem is located. Most of the graphs you pick up show a pretty significant spike in inequality and capture when you start getting into the 1% or .01%. And this is where you see people making private, bottle-service public policy – that is, policy that has almost no public benefit other than to make society work well for the wealthy. Claiming tax deductions for private jets when so many people can’t afford daycare is an example of a rigged system. What I was interested in exploring in Winners Take All is the way in which elites at the very top use the conquest of language, of culture and of our common sense to cement their role and social position
----------
I think philanthropy is a Band-Aid on a bleeding tumor. To be sure, there’s blood, and the Band-Aid helps with that. But the Band-Aid is inadequate to the underlying problem. To stretch the metaphor further: the Band-Aid may give you a false sense of confidence that the problem is being handled. In an age of extraordinary generosity from plutocrats, we are at risk of forgetting that the same class of people are also undermining the greater good every day and on an ongoing basis.
The problem with philanthropy is that it depends on and trusts the voluntarism of the people with the most to lose from change to be our changemakers. I don’t think philanthropists are all horrible people. This is not about individual morality. That is hardly the point. This is about whom you trust to play a leadership role in deciding what the common good is, what our policy priorities should be, and how we make the world better.
In so many ways, we have outsourced the betterment of our world to people with a vested interest in making sure we don’t make it too, too much better. I’m going to give an example that may sound extreme to some people: what we often do today would be analogous to if we had gone around to plantation owners in Alabama in the 1800s and asked them to lead organizations advancing racial justice. It’s impossible. They can’t be the ones to do it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The second piece of the answer is that we should be solving way fewer of these problems through philanthropic giving in the first place. We should be living in a world in which people can’t make as much money as they do right now and profit to a cruel degree on the labor of poor people, mostly black and brown, and then turn around and be able to throw coin at them. This type of change is only achievable through policy. So when Elizabeth Warren proposes a wealth tax in part to fund universal childcare, her motivation is to achieve broad-based justice for many people without putting the ruling class in a leadership position.
And if the ruling class doesn’t like it, they are free to choose any country on earth that offers them a better deal. I am a patriot. I don’t think they’re going to go anywhere. All these billionaires who threaten to take the next plane to Singapore if we tax their 10 millionth dollar at 70% or we take 2% of their wealth in a wealth tax – I think they’re all bluffing and I’m willing to play poker with any one of them.
https://www.theguardian.c(...)iew-winners-take-all
----------
I think philanthropy is a Band-Aid on a bleeding tumor. To be sure, there’s blood, and the Band-Aid helps with that. But the Band-Aid is inadequate to the underlying problem. To stretch the metaphor further: the Band-Aid may give you a false sense of confidence that the problem is being handled. In an age of extraordinary generosity from plutocrats, we are at risk of forgetting that the same class of people are also undermining the greater good every day and on an ongoing basis.
The problem with philanthropy is that it depends on and trusts the voluntarism of the people with the most to lose from change to be our changemakers. I don’t think philanthropists are all horrible people. This is not about individual morality. That is hardly the point. This is about whom you trust to play a leadership role in deciding what the common good is, what our policy priorities should be, and how we make the world better.
In so many ways, we have outsourced the betterment of our world to people with a vested interest in making sure we don’t make it too, too much better. I’m going to give an example that may sound extreme to some people: what we often do today would be analogous to if we had gone around to plantation owners in Alabama in the 1800s and asked them to lead organizations advancing racial justice. It’s impossible. They can’t be the ones to do it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The second piece of the answer is that we should be solving way fewer of these problems through philanthropic giving in the first place. We should be living in a world in which people can’t make as much money as they do right now and profit to a cruel degree on the labor of poor people, mostly black and brown, and then turn around and be able to throw coin at them. This type of change is only achievable through policy. So when Elizabeth Warren proposes a wealth tax in part to fund universal childcare, her motivation is to achieve broad-based justice for many people without putting the ruling class in a leadership position.
And if the ruling class doesn’t like it, they are free to choose any country on earth that offers them a better deal. I am a patriot. I don’t think they’re going to go anywhere. All these billionaires who threaten to take the next plane to Singapore if we tax their 10 millionth dollar at 70% or we take 2% of their wealth in a wealth tax – I think they’re all bluffing and I’m willing to play poker with any one of them.
https://www.theguardian.c(...)iew-winners-take-all
Deuger & Gutmensch
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Het is ideologisch gedreven:quote:
I think philanthropy is a Band-Aid on a bleeding tumor.
- staat georganiseerde solidariteit (verplicht / belasting) vervangen door private filantropie (vrijwillig).
- het gaat niet om de mensen die het nodig hebben, maar om het ontmantelen van de staat.
- de winnaars, 'de piek van de meritocratie', bepalen (geen democratie).
Dat is de onderliggende neoliberale ratio.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door deelnemer op 28-02-2019 18:41:20 ]
The view from nowhere.
