'hey proles, I'm sorry but your public services are too expensive...

why is this allowed?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/b-nE5XChP-M
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

What do you expect. They're acting in their class interest. There's no way to change that without revolution and the bourgeoisie and their allies have all the firepower. We're rapidly approaching the end of the human experiment.

Because we never shoot them for doing it?

youtu.be/b-nE5XChP-M

Even the threat of serious unrest would go a long way. I can definitely see things going that way as governments across the west continue sniffing the farts of austerity.

What kind of loser would actually attend one of those talks?

Considering the amount of tax money pumped into those banks, they should be public property by now

the quads foretold it: there will be unrest.

srsly tho, it's bound to happen. europe is becoming a shithole and it's expanding to more than the southern countries. even france's in trouble now.

Because anything public that does not benefit capitalism is an obstacle to the capital and therefore must be eradicated.

People have low expectations and no optimism these days, life is shit, it must always be shit, no fun allowed. So they allow nice things to be taken away from them because they absorb this.

Because Porky is king and because there's serious laziness and inertia in the economics profession (mostly because Porky is king. Why fund a post-Keynesian who'll tell you the market is a dynamic mess of a thing when you can pay Friedman to suck your cock?)

Also because people are quickly distracted from the spending on banks and drawn to the intuitive analogy to a household (things are bad so cut spending) even though cutting government spending (surprise surprise) means households (or businesses other than banks, who employ the people in households) have to cut spending to compensate.

Steve Keen's book "Debunking Economics" has some interesting model scenarios near the end where it shows how in a society with relatively simple class structures (iirc it was "workers" "capitalists" and "bankers" + a government in one) bankers often wind up worse off if you were to have a "citizens bailout" or throw government money at businesses than if you gave nobody a bailout, and since banks have a substantial lobbying arm and a revolving door with government economic advisors and others…


The worst part is that it's not even tax money directly, it's often money created from nothing (but not printed, it's electronic!) and handed to them with the expectation they'll lend it out (they won't, because they're scared they won't get it back, because a bubble just burst.) based on the meme idea of the money multiplier, making a mockery of the simple idea that the funds available are limited. The amount of money that exists (in computers anyway) was increased a huge amount to buy up assets from banks, but to do the same with public spending would be absolutely unacceptable… (even if you accept that it's inflationary, which isn't a given, the Bank of England was regularly undershooting their 2% inflation target until recently - so give people some damn cash-in-hand and hit the target!)

That said iirc Northern Rock and… I want to say Royal Bank of Scotland were nationalized in the UK because of just how terrible their balance sheets were, so it's still loosely possible for that to happen.

lmao

what?

Some of them were at least in the UK, the government sold them at a loss to the porky friends of the current ruling party

they do. there's all kinds of toxic mortgages around. they don't give a shit because they know they'll be bailed out

the OP is a retard who doesn't understand why things the State provides to prop-up capitalism are deprioritized to keep afloat capitalist firms. They're an ignoramous, I'm just making light of the fact that the basis for their blindness is rooted in thinking public programs are a good thing, that welfare is a good thing, that gibmedats are somehow more important for the state than making sure Capital doesn't collapse. Its almost as if the person is a Statist or a tankie and is retarded and can't fathom how the Banks are more important than the human capital to the State. Weird isn't it???

ok tone down the autism dial now

Oh, they'll get it back.
But immediately after a boom, their irrational speculative tendency is suddenly blunted. It's one of the cycles of capitalism.


I would interpret the question as more "why do the citizens accept the state's hypocrisy on this issue"

how can anyone ever take you seriously mate

Alright, but this didn't happen after 2008.

Oh, that's the fun part. Neoliberalism should have died in 2008, but it didn't. It staggers on, ghost-like.

As Bachman–Turner Overdrive so memorably let us know: You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet…

Partly because people don't know how money is created, partly because people are apathetic.

it sure does, because they have the cultural hegemony. the only people who oppose are buffoons.