Author Topic: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni  (Read 29679 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Meho Krljic

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 51.386
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #550 on: 19-02-2020, 08:47:35 »
Uber, Lyft i takote ridesharing platforme koji nisu taksi kad treba da se plate porez i doprinosi ali jesu taksi u svim ostalim aspektima, su imale viziju da će smanjiti zagušenost urbanih saobraćajnica. Zašto? Ne znam, ali tako su pričali njihovi glasogovornici početkom decenije. Naravno, kao i sa svakim deregulisanim biznisom koji eksploatiše prekarijat, i gde neminovno nastupa trka ka dnu (kroz uštede i prebacivanje troškova na druge), dobili smo sasvim suprotan rezultat: gužvu.


The Ride-Hail Utopia That Got Stuck in Traffic

Quote
Five years ago, Travis Kalanick was so confident that Uber Technologies Inc.'s rides would prompt people to leave their cars at home that he told a tech conference: "If every car in San Francisco was Ubered there would be no traffic."
 Today, a mounting collection of studies shows the opposite: Far from easing traffic, Uber and its main rival Lyft Inc. are adding to congestion in numerous U.S. downtowns.



(...)


 Most users take their own private Lyfts and Ubers, shunning pooling even though it costs them more. Rather than the apps becoming a model of algorithm-driven efficiency, drivers in major cities cruise for fares without passengers an estimated 40% of the time.
 Multiple studies show that Uber and Lyft have pulled people away from buses, subways and walking, and that the apps add to the overall amount of driving in the U.S.



 A study published last year by San Francisco County officials and University of Kentucky researchers in the journal Science Advances found that over 60% of the slowdown of traffic speeds in San Francisco between 2010 and 2016 was due to the introduction of the ride-hail companies.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #551 on: 19-02-2020, 08:59:17 »
Baš neoliberalno: više vozila na ulici smanjuje gužvu u saobraćaju.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

Meho Krljic

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 51.386
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #552 on: 13-03-2020, 10:06:17 »
Pošto New Republic ograničava broj pregleda, kopiram ceo tekst.

Conservatives won their war on Big Government. Their prize is a pandemic.


Donald Trump’s televised address to the nation Wednesday night on the coronavirus pandemic failed just about every single test of political rhetoric. It neither reassured the American people nor did it inform them. The markets have continued their dismal tumble, and the White House took the extraordinary step of correcting (or, in Politico parlance, “walking back”) three separate untruths the president managed to deliver, despite seemingly sticking to his prepared remarks.Not that anyone, at this stage, expected the president to rise to the occasion. It has become apparent that Trump and his staff view a pandemic as a messaging problem that threatens to become a liquidity crisis. The idea that they should have stepped in to contain the virus is as foreign to them as the idea that they now bear the primary responsibility for mitigating it.

Congressional testimony earlier this week featured an illuminating exchange between Representative Andy Harris, a Republican and medical doctor, and Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Harris mainly wanted to use his time questioning the officials who were testifying before Congress to attack a Democratic proposal to lower drug costs for people on Medicare (Harris worries it would stifle “innovation” in the lucrative world of vaccine manufacturing) and to praise the superior ability of the private sector to handle such crises.
The problem, though, was that the private sector hasn’t yet done anything to slow down the virus. “Quest and LabCorp now are geared up to do [coronavirus tests],” Harris asked. “Could they have geared up sooner?”“As a clinician like yourself,” Redfield said in his answer, “I guess I anticipated that the private sector would have engaged and helped develop it for the clinical side.” He finished his response with more bewilderment: “I can tell you, having lived through the last eight weeks, I would have loved the private sector to be fully engaged eight weeks ago.”
Here were two men wondering aloud why reality had failed to conform to their ideology. Where was the private sector, exactly, during these eight weeks? How odd that these companies, whose only responsibility is to their shareholders, had failed to make up for the incompetence of this administration.

Redfield seems to have been selected to run the CDC not only because he was a prominent virologist, which made him appear qualified for the job, but also because of his hard-line politics, which made him qualified to serve in this Republican administration. Even at the time of his appointment, a few experts tried to warn the administration that, as concerning as his dodgy politics were, his complete lack of experience in public health administration was even more disturbing. His politics, as it turns out, matter much more than his expertise when it comes to making a vital agency function.

Redfield wasn’t using his medical experience when he answered the question of whether the United States would be able to set up the sort of mass drive-through tests that South Korea has used to stem the spread of the virus; he was using his politics. “I think we’re trying to maintain the relationship between individuals and their health care providers,” he said.It’s impossible to pin down precisely what led to that answer. Is it ignorance of most Americans’ relationship to the health care system? (A quarter of Americans have no primary care physician, and even among the insured, visits to primary care physicians have been declining for years, in large part due to costs.) Is it an ideological commitment to defending our for-profit health care system? Or is it merely the usual craven tendency of people in this administration to loudly assert into cameras that everything is fine? Soon, it won’t matter. The fantasy that everything is going to be fine is about to run up against an unavoidable reality. The only true answer to the question of when our government will be capable of responding to a pandemic with the vigor and efficiency of South Korea’s is “when we get around to building that government.”

Perhaps another Republican president would’ve handled this differently. President Marco Rubio likely wouldn’t have been so singularly focused on trying to make the TV say things are fine. But after two terms of George W. Bush and three years of President Trump, is there any reason for confidence that Rubio would’ve handled this significantly better?


This is how conservatives govern now, and even eight years of comparatively competent management by a liberal presidential administration was not enough to stem the larger trend of private negligence and public disinvestment. In its 2019 annual report on American public health funding, Trust for America’s Health calculated that “the CDC’s budget fell by 10 percent over the past decade (FY 2010–19), after adjusting for inflation.”

Many Americans seem to still believe we live in a country with functional institutions. Even as broadly defined “trust” in Congress and the government collapsed, this belief persisted: In 2017, with Trump in office, Pew still found that more than 60 percent of Americans believed the government did a good job “protecting the environment and responding to natural disasters.” Indeed, a lot of the conservative project of corrupting or starving government agencies depends on an almost touching belief in the resiliency of the institutions liberalism built in the twentieth century. Even the people dismantling the government probably believed, at some level, that the CDC could effectively address a massive public health crisis even though its new director was unqualified and its budget had declined for years. Despite its grip on power, the conservative movement cannot adapt to the circumstances created by its victory over the state. It didn’t occur to the right that a more terrifying series of words than “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help” would turn out to be “I’m from the government, and I guess I anticipated that the private sector would have engaged.”There is perhaps only one competent and uncorrupted top-ranking official left in the federal government’s public health bureaucracy. The Department of Health and Human Services had its entire email system crash because the secretary is in a fight with the person who is ostensibly in charge of Medicare. The government added millions of masks and respirators to the Strategic National Stockpile in 2009, then forgot about them and forgot to buy more. Five million of the N95 respirators have expired.

In the absence of a functioning federal government, how the crisis plays out will depend in large part on whether you live in a well-managed state or a poorly managed one. In Minnesota, they are beginning curbside testing. California is dipping into its own emergency stockpile of surgical masks and respirators. The response may be less effective in, say, Texas, where, as Christopher Hooks writes in Texas Monthly, the state’s major public health agency worked out of an office full of rats and mold as recently as 2018.


These are all the predictable consequences of giving power to people whose only understanding of the role of government is to protect investment portfolios. A long boom market was seemingly enough to convince the people who check their 401(k) balances regularly that things were more or less fine; that, even if the guy in charge was a clown, the country was resilient and broadly functional. It turns out that, outside of its bloated military and management of the world’s reserve currency, the United States was barely a country at all.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #553 on: 20-03-2020, 21:10:21 »
Više ne znam gde sam započeo da se krljam sa Batom oko neoliberalizma. On je vukao na teorijske početke, a ja na prelomnu tačku kad su se Tačer i Regan opredelili. Sad je sve više sklonih da potvrde moje stavove, pa da podsetim, ako im se učini da su otkrili toplu vodu.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #554 on: 24-03-2020, 12:28:10 »
Podsetiću da su SAD imale veliku priliku da smrve neoliberalizam 2008. kad su se zajebale i pale na floskulu "To big to fall."
Slučajno sam na TV N1 video slične vapaje "srpskih vrhunskih privrednika". I Ćulibrk je kao nešto objašnjavao. Bolje pustiti malu privredu da propadne, veliki zapošljavaju većinu. Ako se zajebemo, sami smo krivi.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

Nada Dimić

  • 3
  • Posts: 956
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #555 on: 25-03-2020, 00:54:00 »
Bezos plače i ne da svoje milijarde.  xrofl

Odavno se ovoliko ne ismejah. Damn, šta je ova kriza sve iznela na obalu (da tu i ostavi, naravno).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-amazon-jeff-bezos-relief-fund-covid-19-billionaire-net-worth-a9422236.html

mac

  • 3
  • Posts: 10.734
    • http://www.facebook.com/mihajlo.cvetanovic
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #556 on: 25-03-2020, 00:58:34 »
Quote from: a spokesperson with Amazon
"We are not and have not asked for donations and the Amazon Relief Fund has been funded by Amazon with an initial donation of $25 million. The structure to operate a fund like this, which hundreds of companies do through the same third-party, requires the program to be open to public contributions but we are not soliciting those contributions in any way,"

Nada Dimić

  • 3
  • Posts: 956
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #557 on: 25-03-2020, 01:08:35 »
Nije šija, nego penis. Loooool

Nada Dimić

  • 3
  • Posts: 956
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #558 on: 25-03-2020, 01:11:53 »
Btw, koliko je cinično osnovati fond za svoje zaposlene? Ti, koji kao poslodavac, treba da zaštitiš svoje ljude, pa i ako to nećeš da uradiš iz solidarnosti, uradi to iz ekonomičnih razloga: trebaće ti ljudi kada se sve završi, biće teško i skupo regrutovati toliko ljudi odjednom da bi održao konkurentnost na tržištu, ti osnivaš fond da im se POMOGNE. Hahahahahah Ovo je ubedljivo najgluplji potez krupnih kapitalista dosad.

mac

  • 3
  • Posts: 10.734
    • http://www.facebook.com/mihajlo.cvetanovic
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #559 on: 25-03-2020, 02:11:32 »
Nešto mi se čini da reaguješ na osnovu nepotpunih informacija. Ovo nije cinično, nego normalno. Ako smatraš da nije normalno to je zato što imaš nepotpune informacije. Ako ćeš sad da mi objašnjavaš zašto nije normalno džaba to radiš, jer nemaš sve informacije.

Nada Dimić

  • 3
  • Posts: 956
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #560 on: 25-03-2020, 02:44:02 »
lol zašto mi ne daš sve informacije?

mac

  • 3
  • Posts: 10.734
    • http://www.facebook.com/mihajlo.cvetanovic
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #561 on: 25-03-2020, 02:58:47 »
Nisam merodavan za davanje informacija.

Nada Dimić

  • 3
  • Posts: 956
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #562 on: 25-03-2020, 02:59:59 »
daj ne zezaj, dal si realan

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #563 on: 25-03-2020, 10:20:12 »
Jebote, još nismo stabilizovali procedure oko pandemije, a već brinemo o bankarima i poslodavcima. Takvi uvek prvi zakukaju.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #564 on: 26-03-2020, 00:20:38 »
Ne mogu više da prebrojim protivnike neoliberalizma. Vreme je da raspakujem drugi kofer.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #565 on: 08-04-2020, 12:11:55 »
Trump direktno napao Svetsku zdravstvenu organizaciju. Posle napada na više drugih naddržavnih organizacija sve je izvesnije da je Trump protivnik neoliberalizma. Da li će se usuditi protiv kockarske mafije svetskog bankarstva još ne znamo.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

Meho Krljic

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 51.386
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #566 on: 08-04-2020, 12:52:53 »
Meni je njegovo kritikovanje SZO za ponašanje u pandemiji bizarno ali dobro, ja sam po prirodi posla pratio SZO od početka pa znam da su bili vrlo aktivni u ovome, nego, više me zanima koji su kriterijumi po kojima SZO smatraš nekakvim simbolom neoliberalizma?

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #567 on: 08-04-2020, 13:15:12 »
Ponašaću se kao da te stvarno zanima. Sasvim je svejedno koja nadnacionalna organizacija je u pitanju. Sa pandemijom se oklevalo dok se mislilo da će samo Kina najebati. Gensek UN se pravi blesav dok mu ne narede da bude pametan. MMF nema kriterijume za ponašanje SAD. Antidoping je funkcionalan samo kad treba zajebati fine vitke teniserke, dok robustne Amerikanke niko ne kontroliše. Organizacija za testiranje mladih ima kriterijume koje ne ispunjavamo, ali naši klinci uporno dokazuju suprotno. Bolonja ne važi za Kembridž, Stanford ili MIT. Po specifikacijama EU nećemo moći da proizvodimo ćevape ili rakiju. Nažalost, autoriteta su se domogli brži a ne bolji.


Ako nije dovoljno ubedljivo, žalim slučaj. Meni je neoliberalizam trn u oku otkad sam shvatio da mediji ne odlučuju o medijima, da je kultura stisnuta fokus grupama i da nećemo gledati dobre filmove i serije, ako marketinška očekivanja nisu pozitivna. Ni knjiga ne valja ako nije u očekivanom "trendu". E, pa, za knjigu sam opasno zainteresovan.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.

Meho Krljic

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 51.386
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #568 on: 08-04-2020, 16:54:00 »
Ne, u redu je to, znamo svi da ne voliš da tržište ima prvu i poslednju reč u domenu kreativnosti ili domenu uređivanja društva i to je u redu, slažemo se. Nego nisam siguran da svaka nadnacionalna struktura automatski upada u neoliberalnu klasu pojava. SZO je radila od Januara na epidemiji COVID-19, imaš ovde prvi SitRep od 21. Januara sa pregledom aktiviranih mehanizama, preporuka itd. tako da je Trampovo kritikovanje SZO običan populizam.

scallop

  • 5
  • 3
  • Posts: 27.623
Re: Neoliberalizmi naši nasušni
« Reply #569 on: 08-04-2020, 17:16:19 »
To sam i hteo da kažem. Za divno čudo, Trump nije neoliberal. Zovi ti to populizmom, ja to zovem popularnom neoliberalnom floskulom. I meni svašta pripišu čim im se ne dopadne šta napišem. A istina je tamo gde uobičajeno i jeste. Globalno je zajebalo svet, od "slobodnog protoka ljudi, robe i kapitala" ćorak, a šta nam se piše videćemo. U svakom slučaju, ako su vanzemaljci rekli da će pregovarati samo sa globalnom vladom, ništa ni od toga. Odloženo do daljnjeg.
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain.