Magritte's "La Trahison des Images" ("The Treachery of Images") (1928-9)
or "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" ("This is not a pipe").
Sometimes translated as "The Betrayal of Images"
By René Magritte, 1898-1967
Saturday, 20 April 2013
La Trahison des Images
Magritte's "La Trahison des Images" ("The Treachery of Images") (1928-9)
or "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" ("This is not a pipe").
Sometimes translated as "The Betrayal of Images"
By René Magritte, 1898-1967
Tuesday, 9 April 2013
Michael Hudson: Thatcher's Legacy of Failed Privatizations
By Michael Hudson, a research professor of Economics at University of Missouri, Kansas City, and a research associate at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. His latest book is “The Bubble and Beyond.”
As in Chile, privatization in Britain was a victory for Chicago monetarism. This time it was implemented democratically. In fact, voters endorsed Margaret Thatcher’s selloff of public industries so strongly that by 1991, when she was replaced as prime minister by her own party’s John Major, only 35 percent of Britain’s voters supported the Labour Party – half the proportion registered in 1945. The Conservatives sold off public monopolies, used the proceeds to cut taxes, and put the privatized firms on a profit-making basis. Their stock prices rose sharply, making capital gains for investors whose ranks included millions of Britons who had been employees and/or customers of these enterprises.
Yet by 1997 the Conservatives were voted out of office by one of the largest margins in their history. What concerned voters were the results of privatization that Mrs. Thatcher had not warned them about. Prices did not decline proportionally to cost cuts and productivity gains. Many services were cut back, especially on the least utilized transport routes. The largest privatized bus company was charged with cut-throat monopoly practices. The water system broke down, while consumer charges leapt. Electricity prices were shifted against residential consumers in favor of large industrial users. Economic inequality widened as the industrial labor force shrunk by two million from 1979 to 1997, while wages stagnated in the face of soaring profits for the privatized companies. The tax cuts financed by their selloff turned out to benefit mainly the rich.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/04/michael-hudson-thatchers-legacy-of-failed-privatizations.html#RQafx5LdtJVXqFlE.99
As in Chile, privatization in Britain was a victory for Chicago monetarism. This time it was implemented democratically. In fact, voters endorsed Margaret Thatcher’s selloff of public industries so strongly that by 1991, when she was replaced as prime minister by her own party’s John Major, only 35 percent of Britain’s voters supported the Labour Party – half the proportion registered in 1945. The Conservatives sold off public monopolies, used the proceeds to cut taxes, and put the privatized firms on a profit-making basis. Their stock prices rose sharply, making capital gains for investors whose ranks included millions of Britons who had been employees and/or customers of these enterprises.
Yet by 1997 the Conservatives were voted out of office by one of the largest margins in their history. What concerned voters were the results of privatization that Mrs. Thatcher had not warned them about. Prices did not decline proportionally to cost cuts and productivity gains. Many services were cut back, especially on the least utilized transport routes. The largest privatized bus company was charged with cut-throat monopoly practices. The water system broke down, while consumer charges leapt. Electricity prices were shifted against residential consumers in favor of large industrial users. Economic inequality widened as the industrial labor force shrunk by two million from 1979 to 1997, while wages stagnated in the face of soaring profits for the privatized companies. The tax cuts financed by their selloff turned out to benefit mainly the rich.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/04/michael-hudson-thatchers-legacy-of-failed-privatizations.html#RQafx5LdtJVXqFlE.99
Thursday, 7 March 2013
Sunday, 10 February 2013
Why an H&M T-Shirt costs only 4,95 Euro?
Wolfgang Uchatius asks in this week’s DIE ZEIT, how an H&M T-Shirt can cost only 4,95 Euro (the exact same price as 10 years ago). In his long and well-researched article he follows the path of an H&M T-Shirt – a little bit like Rivoli’s “Travels of a T-Shirt”, but only on 3 pages. Uchatius discovers at least 7 secrets of the cheap H&M T-Shirt:
1. Cheap cotton: In the past years, the 400 g of cotton that you need for one T-Shirt cost around 0,40 Euro. US cotton is cheap, because the cotton stripping machines yield as much cotton a day as 300 workers, and because US-American taxpayers subsidize it by 40 Cents a shirt. Hence, machines and US taxpayers make our H&M T-Shirt cheap. However, Uchatius explains that the cotton price has been rising to 1 Euro for 400 g, because there is too little cotton in the world market at the moment.
2. Indecent working conditions: The ability of the workers in Bangladesh to hold back their need to go to the toilet during working hours (he explains the living and working conditions of workers in Bangladesh in some detail). Garment workes in Bangladesh drink little during working hours (in factories that are around 30-40 degrees hot!), because otherwise they need to go to toilet and then they do not manage the strict targets set by the factory management to achieve the low prices H&M pays (....more)
1. Cheap cotton: In the past years, the 400 g of cotton that you need for one T-Shirt cost around 0,40 Euro. US cotton is cheap, because the cotton stripping machines yield as much cotton a day as 300 workers, and because US-American taxpayers subsidize it by 40 Cents a shirt. Hence, machines and US taxpayers make our H&M T-Shirt cheap. However, Uchatius explains that the cotton price has been rising to 1 Euro for 400 g, because there is too little cotton in the world market at the moment.
2. Indecent working conditions: The ability of the workers in Bangladesh to hold back their need to go to the toilet during working hours (he explains the living and working conditions of workers in Bangladesh in some detail). Garment workes in Bangladesh drink little during working hours (in factories that are around 30-40 degrees hot!), because otherwise they need to go to toilet and then they do not manage the strict targets set by the factory management to achieve the low prices H&M pays (....more)
Friday, 8 February 2013
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Tuesday, 1 January 2013
Yes I do (Monika)
You're my crystal sea
You're my loudest rhythm
Beats inside my heart
I will make you laugh
I will make you fly to the sunny skies
Where we'll live in happiness
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)