3 ms·

By "reason" I mean I don't see how it's justified. The government could work on both the supply and demand side of equation, and increase the quality of life of

by watt 5y ago

By "reason" I mean I don't see how it's justified. The government could work on both the supply and demand side of equation, and increase the quality of life of residents, by allowing a way larger chunk of income stay in their hands.

southerntofu 5y ago
It's hardly defensible, but since the neoliberal turn in the 80s/90s most global north governments have started to dismantle their public services. That's why they're not working on both sides of the equation: because governments work directly against the interest of the people. Governments and elections are the exact opposite of democracy, because it's delegating powers to representatives instead of exerting "power of the people, by the people, for the people".
- lispm 5y ago
  Last I've been to Munich public services seemed not to be dismantled. Munich has other problems: it's too successful and attracts people and investors.
  - southerntofu 5y ago
    > public services seemed not to be dismantled It's a very progressive process, not a binary flag. See for example David Graeber's CCC talk on "Managerial feudalism and the revolt of the caring classes". All in all most of the global north appears to have strong public services and cultivate that image to please the middle classes who are happy to pay taxes for that, but they've worked hard to make them harder to reach and impossible to sustain (see also, Covid crisis and public hospitals) in order to "attract people and investors". There's no way a society with good public services can be attractive to private investors, because good public services provide better services at a much lower price than private services. It's either one or the other, and the presence of investors and gentrification is a factor that the social fabric and public services have already been heavily damaged.
lispm 5y ago
How could they?

by watt 5y ago

southerntofu 5y ago

It's hardly defensible, but since the neoliberal turn in the 80s/90s most global north governments have started to dismantle their public services. That's why they're not working on both sides of the equation: because governments work directly against the interest of the people. Governments and elections are the exact opposite of democracy, because it's delegating powers to representatives instead of exerting "power of the people, by the people, for the people".

lispm 5y ago
Last I've been to Munich public services seemed not to be dismantled. Munich has other problems: it's too successful and attracts people and investors.
- southerntofu 5y ago
  > public services seemed not to be dismantled It's a very progressive process, not a binary flag. See for example David Graeber's CCC talk on "Managerial feudalism and the revolt of the caring classes". All in all most of the global north appears to have strong public services and cultivate that image to please the middle classes who are happy to pay taxes for that, but they've worked hard to make them harder to reach and impossible to sustain (see also, Covid crisis and public hospitals) in order to "attract people and investors". There's no way a society with good public services can be attractive to private investors, because good public services provide better services at a much lower price than private services. It's either one or the other, and the presence of investors and gentrification is a factor that the social fabric and public services have already been heavily damaged.

lispm 5y ago

How could they?