must be good -
  because (1st of x)

.. privatisation ...

  .. makes the user pay ...

    .. and fat-cats ever filthy-richer

Thesis/Subtitle; Q: But I don't see how this helps?


A: Simple; things costing more send '$-signals' which tend to lower consumption.

Q: But I still don't see how this helps?

Well, take electricity. In Aus it is mainly produced from coal; less electricity = less coal = less CO2 - 'saving the planet,' see?

(Note: Governments continue to privatise, looong after it has been *conclusively proven* that privatisation is *not* in our, we the people's nett-interests - Q: Why? A: Because they are not *our* representatives so much if at all; they tend to 'sell-out' to the highest bidder - namely, to those with the most $s = the fat-cats, those getting ever filthy-richer - mainly on our, we the people's dough (it's a vicious circle). This adds insult to injury as well, and since both 'sides' = Lib/Lab are 'ugly-twins,' it's bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic.)

Same with petrol (fleet now increasingly diesel, same argument); less vehicle-fuel = less CO2 - again 'saving the planet.'

(Note: Speculators can drive prices up; saw one estimate of +20%. Thnx, speculators, for also trying to 'save the planet.')

(Ditto with threats of war by US/Zs against Iran, say - another +20% on oil; 'saving the planet' never looked so easy!)

But I don't understand how it works with i.e. tomatoes or potatoes, though. The farmers are always going broke (Heinz (ketchup), McDonald's (freedom-fries) doing price-arbitrage, say) - the consumer-market-prices for many foods go up and up (the difference between the farm-gate and the consumer = 'super-profit' = economic-rent; why 'middlemen' get ever filthy-richer), but the people get ever-more obese?

Corollary: Since nothing is free (the usually non-accounted 'externals,' say), there is always some cost borne by someone, and here it's mainly the poor who do the bearing; IF they can't afford to eat, heat or drive THEN they go on a diet, put on a jumper and/or walk to their desired (non-remote) destinations (resulting in more possible +ves - they get thinner and/or fitter, and what doesn't kill 'em makes 'em stronger...)


PS It's actually worse, far worse, than the above portrayal seeks to illustrate. In the 1st instance, they are not even *trying* to 'save the planet' - which is why I put it ('such things') in single-quotes, to indicate various levels of irony. In fact, the proof is easy: Both in Aus and the US (and elsewhere but who cares?) - they are planning to *increase* CO2 emissions; Aus by ever-more mining, US(+Zionists; the Zs 'own' the US, Congress+military+MSM at least) - by ever-more murder for spoil - Zs for soil, US for oil. Note that 'increase everything' is another tenet of neoliberalism (eternal increase = absolutely impossible on a finite planet), and the proof of that is currently seen in both US & EU; despite 'skilled immigration' (= theft of talent from 'lesser' countries) and 'un-skilled immigration' (= cheaper than 'domestic' slaves) driving up local populations, 40+/- years of neoliberalism 'increasing productivity' = depressing wages and conditions -> ever-diminishing demand; both average & nett demand falling *plus* ever greater indebtedness (both bubbles and one-sidedly tax-cutting (mostly off the rich) -> inflating borrowings) -> a downward spiral, just as I (partly) envisaged all those years ago, on 1st hearing 'economic rationalism,' then realising what lies they were telling and the projected consequences there-from. But nobody stopped it, proof that the MSM (TV, radio, press) & parts of academia have also sold out; see next.

PPS It's actually worse, far worse (again = as well), almost to the power of infinity, in that it's not merely our faux-representatives, but it's also the MSM and selected bits of academia (economists, psychologists, communication/PR schools). We get our news from the MSM and a part of that is *our* AusBC; no-one, neither in the private nor publicly-financed MSM made any *effective* effort to truthfully report on neoliberalism and it's consequences (proof of that is that there was *no revolution* = the people were 'successfully' brought to be then kept dumbed-down.) We get our economics from 'the experts,' few and none effectively resist 'the message.' The 'news' = propaganda, often lies, is 'shaped' by the psychologists & communicators = 'spin-masters.' That all these go along with 'the program' = proof of a massive cooperation; since the aims of the program are to take $s from us without giving fair value = rip us off = theft makes the program criminal = conspiracy. Look for yourself; try squinting through the pushed-paradigm propaganda - only the (unspun!) truth can ever set us free.

No comments:

Post a Comment