- too insular, not adopted by those it describes
- too many possible interpretations (this is bloat-death for most word)
I agree
Conversation
this is quite singaporean, actually
1
1
10
this too
1
1
8
this is such a poetic description of how capitalism works, and again, the sentence makes more intuitive sense if you replace the word "neoliberals" with "capitalists"
3
3
8
Replying to
If you replace all instances of "neoliberalism" w/"capitalism", how do you distinguish e.g. the Norwegian economy from that of the US?
(Discounting Norway's short flirts w/deregulation now and in the 90s)
1
Replying to
I don't quite understand the question. Norway is Norway, the US is the US. If Norway still has some measure of national sovereignty, it maybe means that the capitalists haven't gotten around to it yet. You could maybe describe Norway as relatively protectionist, isolationist, etc
2
Replying to
Norway is ultracapitalist, owns the largest sovereign wealth fund in existence, 1.3% of world stocks, is antifragile wrt recessions.
The US is one of the few richer countries pr. capita, but does not have:
- clean air
- universal health care
- job security
- good infrastructure
2
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Yes. I'm aware. And your issue is where?
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Yes. It's state capitalism. I still fail to see why you think there's a contradiction.
You think a state governing <0.1% of global pop owning 1.3% of world stocks isn't a capitalist construction?
This is a weirdly constrained model of capitalism. There are many branches.