View allAll Photos Tagged Capitalism
Someone left this coke cup standing by the bicycle stand close to my work.
The Voightländer can give good DOF and pop-effect if you handle it correctly. Im no expert though but this one I think I got right.
---
Leica M3
Voightländer 35 Ultron 1.7
Fuji Superia Reala 100
Skylight filter
Scanned in silverfast
Monopoly 2.0 - Ecology Games 2012
The original game of Monopoly was invented by a Quaker woman called Elizabeth Magie in 1903 (and originally called The Landlord’s Game). Elizabeth Magie's game intended to demonstrate the injustices of capitalism but instead Parker Brothers bought the rights and made a game about buying property, making monopolies and beating other players by charging them rent.
Monopoly 2.0 is about the commodification of the natural world. Presently, ecological ‘services’ are being given financial value in a desperate effort to convince industrialists to acknowledge the importance of Nature. The financialisation of ‘ecosystem services’ is based on the belief this will help protect biodiversity.
Consider the recent The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) report, which estimates a total economic value of insect pollination worldwide at €153 billion (Gallai et al. 2009 in TEEB, 2010: p.8). It's a high number, but does this number actually reflect the value of pollinating insects? Considering that we are dependent on functioning ecological systems, surely these 'ecosystem services' and the pollinating insects which are a vital part of these ecosystems are in fact priceless.
It's no small thing to bring nature into the space where everything must prove its financial worth. We simply do not have the scientific capacity to measure all of the life-sustaining services provided by nature. What is possible to know for sure is that there will be no financial system to create this human construct we call money without the benefit of a stable climate, clean water and healthy local ecosystems. The paradox remains that in attempting to protect nature by assigning it's services economic values, we reinforce the idea that the only thing that matters is the economic impact of a particular course of action. 'Priceless' is a concept that is quickly being destroyed as the scope of the market expands.
James Harding, Director, News and Current Affairs, BBC News, United Kingdom speaking at the Annual Meeting 2017 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, January 17, 2017
Copyright by World Economic Forum / Sandra Blaser
"Yeah, so you got Creative Commons on your side. Yeah, so the band and artist said it was CC too, and they never made a penny outta it? Ain't they the fools.
Read our conditions, and remember, we decide. See them fat lawyers over there? We'll grass you over to the trolls so they can litigate til you run outta money. We're the judge, and if we take you down, there ain't a thing you can do about it. You gonna try fighting it, pretty thing? Go on, you gonna try? I dares yer."
YT: "Your dispute wasn't approved.
The claimant has reviewed their claim and has confirmed it was valid.
You may be able to appeal this decision, but if the claimant disagrees with your appeal, you could end up with a strike on your account."
As I provided evidence about the music on my video with my original dispute, it seems rather unlikely the claimant is going to suddenly realise they have made an unfortunate error 24 hours later. I know the artist hasn't made a penny out of it, so why should others monetise it?
'Shot' at Missing Mile Dark Rural Community: maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Soap/80/127/27
'Less than Zilch'. Proudly Creative Commons on Vimeo: vimeo.com/136958109
Participants in the "Stewarding Responsible Capitalism" session at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2023 in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, 18 January. Congress Centre - Sanada Room. Copyright: World Economic Forum/Jakob Polacsek
Fascism can be combated as capitalism alone, as the nakedest, most shameless, most oppressive, and most treacherous form of capitalism.
-Bertolt Brecht
No government fights fascism to destroy it. When the bourgeoisie sees that power is slipping out of its hands, it brings up fascism to hold onto their privileges.
-Buenaventura Durruti
75 years after and history seems to repeat itself. Shall we let them lead Europe into the hands of fascism again? Talk to people, show them the real face of fascism. Don't let fear rule your lives. Fight back by using any means you can.
Feel free to share.-
Economist Milton Friedman, propagated 18th century values in the Post-WWII global economy. Like Adam Smith he preached the gospel of minimal government, laissez-faire. The triad, Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom (1944), Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (1957), and Milton Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom (1962) pit economic efficiency against social justice.
Footnotes
I compiled this digitized collage, inspired by Deborah Barndt's
Tangled Routes: Women, Work and Globalization on the Tomato Trail on November 16, 2006. I used a Google earth generated globe to situate as a kind of circumtomato globe. I developed the concept of John Elkington's Cannibals with Forks for the image of a world being devoured by those who choose to make decisions based on only one bottom line.
See also oceanflynn.wordpress.com/2006/11/17/friedmansocial-respon...
Barndt, Deborah (2001) Tangled Routes: Women, Work and Globalization on the Tomato Trail, Aurora, ON, Garamond Press.
Davis, Ian. 2005. "The biggest contract: By building social issues into strategy, big business can recast the debate about its role, argues Ian Davis." The Economist. May 28.
"The great, long-running debate about business's role in society is currently caught between two contrasting, and tired, ideological positions. On one side of the current debate are those who argue that (to borrow Milton Friedman's phrase) the “business of business is business”. This belief is most established in Anglo-Saxon economies. On this view, social issues are peripheral to the challenges of corporate management. The sole legitimate purpose of business is to create shareholder value. On the other side are the proponents of “Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR), a rapidly growing, rather fuzzy movement encompassing both companies which claim already to practise CSR and sceptical campaign groups arguing they need to go further in mitigating their social impacts. As other regions f the world—parts of continental and central Europe, for example— move towards the Anglo-Saxon shareholder-value model, debate between these sides has increasingly taken on global significance. That is a pity. Both perspectives obscure in different ways the significance of social issues to business success. They also caricature unhelpfully the contribution of business to social welfare. It is time for CEOs of big companies to recast this debate and recapture the intellectual and moral high ground from their critics. Large companies need to build social issues into strategy in a way which reflects their actual business importance. They need to articulate business's social contribution and define its ultimate purpose in a way that has more subtlety than “the business of business is business” worldview and is less defensive than most current CSR approaches. It can help to view the relationship between big business and society in this respect as an implicit “social contract”: Rousseau adapted for the corporate world, you might say. This contract has obligations, opportunities and mutual advantage for both sides." See The Economist premium content.
Elkington, John (1997) Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, New Society Publishers, Limited.
Elkington, John (2003) Chrysalis Economy: How Citizen CEOs and Corporations Can Fuse Values and Value Creation, Wiley, John and Sons, Incorporated.
CBC, 2006. “In Depth: Wealth Canada's super-rich,” CBC News, Last Updated December 4, 2006, accessed December 12, 2006. Canadian Business magazine lists 1. the Ken Thomson family (media) $24.4 Billion Cdn or 19.6 Billion US); 2. Galen Weston (groceries) $7.1 $24.4 Billion Cdn; 3. The Irving family (oil) $5.45 Billion Cdn; 4. Ted Rogers Jr. (media) $4.54 Billion Cdn; 5. Paul Desmarais Sr. (Power Corp.) $4.41 Billion Cdn; 6. Jimmy Pattison (entrepreneur) $4.35 Billion Cdn; 7. Jeff Skoll (eBay) $3.93 $4.41 Billion Cdn; 8. Barry Sherman (Apotex drugs) $3.23 Billion Cdn; 9. David Azrieli (real estate) $2.44 Billion Cdn; Fred and Ron Mannix (mining) $2.38 Billion Cdn as ten of the 22 Canadian families who are part of the uber wealthy group of 793 billionaires who control $2.6 trillion US of the world's wealth. Others include Alexander Schnaider (steel) baron, Calvin Ayre (online gambling), John MacBain (classified ads), Guy Laliberté (Cirque du Soleil) 1 Billion Cdn. of this group of 22 billionaires their money came from pharmaceuticals, media, oil and gas, food retailing, printing, money management, construction and the BlackBerry. Five of the 22 are in their forties. Danko, William D. The Millionaire Next Door Danko, William D. Richer Than A Millionaire Drummond, Don, Tulk, David. 2006. “Lifestyles of the Rich and Unequal: an Investigation into Wealth Inequality in Canada.” Special Report. TD Bank Financial Group. December 13, 2006. Accessed December 14, 2006.
Drummond explains how the wealthier quintile of the Canadian population will continue to become wealthier while the middle quintiles will suffer with lower wage gains intensifying wealth disparities. The assets of of the lowest quintile fell by 9. 1% since 1999. This is the group which includes single women, Canada's children who live in poverty and seniors.
What is also interesting is that there is a significant amount of inequality within the highest wealth quintile of Canadians. One can get an appreciation of this fact by noting the pronounced difference between the mean and median asset holdings. While median net worth for the top 20% is $862,900, the average stands at $1,264,200 suggesting a significant skew towards the extremely wealthy. This difference is even more pronounced when holdings of individual assets are compared for those who hold them within the highest quintile. The largest source of the skew towards the wealthy comes from the holdings of bonds which has a mean-median ratio of 7.9 (the larger the ratio, the greater the share of the asset is held by the top segment of the wealthy). The nebulous category of “other non-financial assets” also has a significant concentration in the super-wealthy. Included within this category are such items as the contents of the residence, valuables, collectables, as well as such high value and sparsely-held items as copyrights and patents. [...] Within this category, the share of employer-sponsored pension plans (18.5%) is twice as large as individual pension assets (10.5%) such as Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs), Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs), and Locked-in Retirement Accounts (LIRAs). Holdings of non-pension financial assets (10.4%) and equity in business (10.5%) each represent a comparatively smaller portion of total asset holdings.
Morissette, René, Zhang, Xuelin. 2006. "Revisiting wealth inequality: Perspectives on Wealth and Income," Statistics Canada. http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/75-001-XIE/11206/high-1.htm
Vol. 7, no. 12. December 13, 2006. Accessed December 14, 2006.
"When all families are considered, real average wealth rose 70% from [1999 to 2005] however wealth inequity increased as well. Real average wealth increased between 51% to 70% reflecting large increases for the wealthiest 10% of Canadians who held 58% of the wealth, a percentage that continues to rise as it has since 1984. For fifteen years prior to the deep cuts made in the post-1984 period of deficit panic wealth inequity fell then plateaued. Canadian families will continue to become more at-risk to social exclusion as their debts increase, equities are reduced and they face little or no wage increase.Morissette and Zhang (2006) reveal how challenging it is to estimate the share of total wealth controlled by the upper quintile, particularly the UHNW. See also Davies (1993). While 10% may control 58% of Canadian wealth less than 1% of Canadian families may in effect hold up to 46% of the wealth.While Morissette and Zhang (2006) claim that elderly unattached individuals saw their median wealth double, from roughly $48,000 in 1984 to $100,000 in 2005, they did not qualify that the extremes of wealth and poverty skew the statistics. See the article on the large number of senior Canadians who live below the poverty line.While the wealthiest quintile, particularly the top 1% benefited since 1984, the lowest quintile, mainly female lone-parent families remain as by far the most financially vulnerable. "In all years, more than 40% of persons in these families were in low income and would have stayed in that state even after liquidating their financial assets." This is where Canada's children who live in poverty in a rich country live. Lower quintile included those with median wealth no higher than $7,000, families with no assets at their disposal to lessen the impact of unexpected expenses or earnings disruptions. The average wealth of the most vulnerable families fell to -$1000 between 1999 and 2005 from zero assets/debt ratio through the 1980s to negative (about -$1,000) in both 1999 and 2005. The value of their real estate, for those who did have a modest home, did not rise. "it fell substantially among those in which the major income recipient was aged 25 to 34. In 2005, these families had median wealth of $13,400 (in 2005 dollars), much lower than the $27,000 and $17,400 registered in 1984 and 1999 respectively." While in the middle quintile there was a modest rise of average wealth rose of about $19,000, families in the most wealthy quintile experienced a substantial increase in the value of their real estate. They allocated more of their financial assets to RRSPs and LIRA holdings. They sharply increased their investments in RRSPs between 1986 and 2003.
"Median wealth more than doubled between 1970 and 2005, having grown by c.20-25% since 1984. While the median wealth of young families fell by half between 1984 and 2005, it rose by almost 40% for those in which the major income recipient was a university graduate aged 35 to 54."
Stenner, Thane, Bower, Rod, Currie, John, O.Connor, Rory. 2006. “True Wealth Report: Values and Views of Ultra-Affluent Individuals,” www.truewealthreport.com/downloads/2006_TWR_low.pdf
Researchers for the True Wealth report surveyed 165 Ultra High Net Worth (UHNW) individuals, those whose assets are over $10.
*
Aufruf zur Internationalen Großdemonstration in Rostock
am Samstag, 2.6.2007
Make Capitalism History
• Alle fünf Sekunden stirbt in der Welt ein Kind an Hunger, mehr als 800 Millionen Menschen sind chronisch unterernährt. Maßgeblich verantwortlich hierfür ist eine ungerechte Welthandelspolitik, wie sie im Rahmen der G8 und anderer internationaler Institutionen von den reichen Industrieländern betrieben wird.
• Trotz der vollmundigen Versprechungen vom G8-Gipfel in Gleneagles 2005 wurde den Ländern des Südens bislang nur ein geringer Teil ihrer Schulden erlassen.
• Indem sie Liberalisierung und Privatisierung vorantreiben, haben die G8 Armut nicht nur im globalen Süden, sondern auch in den Industrieländern verstärkt. Die weltweite Plünderung von Rohstoffen und anderen natürlichen Ressourcen wird beschleunigt.
• Zugleich schotten sich die reichen Industrieländer immer stärker gegen Flüchtlinge und MigrantInnen ab. Die dennoch Eingereisten werden illegalisiert und als rechtlose BilligarbeiterInnen ausgebeutet.
• Die G8-Staaten sind die größten Klimazerstörer. Sie allein sind für 43% des weltweiten CO2-Ausstoßes verantwortlich und stehen zudem für eine Renaissance der Atomenergie, die wir entschieden ablehnen.
• Die G8-Staaten sind verantwortlich für 90% der weltweiten Waffenexporte und eine neue Ära von Rohstoffkriegen. Sie sind Vorreiter einer auf Krieg gestützten Weltordnung, die in vielen Ländern zu Flucht, Vertreibung, neuem Hass und Gewalt führt.
Die von der Dominanz der G8 geprägte Welt ist eine Welt der Kriege, des Hungers, der sozialen Spaltung, der Umweltzerstörung und der Mauern gegen MigrantInnen und Flüchtlinge. Dagegen wollen wir bei unserer Großdemonstration am 2. Juni 2007 in Rostock protestieren und die Alternativen dazu aufzeigen. Gemeinsam mit Millionen Menschen in aller Welt sagen wir: Eine andere Welt ist möglich!
• Für die sofortige Streichung illegitimer Schulden und eine faire Entschuldung der Länder des globalen Südens!
• Gegen den Ausverkauf öffentlicher Güter und Dienste – für gleiche soziale Rechte und Standards weltweit!
• Für einen schnellen und radikalen Wechsel zu den erneuerbaren Energien. Zusammen mit einer deutlichen Erhöhung der Energieeffizienz und der Umstellung auf ein nachhaltiges Wirtschaften können nur so ein gefährlicher Klimawandel und weitere Kriege um Öl- und Gasreserven verhindert werden.
• Für den sofortigen und endgültigen Ausstieg aus der Atomenergie und für vollständige weltweite atomare Abrüstung!
• Für ein solidarisches und gleichberechtigtes Zusammenleben aller Menschen – gegen jede Form von Rassismus und Faschismus!
• Für die Überwindung von Mauern und Grenzen! Gegen Lager und Abschiebungen!
• Für eine friedliche Welt! Schluss mit der militärischen Durchsetzung wirtschaftlicher und machtpolitischer Interessen durch die G8-Staaten!
Globalisierung im Interesse der Mehrheit der Menschen bedeutet faire Beziehungen zwischen Industrie- und Entwicklungsländern, bedeutet Frieden, Gerechtigkeit, soziale Sicherheit, Demokratie und Bewahrung der Lebensgrundlagen des Planeten für die nächsten Generationen.
Eine solche andere Globalisierung entsteht nicht auf exklusiven und abgeschotteten Gipfeltreffen, sondern von unten aus der globalen Bewegung von Menschen und Initiativen, die sich für eine andere, bessere Welt einsetzen. Diese globale Bewegung wird sich mit zahlreichen Aktionen und Veranstaltungen während des G8-Gipfels zu Wort melden. Auf der Internationalen Demonstration am 2. Juni 2007 in Rostock werden wir die Größe, Stärke und Vielfalt unseres bunten und breiten Protestes unübersehbar machen.
(veröffentlicht am 26.2.2007)
fels.nadir.org/de/109/aufruf-demo-rostock-g8
----------
Another World is Possible!
G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, Germany
Call to International Demonstration in Rostock, June 2, 2007
At the beginning of June 2007, the governments of the seven most important industrialised countries and Russia will meet for the ‘G8 Summit’ at the Baltic seaside resort of Heiligendamm. The ‘Group of 8′ (G8) is an institution without legitimacy. Nevertheless, as a self-appointed informal world government, they make decisions which affect the whole of humanity. The policies of the G8 stand for a neoliberal globalisation and deregulation, economic policies oriented towards the capital returns of international financial investors and companies.
• Every five seconds, a child dies somewhere in the world from hunger. More than 800 million people are chronically malnourished. Primarily responsible are unjust world trade policies, forwarded by the rich industrialised countries within the G8 and other international institutions.
• Despite the whole-hearted promises of the G8 Summit at Gleneagles in 2005, until now only a small proportion of the debt of Southern countries has been cancelled.
• Through their promotion of liberalisation and privatisation, the G8 have not only increased poverty in the global South, but also in the industrialised countries. The worldwide plundering of raw materials and other natural resources is being accelerated.
• At the same time as the rich industrialised countries seal themselves off from refugees and migrants, those who nevertheless arrive are illegalised and exploited as cheap labourers without rights.
• The G8 states are the biggest destroyers of the climate. They are alone responsible for 43% of worldwide CO2 emissions as well as being in favour of a renaissance of nuclear energy, which we decidedly reject.
• The G8 states are responsible for 90% of worldwide weapons exports and a new era of war for raw materials. They are the leaders of a world order based on war, which leads to migration, displacement, new hate and violence in many countries.
The world shaped by the dominance of the G8 is a world of war, hunger, social divisions, environmental destruction and barriers against migrants and refugees. At our mass demonstration on 2 June 2007 in Rostock, we want to protest against this and show the alternatives. Together with millions of people around the world we say: Another World Is Possible!
• For the immediate cancellation of illegitimate debt and comprehensive debt relief for the countries of the global South!
• Against the sale of public goods and services – for equal social rights and standards worldwide!
• For a speedy and radical transfer to renewable energies! Dangerous climate change and further wars for oil and gas reserves can only be prevented through a significant rise in energy efficiency and the transfer to a sustainable economy.
• For the immediate and permanent abandonment of nuclear energy and for complete worldwide nuclear disarmament!
• For the showing of solidarity with, and the living together with equal rights, of all people – against every form of racism and fascism!
• For the overcoming of walls and borders! Against detention camps and deportation!
• For a peaceful world! End the military imposition of economic and power-political interests through the G8 states!
Globalisation in the interests of the majority of people requires a fair relationship between industrialised and developing countries, and means freedom, justice, social security, democracy and the conservation of the planet’s natural resources for the next generation.
Such an alternative globalisation will not result from exclusive and insular summit meetings, but rather from below out of the global movement of people and initiatives who stand up for another, better world. This global movement will make itself heard through numerous actions and events during the G8 Summit. At the International Demonstration on 2 June 2007 in Rostock, we will make the size, strength and diversity of our colourful and broad protests visible.
dissent-archive.ucrony.net/dissentnetwork/node/1998.html
*