https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2022/august/ … capitalism
ransom capitalism.
ransom capitalism.
The bailout consensus is strikingly similar to the model by which neoliberal capitalism has operated globally for decades. Energy producers and suppliers are extracting profits from the state by menacing the public with unaffordable bills, effectively threatening to remove the means of existence from millions of people. This process, of capital holding the public to ransom, has been going on for decades in the Global South, where countries facing financial, energy and even public health crises have been held to ransom by the IMF, World Bank and multinational corporations based in the US or Europe. Money to relieve immediate social meltdown was provided on the condition of structural reforms and repayment agreements that locked generations of citizens into decades of debt, economic restructuring and austerity to ensure the profits of corporations.
As Kojo Koram and others have argued, the IMF/World Bank interventions undermined the growth of alternative political movements and brought post-colonial nations into a capitalist system where wealth is distributed upwards. Practices once applied by imperial nations to colonial subjects have now been turned on their domestic populations. Ransom capitalism and bailouts are not new, but their scope has expanded.
Under the bailout consensus, as with the IMF interventions, the state and its citizens are expected to pay private companies’ ransom demands without taking anything substantive in return. There’s no suggestion that the public might acquire a stake in a company in exchange for the money they hand over. Shareholders and CEOs are provided with ‘protection’ or ‘compensation’ rather than being made to face the downsides of the risk supposedly inherent in investment. The bailout averts a crisis, but keeps things on terms friendly to capital.
There is an underlying assumption that at some point there will be a return to the ‘normality’ of self-regulating markets of private actors. But bailouts without structural change keep us on the path of ever-increasing losses for the public just to sustain the basics of life, while maintaining a failed market system which is not only generating crises but limiting responses to them – as many nations in the Global South have experienced for decades.
High inflation is not unique to the UK, but the capitulation to the energy companies’ ransom demands seems especially acute here, as is the actual rate of rising costs. France is able to lower prices through its state energy company, Spain and Germany have intervened to reduce the cost of public transport, and many of the proposed measures across Europe involve taking equity in energy companies or stricter regulation. But the UK is too far down the neoliberal rabbit-hole even to countenance such mild social democratic policies.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-30 02:51:09)
The free market doesn't work with monopolies - who knew?
The govt could negotiate long-term pricing with the threat of nationalisation in the background..
But that assumes Britain has a government.
The govt could negotiate long-term pricing with the threat of nationalisation in the background..
But that assumes Britain has a government.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
the private energy market doesn't consist of monopolies in this case, but nevermind.
the original thinkers on free-market economics had a few things to say about inflation caused by runaway profits, though.
the original thinkers on free-market economics had a few things to say about inflation caused by runaway profits, though.
Gas supply to the UK, from its own gas fields, is a practical monopoly.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
erm, no it's not, we sold it off to multiple parties from several different countries.
we could have kept it as a state-owned monopoly but instead we divvied it up and handed it out to a motley crew of (newly) private entitles, existing oil conglomerates -- and other state-owned actors, such as denmark and even russia's gazprom, for a small stake.
even in the last 5 years or so there have been endless deals of our former north sea oil assets changing hands multiple times with private equity firms. the great market rip-off continues as they know that the british state will step in to keep their business afloat forever.
inelastic demand for essential services is not the same thing as a supplier monopoly. monopsonies from the purchaser side are not the same thing as monopolies.
nevermind the fact that the UK home energy/retail market is interceded upon on behalf of the retail-facing gas suppliers, of which there are 5-6 major companies and half a dozen subsidiaries based on region/market. how is that a 'monopoly'? their price-fixing and profit gouging might be uncompetitive and in bad need of new regulations – lord knows that much – but it's quite literally not a 'monopoly'.
we could have kept it as a state-owned monopoly but instead we divvied it up and handed it out to a motley crew of (newly) private entitles, existing oil conglomerates -- and other state-owned actors, such as denmark and even russia's gazprom, for a small stake.
even in the last 5 years or so there have been endless deals of our former north sea oil assets changing hands multiple times with private equity firms. the great market rip-off continues as they know that the british state will step in to keep their business afloat forever.
inelastic demand for essential services is not the same thing as a supplier monopoly. monopsonies from the purchaser side are not the same thing as monopolies.
what about that to you says 'monopoly' from 'the UK's own gas fields'? what 'own' gas fields?Feb 24 2021 (Reuters) - Tailwind, a private oil producer backed by commodity trader Mercuria, has agreed to buy BP's stake in the Shearwater oilfield in the British North Sea, it said on Monday.
[...]
Here is a list of recent deals:
Deals in 2016
OMV (OMVV.VI) sells its British North Sea assets to Siccar Point, backed by private equity groups Blackstone (BX.N) and Bluewater, for up to $1 billion.
BP merges its Norwegian North Sea assets with Det norske, creating a new entity Aker BP (AKERBP.OL).
Deals in 2017
Royal Dutch Shell (RDSa.L) sells North Sea assets to Chrysaor, backed by Harbour Energy, an investment vehicle of EIG Global Energy Partners, in a $3.8 billion deal.
Engie (ENGIE.PA) sells its exploration and production business, including North Sea assets, to Neptune, backed by private equity funds Carlyle Group (CG.O) and CVC, in a $3.9 billion deal.
Deals in 2019
ConocoPhillips (COP.N) sells North Sea assets to Chrysaor for around $2.6 billion.
Chevron (CVX.N) sells North Sea assets to Israel's Delek Group (DLEKG.TA) for $2 billion.
Exxon (XOM.N) sells Norwegian North Sea assets to Var Energi, backed by Eni (ENI.MI) and private equity fund HitecVision for $4.5 billion.
Deals in 2020
Premier Oil will be renamed Harbour Energy Plc after a reverse takeover by private equity-backed Chrysaor due to complete in the first quarter of 2021.
Deals in 2021
Exxon agrees to sell its non-operating interest in its UK and North Sea exploration and production assets to private-equity fund HitecVision for more than $1 billion.
Cairn Energy (CNE.L) agrees to sell its stakes in British fields Catcher and Kraken to private equity firm Waldorf Production for $460 million.
nevermind the fact that the UK home energy/retail market is interceded upon on behalf of the retail-facing gas suppliers, of which there are 5-6 major companies and half a dozen subsidiaries based on region/market. how is that a 'monopoly'? their price-fixing and profit gouging might be uncompetitive and in bad need of new regulations – lord knows that much – but it's quite literally not a 'monopoly'.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-30 04:23:41)
world top 10 economy.
https://twitter.com/nadiawhittomemp/sta … Oo1FGtpbMQ
another victory for conservatism. can’t wait for their genius austerity v2 when we enter another global recession on the scale of 2008.
https://twitter.com/nadiawhittomemp/sta … Oo1FGtpbMQ
another victory for conservatism. can’t wait for their genius austerity v2 when we enter another global recession on the scale of 2008.
Monopoly - The holder of the monopoly may change regularly, but Britain still has a choice of about 2-3 companies it can source its gas from at any one time, practically a monopoly.
Since Britain went into the Great Derpening I don't see an easy way out TBH.
Not with the same Oksferd PPE geniuses reapplying the same nonsense theories over and over.
It really needs to be handed over to competent nation-builders.
Since Britain went into the Great Derpening I don't see an easy way out TBH.
Not with the same Oksferd PPE geniuses reapplying the same nonsense theories over and over.
It really needs to be handed over to competent nation-builders.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
erm 2–3 companies is not 'practically' a monopoly, i suggest you look up what the prefix 'mono-' means. it is of some significance in this debate.
as i said before, there's valid criticism to be made about cartel-type behaviour and collusion/price fixing. some of it is borderline anti-competitive. but that's not the same thing as dealing with a monopoly.
britain was privatized by thatcherites. she studied chemistry and her government were in the pockets of City finance types. you can hardly construe the woman from grantham whose father ran a grocers and who went to a state grammar as a privileged and insular 'oksferd PPE type'.
details matter, dilbert. otherwise you're just ranting. though i suspect that's the only point with you.
it's also funny how you've changed your tune. at the start of this discussion i was precisely saying we should make sweeping and substantive reforms and think about bringing these services/utilities back under state ownership. you hedged and said it would be complicated and 'hard to make fair for the companies' or some nonsense. now you're saying it's a practical monopoly and could be renationalized overnight if only the govt had the balls. errrm ... ??? do you even read the shit you post? i mean honestly. like a dog chasing his tail.
as i said before, there's valid criticism to be made about cartel-type behaviour and collusion/price fixing. some of it is borderline anti-competitive. but that's not the same thing as dealing with a monopoly.
britain was privatized by thatcherites. she studied chemistry and her government were in the pockets of City finance types. you can hardly construe the woman from grantham whose father ran a grocers and who went to a state grammar as a privileged and insular 'oksferd PPE type'.
details matter, dilbert. otherwise you're just ranting. though i suspect that's the only point with you.
it's also funny how you've changed your tune. at the start of this discussion i was precisely saying we should make sweeping and substantive reforms and think about bringing these services/utilities back under state ownership. you hedged and said it would be complicated and 'hard to make fair for the companies' or some nonsense. now you're saying it's a practical monopoly and could be renationalized overnight if only the govt had the balls. errrm ... ??? do you even read the shit you post? i mean honestly. like a dog chasing his tail.
Last edited by uziq (2022-09-01 03:59:32)
We've done this, Thatcher failed to get into a humanities dept at Oksferd so shopped around for a course which would let her put 'Oksferd' on her CV.uziq wrote:
britain was privatized by thatcherites. she studied chemistry and her government were in the pockets of City finance types. you can hardly construe the woman from grantham whose father ran a grocers and who went to a state grammar as a privileged and insular 'oksferd PPE type'.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Britain has spent the money gained from privatisation, how are they going to fund buying back what they sold?uziq wrote:
it's also funny how you've changed your tune. at the start of this discussion i was precisely saying we should make sweeping and substantive reforms and think about bringing these services/utilities back under state ownership. you hedged and said it would be complicated and 'hard to make fair for the companies' or some nonsense.
They could negotiate a sensible deal, otherwise actual people, pension funds etc own shares in these companies so capital-free renationalisation would just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
be that as it may, she graduated with honours in chemistry and wrote a thesis on x-ray crystallography. she worked for years in industry as a research chemist. she had no higher academic qualifications in humanities. she never pursued a career in humanities.Dilbert_X wrote:
We've done this, Thatcher failed to get into a humanities dept at Oksferd so shopped around for a course which would let her put 'Oksferd' on her CV.uziq wrote:
britain was privatized by thatcherites. she studied chemistry and her government were in the pockets of City finance types. you can hardly construe the woman from grantham whose father ran a grocers and who went to a state grammar as a privileged and insular 'oksferd PPE type'.
you truly are mindbogglingly strange. first you insist on characterizing people and politicians, and their entire worldview, for their entire adult lives, on their fucking undergraduate studies. that in-itself is pure silliness. now you're accusing fucking professional chemists of being - what? - crypto-litterateurs?
"that woman who worked as a professional chemist and made contributions to scientific research, and who graduated from one of the best schools in the world in her subject, wasn't actually a scientist. she was actually, secretly, a wannabe milton scholar".
jesus christ you say some fucking insane things.
Last edited by uziq (2022-09-01 04:30:29)
once again you don't know what you're talking about. not the foggiest.Dilbert_X wrote:
Britain has spent the money gained from privatisation, how are they going to fund buying back what they sold?uziq wrote:
it's also funny how you've changed your tune. at the start of this discussion i was precisely saying we should make sweeping and substantive reforms and think about bringing these services/utilities back under state ownership. you hedged and said it would be complicated and 'hard to make fair for the companies' or some nonsense.
They could negotiate a sensible deal, otherwise actual people, pension funds etc own shares in these companies so capital-free renationalisation would just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
the amount of money we are going to spend from the tax purse over the next 2–3 winters could easily total £100 billion. we're paying £37 billion this winter alone. poof! straight into offshore bank accounts and energy CEO bonuses.
if we can afford to continually bail out private companies, take no stake in them in return, and continue gilding their shareholders ... why can't we spend that same money to bring the same industries into state-control, partial or total? what's better, spending the money and getting zilch or spending the money and gaining a stake?
the estimated cost of renationalising the energy industry is in the same ballpark of £100 billion, by the way.
bong! congrats! you're stupid!
Like most of the rest of the British govt - look at what they've achieved.uziq wrote:
she never pursued a career in humanities.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
dilbert, you are talking fucking bollocks. grow up, lad.
remember when dilbert claimed that the cost of living crisis was the fault of young parents for having kids and not being financially responsible? lol. yet another genius insight from our resident man baby.
Nope, when was that?
Meanwhile I'm not seeing a complete govt composed of the cream of elite humanities geniuses actually coming up with any kind of short, medium or long term solution, no, they're squabbling over who will be PM in the near term.
Meanwhile I'm not seeing a complete govt composed of the cream of elite humanities geniuses actually coming up with any kind of short, medium or long term solution, no, they're squabbling over who will be PM in the near term.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
you literally said at the beginning of the discussion about the emerging cost-of-living crisis that, in response to an anecdote about a working father with a young family who couldn't meet said costs, it was 'their fault' for 'poor financial planning' and that you shouldn't be expected to pay for other people's 'uncontrolled' breeding. you said that. go back a few pages. it's right there.
Last edited by uziq (2022-09-04 04:02:07)
rofl. timeless post. three paragraphs of total self-own.Dilbert_X wrote:
I have little sympathy for someone who decided to have three kids without planning how to pay for them and wants someone else to bail them out.
The population more than doubling every two generations is not sustainable, these people are the real terrorists.
Also Woodside Petroleum has done well for me this year, up 65%, 8.2% fully franked dividend easily pays my petrol bill.
So I didn't say "the cost of living crisis was the fault of young parents for having kids and not being financially responsible"
The cost of living crisis is the result of European dependence on Russian gas.
If people have overstretched themselves and can't absorb the odd bump whose fault is this?
People shouldn't expect cheap everything and disposable cash and as many kids as they want.
This blip is ending, Britain is sliding into failed state territory and people should probably get used to being cold and hungry and poor - like most of the rest of the world.
The cost of living crisis is the result of European dependence on Russian gas.
If people have overstretched themselves and can't absorb the odd bump whose fault is this?
People shouldn't expect cheap everything and disposable cash and as many kids as they want.
This blip is ending, Britain is sliding into failed state territory and people should probably get used to being cold and hungry and poor - like most of the rest of the world.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
you responded to the cost-of-living crisis by announcing your lack of sympathy with young families. are you really being this pedantic now? sad and pathetic.
and here you are doing it again. "if people can't absorb the odd bump". lol, in response to the above graph. unprecedented rise in household energy expenditure not seen in generations. the average working-class UK household don't even have £5k in savings. you can thank austerity and decades of stagnating wages for that.
'people shouldn't expect cheap everything'. lmfao. we are talking about a FIVE THOUSAND QUID energy bill. all you have is tabloid rhetoric and daily mail nonsense. incidentally, even the right-wing tabloids and conservative base are rounding on the energy companies now, and talking seriously about nationalisation again. only you persist in this stupid, frankly misanthropic line of attack.
you're 0.2 posts away from saying that people should cancel their netflix subscriptions and stop buying avocados.
last week boris johnson said that people could tackle their energy bills by buying a new, modern kettle and making £10–20 savings per year. that'll deal with a £5,000 energy bill. amazing how you criticise boris johnson's lot and their intellectual shoddiness, ad infinitum, and yet parrot the exact same fucking blague here.
you're a moron.
and here you are doing it again. "if people can't absorb the odd bump". lol, in response to the above graph. unprecedented rise in household energy expenditure not seen in generations. the average working-class UK household don't even have £5k in savings. you can thank austerity and decades of stagnating wages for that.
'people shouldn't expect cheap everything'. lmfao. we are talking about a FIVE THOUSAND QUID energy bill. all you have is tabloid rhetoric and daily mail nonsense. incidentally, even the right-wing tabloids and conservative base are rounding on the energy companies now, and talking seriously about nationalisation again. only you persist in this stupid, frankly misanthropic line of attack.
you're 0.2 posts away from saying that people should cancel their netflix subscriptions and stop buying avocados.
last week boris johnson said that people could tackle their energy bills by buying a new, modern kettle and making £10–20 savings per year. that'll deal with a £5,000 energy bill. amazing how you criticise boris johnson's lot and their intellectual shoddiness, ad infinitum, and yet parrot the exact same fucking blague here.
you're a moron.
Well they should.uziq wrote:
you're 0.2 posts away from saying that people should cancel their netflix subscriptions and stop buying avocados.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I did the math and if I stopped buying a $5 bag of avocados every month, I could afford a $600,000 house.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +635|3721
Reopen the coal minesuziq wrote:
remember when dilbert claimed that the cost of living crisis was the fault of young parents for having kids and not being financially responsible? lol. yet another genius insight from our resident man baby.
