• Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    “… but it’s also just understanding how money works so we can advocate for policies that make sense,” she said.

    Great. Except there’s disagreement over how money works even among academics. And what understanding you subscribe to has real political implications. For example different understanding of money is used to drive pro austerity vs anti austerity policies.

    In addition, the way money works in practical, personal terms, is not how it works in government terms and this understanding is often used to promote austerity policies that are harmful for most individuals.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      Also as much as we can argue over certain shades of blue-green being more blue or more green the Conservatives are out here trying to tell us that pure red should also be included in the discussion. We have so many good options with their own pros and cons and they’re just going for the objectively bad stuff.

      Like, none of their financial policy works. The math doesn’t even add up at surface level. From buck-a-beer, to giving people a refund for plate renewals that ultimately is nothing, to deliberately misrepresenting how the carbon tax works none of it works with even the slightest bit of questioning. They just can’t stop failing no matter how many times real academics and qualified activist groups plead with them to listen.

      It’s almost like making things better for the vast majority of people isn’t their goal…

      • MoonChildOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        It isn’t their goal to make things better for most people. Their goal is to make things better for them and their friends