“Look, America is no more a democracy than Russia is a Communist state. The governments of the U.S. and Russia are practically the same. There’s only a difference of degree. We both have the same basic form of government: economic totalitarianism. In other words, the settlement to all questions, the solutions to all issues are determined not by what will make the people most healthy and happy in the bodies and their minds but by economics. Dollars or rubles. Economy uber alles. Let nothing interfere with economic growth, even though that growth is castrating truth, poisoning beauty, turning a continent into a shit-heap and riving an entire civilization insane. Don’t spill the Coca-Cola, boys, and keep those monthly payments coming.”
― Tom Robbins, Another Roadside Attraction

anonymous asked:

Hello, question about Westerosi currency originated by the show (but does not require watching it). In the last episode Davos offers 30 golden dragons to bribe two guards to ignore his boat. The scene is framed as if he is giving them a nice but not astronomical sum, but am I correct to think that amount of money is actually kind of a fortune in Westeros, worth more than any cargo a smuggler could carry on a small boat?

Well, we can’t necessarily use the dragon in the books, we need to use the show’s numbers to determine how valuable this is, so my knowledge is limited to what I’ve seen. As far as gold is concerned, Brienne had an attempted ransom for 300 gold dragons which Jaime remarks is a pretty hefty one. Tyrion pays 20 dragons to each dwarf to make up for their public humiliation. Conversely, bread costs a few coppers, and cheap prostitutes are referred to as ‘five-copper,’ whether or not that is actually the price, that’s shown to be cheap. 100 stags is considered a healthy bounty for the Hound, so we have some idea that dragons are not commoner fare.

With that, 30 dragons between two guards seems like a rather immense sum, because only nobles are throwing around double digits of gold dragons. Unfortunately, I do not watch the show, but I believe this question would tickle @racefortheironthrone‘s fancy.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King


Reading my “Economics for dummies” book. I failed economics class last year, that’s one of the reasons why I have to repeat my first year at uni. I just didn’t know anything at all about that subject haha :o This year, I wanna be well prepared!

anonymous asked:

Regarding the gold dragons: maybe inflation is worse in Westeros right now because of the war, and a dragon doesn't go as far as it used to?

That’s Weimar Republic level or Venezuela level hyperinflation there.

Neoliberalism: the idea that swallowed the world
The long read: The word has become a rhetorical weapon, but it properly names the reigning ideology of our era – one that venerates the logic of the market and strips away the things that make us human
By Stephen Metcalf

Why is “economic freedom” always measured in how easy it is for rich assholes to own limitless property and exploit the working class by the thousands, and not in how easy it is for the average person to meet their basic necessities so they can live comfortably and happily in society?

Really makes you think. It’s almost like we live in a society where those same rich assholes control the media and dominant ideological institutions, thus constricting us to a very particular socially-constructed definition of “freedom” that benefits them materially. It’s almost like power seeks to reproduce itself or something.

Some things about Net Neutrality being threatened that I haven’t seen many comments on:

- The OOOONNLY people benefiting from this possible rollback are corporate shareholders. 

- The removal of NN would result in few if any new jobs whatsoever, so any argument that it would help the economy is null and void (btw, we’re not actually in a recession anymore, in case anyone still thought that. The US’s economy, while it has plateaued in actual growth at about 2%, it’s actually pretty high in the business cycle.)

- Limitation and partisan censorship is a major concern (I lied that one is what everyone is talking about)

- In fact it will HURT online businesses, which will damage the small business sector in general.

- And last but not least: It is going to have a majorly negative impact on the education system. I just finished highschool in May and let me tell you, even rural schools are getting more and more technology and internet dependent. Students frequently, if not regularly, are sent home with online assignments. How can students possibly be expected to finish an online homework assignment if they can’t even remotely begin to afford internet? This is already an issue in rural and poor and POC dominated areas, and should Net Neutrality be removed and access to the internet be placed back into money hungry corporate hands, it will be an even more massive and far worse problem that will only perpetuate low education levels in these areas. what if their assignment requires research on a website that their partisan provider has decided to censor? You get a zero. Especially if you’re a college student that can’t afford another $150 a month just to get ok-ish internet speeds. 

- This gives me great concern for marginalized and outcast kids. The internet has been one of the very, very few places where LGBT+ and POC children and people in general can go and feel safe and accepted and loved and celebrated for how/who they are. Imagine that that’s the ONLY place you feel safe and okay and then that gets taken away from you. Early teen suicide rates are already high enough. 

This is all just a disgusting money grab by the GOP and other politicians who are invested in cable and cellular companies. Call or message your congressional representatives to oppose. Drown them in resistance. I’ve already found several posts with links that let you do that. 

Rick Perry has no idea how economics works

  • Energy secretary, former Dancing With The Stars contestant, and hmm — what’s that third thing? — Rick Perry does not understand how economics works.
  • In a speech at a West Virginia coal plant on Thursday, Perry attempted to offer the crowd a little lesson in supply and demand.
  • “Here’s a little economics lesson: supply and demand.” Perry said. “You put the supply out there and the demand will follow.”
  • Unfortunately for Perry, that’s not how it works. Since the 1930s, economists generally agree that supply follows demand, and excess supply leads to supply gluts and not more demand.
  • Put simply, if you mine a bunch of coal it does not mean people will suddenly want more coal.
  • Ironically, this is one of the central tenants of global energy policy. An increase in the global supply of oil without commensurate increases in global demand decreases the price of oil, forcing international organizations like the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to try and restrict supply in order to raise the price. Read more (7/6/17)
"McDonald's and Walmart can afford to pay the $15 minimum wage!"

You’re right, they probably can. You know who can’t? Mr. and Mrs. Smith who run the corner store downtown. Mr. and Mrs. Smith are going to go out of business because they could never afford to pay the workers that much if they were legally required to. And McDonald’s and Walmart aren’t really upset about paying the higher wages because they’ve just driven all their competitors of business. I don’t want to hear you complaining about big corporations running small businesses out of town if you support raising the minimum wage to a level that small businesses could never reach.