Rhodes Center Podcast: How Precarity Puts Capitalism on Edge

[@eottoe2001]

Really liked this discussion. One thing I did notice in the 90s was that it wasn't so much as making a lot of money that helped peoples' lives but that having a stable job meant they could plan to do things like buying house without fear that next week they were jobless. If you have a job with a steady paycheck, a lot can be done.

[@totonow6955]

This is FINALLY analysis that absolutely matches my felt, lived experience.

[@redcoltken]

Same here. I think she nailed it

[@abelayele3130]

yes!

[@tonywilson4713]

I was able to read the preface and Introduction on Google books and parts of it really struck me similar to what you said. Even that part is worth the read. I think she's done something rare in that she's stopped, looked around and said the narrative being spun doesn't match what I know and can see. I'm an engineer and have lived my adult life not knowing what next week was particularly since they dragged us all onto contract work. The what happens next after the current contract isn't a nice way to live. Certain professions are naturally that way. A mechanic doesn't always know how many cars he'll fix next week but he knows something will need to be fixed.

[@samuelglover7685]

It's *really* clarifying, the distinction she draws between the psychology of precarity, and the mass envy purportedly triggered by inequality.

[@abelayele3130]

wilhem Reich's Mass psychology of fascism is a great primer and explanation of the success of reaction even during periods when a left turn would make most sense. fear, sexual anxiety, religious /racial mysticism, notions of blood and honor etc

[@troywalkertheprogressivean8433]

19:55 tho to clarify, the rich dont ACTUALLY work more, they hire other people to "work more". people give rich individuals more credit than deserved.

[@eliyahubenysrael6272]

Amen.

[@cmccaffer]

Well said. They have the skill to utilise, or exploit, other peoples' skills and labour. Utilising fairly is a good skill, unfairly or exploiting is not - my personal opinion, of course.

[@deborahkusaj1928]

I see this as validation for my argument against competition. I always saw competition is a bad thing and the source of unhappiness.

[@albertdittel8898]

absolutely great thoughts! But when they talked about "the rich being in the same precarious boat" they didn't mention the 1% who own everything. I really don't think those guys are experiencing the same insecurity as top lawyers or programmers or what have you. Inequality may not be the only problem, but it certainly is a huge problem and I see the danger in talks like this to try to neglect that.

[@tonywilson4713]

I think your right on that and I don't think she meant the top 1% as we commonly think of them. But many of them do live a precarious existence, but its different to the rest of us. Many of them are risk takers and they enjoy taking those risks and dragging others along into that risk. I think one of the Western Worlds biggest problem is that we have continually bailed out the risk takers and they have kept taking bigger and bigger risks with our future. So I think she's mostly right but misses that there is a part of the top 1% who psychologically are addicted to risk and don't care about precarity that they put us all into.

[@autohmae]

@@tonywilson4713 a bunch of those people are actually psychopaths who will never care about the risks for others.

[@tonywilson4713]

@@autohmae If you can find it there's footage of Rupert Murdoch from the British enquiry into phone hacking. At one point he's playing all old and frail and it was other people doing the bad stuff behind his back. The British politician questioning then asked then maybe he shouldn't e running a major public company. Murdoch lost his composure for just a moment and snapped back of course not. Its not the words I remember but the body language and the tone. I'd always heard how ferocious Murdoch could be, but he never shows it publicly. Well for that moment he did - it was scary, psychopathically scary.

[@autohmae]

@@tonywilson4713 I know the huge influence he has had on the US,UK, AU media. But I don't life in these countries. But it has affected me as well. I remember the the phone hacks mostly as a news item. Never really looked into the man himself. But what you said about Murdock makes perfect sense to me. After the financial crisis I was following "The Joris Luyendijk banking blog" of "The Guardian". Sounds like you might be from the UK and their is a small chance you know about it. It gives an amazing look into how this environment is great for psychopaths. It's very scary actually.

[@tonywilson4713]

@@autohmae close I'm Australian so I know all about living in a country with Murdoch influence

[@keithfoster6042]

One of my favourite podcasts from the last five years.

[@quanty30]

Inequality and precarity are intertwined.

[@cyberslim7955]

NO! They are really not! Just because somebody has more money, does not mean a lot of others have less!

[@Gibbons3457]

@@cyberslim7955 That's not what they said. Control your knees, they are jerking.

[@samuelglover7685]

Yes, but her crucial observations seem to center on the real, commonplace responses to insecurity, versus those that are *assumed* to begin with resentment over iniquity. It's an important distinction; these are the microfoundations of building effective political movements -- something the left hasn't exactly had a lot of luck with over the last 40 years.

[@troywalkertheprogressivean8433]

30:00 alan greenspan said it plainly for all to hear, job insecurity is part of the plan.

[@TheLivirus]

Seems to me that salaries in the lower bracket are regulated by keeping a pool of people involuntarily unemployed, so it seems quite difficult to reduce precarity without reducing inequality.

[@stefanlamb1179]

My issue with the conclusion, to try something that hasn't been done before, is that precarious people do not try new things, they cling to what they have. It seems the more precarious people are, the less likely they will be to try new, scary systems.

[@patbranigan6501]

Which is exactly where the rich want us to be scared of losing our jobs and scared of each other.

[@ChannelMath]

interesting idea but i disagree. A system change can also seem less scary, the scarier your current situation is. Scary is relative.

[@ChannelMath]

tbf, she did express your idea around 14:50

[@quanty30]

Those poor millionaires with their precarious lives and children who are unable to get into Oxford of Cambridge 😢 Inequality cannot be separated from precarity. Inequality leads to social problems (studies have clearly shown this), social problems lead to uncertainty, uncertainty leads to precarity.

[@georgehart1122]

Exactly! Why try to tease the two apart when 1 reinforces the other. you know what would make peoples lives less precarious? MORE MONEY and, by extension, LESS INEQUALITY

[@tonywilson4713]

I don't think she's really doing that. I think she's pointing out that precarity affects a much larger chink of society including the rich. But I do think she misreads the risk takers in the top 1%. In the figurative top 1% there are risk takers and they enjoy taking those risks and dragging others along into that risk. I think one of the Western Worlds biggest problems is that we have continually bailed out the risk takers and they have kept taking bigger and bigger risks with our future. So I think she's mostly right but misses that there is a part of the top 1% who psychologically are addicted to risk and don't care about precarity that they put us all into.

[@quanty30]

@@georgehart1122 you got it George

[@cyberslim7955]

NO, if you understand how banks create money and how the rich get richer, inequality is irrelevant.

[@youmaarludwig5647]

All the bulbs I thought I never had began to shine like crazy..... wonderful stuff..... brilliant....

[@drdubious2432]

Capitalism is working perfectly. It is a system that intrinsically concentrates wealth and searches for ways to reduce labor costs and increase profit. Precarity is a feature, not a bug. Lower job security allows lower wages and higher profit. The ideal incarnation would have zero jobs and zero labor cost, just owners. It is also a system dependant upon infinite growth, also known as cancer, and is unsustainable in nature. Lower and middle-income workers experience this process first and most intensely. Because they are propagandized to believe that they live in the ideal system, the majority do not accept alternative solutions. Being structurally dictatorial, capitalism naturally drives people toward authoritarian solutions and the acceptance of scapegoats.

[@thomasjamison2050]

Ah, yes, you see my friend. Your anxiety of living pay check to paycheck without decent healthcare and a pension of any sort is just as disturbing to you as is my insecurity of worrying about my free healthcare and my ample pension. Why doesn't that make any sense to you?"

[@mmmhorsesteaks]

That was my first thought. Wealthy white people have it so hard...

[@markbrownner6565]

nothing scares rich people more than knowing that any small slip or error will result in them losing all they have... see the movie 'trading places'....

[@Gibbons3457]

It's all about context. People with a lot of money feel just the same stressors as people with very little. There's a point (last time I checked it was around $53,000 a year) where having money stops being a comfort and starts to become a stressor in and of itself. It's like getting into first place on the racetrack, just because you are winning doesn't mean you can relax, in fact, you might likely get even more stressed because that guy in second place is gaining on you. It's not the rich people don't have it easier, of course, they do, they know where their next meal is and they have a roof over their heads, in fact, they have a choice of which roof they want but that doesn't mean they aren't miserable, stressed out, and sick; they are, just for different reasons. The poor and the rich both worry about similar things, for very different reasons.

[@rpena0899]

Really interesting conversation but why end the discussion when she begins to talk about her potential solution?? I'd love to hear more about that

[@nonenone5387]

Was anyone scared at the phrase, its the job of politicians to come up with policy.

[@mirabeaux851]

It felt more like a cop out. I think it’s one thing to be like “this is such a big problem and i don’t have any solutions bc it stuns me”, but it’s another to talk for several minutes in a heavily and-here’s-my-policy direction and then be like “oh not that’s a politicians job. Oh and I’m going to make a whole series of political claims”

[@tracyleighbasham]

She clearly needs to read some Thomas Frank before she continues to pretend she understands what "populism" means. 🙄 Otherwise, very thought-provoking.

[@scottharding4336]

I think that inequality matters more when people feel insecure. The majority starts to notice that when things are good, the wealthy make money, but when things go sideways, the wealthy make money. It's the inequality of security that is exposing the deep corruption of the system. In 2009 bankers were payed bonuses with stimulus money while GM retirees were losing their pensions.

[@paulpeterson4216]

The solution seems to be to get rid of capitalism. Precarity is partly a result of insecurity of your position, but it is also largely driven by a lack of resources, which is in turn driven by a few thousand billionaire capitalist oligarchs hoarding all of those resources. The latter being what we euphemistically call "inequality." It is not inequality, it is a systematic theft of resources by the powerful, whether they be Afghan Warlords, Corrupt Politicians or Billionaire Oligarchs.

[@quanty30]

You got it Paul. The problem is economic rent being extracted.

[@EricMilewski]

Very interesting, Thank You!

[@ellengran6814]

Economic inequality works just fine in Scandinavia, due to social programs; free healthcare, free education, etc. The economic inequality in Norway is comparable to the one in US.

[@squatch545]

Nonsense.

[@aa2ll260]

Although we talk about it constantly, inequality was never the problem in the sense of the have nots comparing themselves with the haves. The problem that has long been implicit in inequality is this: When the rich take everything to themselves, there simply isn't enough left over for the rest. Yes, we end up with the yellowshirts complaining about not being able to pay their bills and not about inequality, but inequality was ever the root cause of precarity.

[@albertdittel8898]

And why is social welfare supposed to be not helpful against precarity again? (Don't point me to the part of this interview, because she didn't really anser the question).

[@thomasjamison2050]

The precarity of the wealthy classes is measured in the hardships of the lower classes and the perceived potential for a political reaction in the lower classes. Precarity rising in the lower classes ensures the precarity of the wealthy. The precarity of the wealthy is not something the lower classes worry about, but something the lower classes might well affect in a truly meaningful way at some unknown date in the future.

[@roc7880]

I do not get her argument. Being precarious is different from feeling precarious. A service worker who might not be employed this week because there are no customers is different from a rich guy who is worried that a crisis in Asia will lower the value of the investments. Saying rich are as precarious as the waiters is ridiculous

[@joyg2526]

Capitalism encourage the most ruthless and greedy to seize more and more power and thus giving them the ability to make rules that favor them. This inequity of power creates precarity in an economic system that prioritizes profit and everyone else suffers. Most people don't understand the forces at work that prevents them from making a secure living, they're not academics. All the average person knows is they can't make a living as a waiter, rent & food prices go up while their wages stagnate. I think precarity is a part of the issue. Capitalism was a good starter, but now we have to try something else.

[@ellengran6814]

In my view, greed is the real problem. Somehow the modern society creates a hole in our souls. They say indigenous people have lived in Australia for 40000 years - 40000 years of satisfaction (no need for change) !

[@tonywilson4713]

Actually that's the glossy travel brochure version. Yes they lived a nomadic, hunter gatherer existence, but I think its stretching reality a very long way to say they lived some utopian existence. As for how long they have actually lived in Australia there is a narrative that's publicly accepted and backed by a certain fraternity within the anthropological community but if you actually know what the evidence is its very sketchy. There have been some wild claims by certain people that have been debunked to much embarrassment. There's no doubt that there's rock artwork that is incredibly old, but how old is the contentious issue. FYI - I am Australian and been to Kakadu where the most ancient of the rock art is and yes its mind numbing extraordinary.

[@ellengran6814]

@@tonywilson4713 To me satisfaction has nothing to do with utopia . Satisfaction is, in my opinion, what you feel when your needs are fulfilled. Today we are obsessed with what we want, and I believe we have forgotten what we need; the feeling of belonging (on earth, in society), the feeling of pride just for being human, the feeling of joy just for living. Pride is a reflection of others respect, belonging is created by the stories we tell and the care we recieve, joy is an ecco inside. Im not talking about an easy life, Im talking about a life that fulfills your body, mind and soul.

[@tonywilson4713]

@@ellengran6814 I can't disagree with that but its also a little to far into the fantasy utopia that too many want to preach about but never do the hard work for. And the worst of those people expect others to work their asses off to provide the nik naks they like. A number of years ago a bunch of free thinking utopians came on television in Australia. One of them while telling how magical her life was was asked about being on government financial assistance. She then said that WITHOUT that money she wouldn't be able to feed herself. When she was asked what people might think of that as they drove to work the next day her answer was "how terrible it was that people drove cars." That wasn't the question - the question was if her life was so good why did she need others to pay for her food. Having lived for a short time in the far north of Australia and having met the locals I can tell you one thing for certain. Neither you or me could live as they live. They do know how to live off the land, but in the world we have their life expectancy is dramatically shorter without modern health care. So where do we strike the balance between their lifestyle and their life expectancy. Having known some of their history and knowing how some of them live today I guarantee you that there are many native Australian communities where you as a girl would NOT want to grow up. Other than health care there are some cultural issues that aren't mentioned much and I can't mention them here without getting into trouble (that's a hint - don't ask).

[@ellengran6814]

@@tonywilson4713 I saw a documentary from Canada. Indigenous people (inuits) have been forced to live in cities and their children forced to boarding schools (just like indigenous people all over the world) . Their children are now unable to live the old life, they dont have the skills needed. The adults miss the freedom of their old life . Alchohol and depression has become a part of the lives of both the old and the young - just like it has in all other indigenous tribes. In my view, the opium problems in US is kind of the same problem . The old way of living in the Midwest, factory jobs, disappeared. Some say : Stupid people, why cant they just adjust - moove away from their friends/family, study computer-science and get a job at Facebook. In my opinion we have to learn to respect the needs of human beings. Yes, we can change/adapt but we all adapt in different ways, at different speed. As I said I believe we also have to focus more and learn more about what it means to be humans - what our needs are. We create societies for humans, not for money or robots.

[@ellengran6814]

@@tonywilson4713 PS. One of my sons spent a year on a University in Australia. He had a great time 😊

[@cyberpunkalphamale]

recently mentioned by Tony Wilson on Steve Keen"s podcast

[@janstaes2172]

alan greenspan "if the workers are more insecure, that's very healthy for the society" because "they'll serve the masters gladly and passively."

[@CA999]

Was this topic just on a week ago?

[@ryerye9019]

Precarity drives inequality. Human beings are loss adverse. The poor and once middle class have more to lose because they have so little left. And once they lose everything they revolt and their politics become radical. They author struggles more with semantics (distinguishing the two terms) than the actual issues that concern people. Feels nitpicky and probably why academics won't inspire any social movements.

[@TheLivirus]

On the one hand, developed nations seek birth rate above replacement rate in order to sustain growth, on the other hand the children are taught to lower their expectations on their share of it.

[@doodoobrn]

Were the 90s the most prosperous decade in the 20th century?

[@cyberslim7955]

12:30 How true, there are so many rich people, and you look in their face, and you think, why are you not happy?

[@redrockcrf4663]

Maybe I missed it, but it seems to me the dark side of this argument is that fascists would propose indentured servitude as providing certainty of being looked after. In other words, some would try to work this towards a system of Serfs and Masters.

[@roc7880]

yes, because fascism is telling people that those who they hate will suffer more. this was the argument of those who voted for Trump. I will lose social security but there will be a wall

[@samuelglover7685]

@@roc7880 It seems to me that cutting-edge right-wing thinkers are really interested in crafting legal definitions of "citizenship" that make its *revocation*, not merely restriction, much easier for authorities. Social benefits are already essentially tied to citizenship (in reality, if not in right-wing fever dreams). Revocation of citizenship makes it easy to ensure that only "real Americans" get things like Social Security. In fact maybe it could even get a new name, something like, say, National Social Security.

[@roc7880]

@@samuelglover7685 indeed, the right invented the original identity politics doctrine, except that they were more smooth in using euphemisms before. now, they are in the open.

[@cyberslim7955]

OMG, finally they get it! When you are poor, being jealous about somebody else having a bigger bank account gives you f***ing nothing! The only question there is, how can I have better/easier opportunities to make a decent living for myself?

[@MrOliverwoods]

Incredible idea

[@patbranigan6501]

Except in America people work more than one job because wages are so low. So precarity is mated with low wages in the US which it is not in the rest of the Western world. So at least in America it is not only precarity it is wage oppression. so great you share 3 jobs with other people?

[@animalfarm7467]

Can't listen to this crap. Her analysis is fragmented, selective, and avoids too much of history. It appears to be designed to create a certain narrative.

[@markbrownner6565]

as a Tauren hockey player the need for emotional & financial security is paramount in decision making along with avoiding skating on thin ice so this idea of precarious situations affecting those areas of your life rings terrible true and will generate emotional (not rational) reactions and amplified over entire economies & countries has given us this modern situation not unlike what the luddites faced in the early 1800s... so while pointing out this miasma the solutions were not very well explained or perhaps unrealistic.. remember when robots were going to free us all up for more leisure time..

[@stefanlamb1179]

Precarity at both the bottom and the top (not being able to leave) could explain why suicide rates are so high for both rich and poor alike.

[@Eastbayrob]

Interesting take.

[@dmoneytron]

RedIscovering Kapital volume 1 the talk.

[@Mageroeth]

Yep, i always found it odd that people arent working to work less. Im glad im not alone everytime friends or family says we need more jobs we need to bring manufactoring back i always say how about we keep the cheap labour and just work less.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Everyone enjoys sporting competitions, even in Commerce. Most people don't want it to become litigious competitions that poor people always pay for, except those few "Capitalists". (Not Investors who rely on Social and Corporate stability)

[@squatch545]

Nobody is going to want to job share if it means any decrease in wages. It's a nonstarter. We need a revolution.

[@markbrownner6565]

ok smith what's your plan..??

[@squatch545]

@@markbrownner6565 Did you read my comment?

[@markbrownner6565]

@@squatch545 yes how will the revolution manifest itself..??

[@squatch545]

@@markbrownner6565 Do you know what a revolution is? See:: French Revolution, Spanish Revolution, etc.

[@markbrownner6565]

@@squatch545 sounds violent... will you lead the charge when the gates are stormed..??

[@scrambaba]

Loss of control, not precarity.

[@quanty30]

Bourgeois propaganda.

[@quanty30]

Basically this idea makes rich white people feel better again so that they don't get angry and side with the poorer minorities.

[@ericblakeney5153]

Another well thought out false argument.

[@NosyFella]

I don't want to work to enrich anyone. I don't want to take part in the pillaging. I agree that precarious living is the main driver of political instability in western countries. But why should the left be trying to make capitalism more stable? She's just describing a new capitalist order. A lot of what she is saying doesn't sound too far off 'the great reset' movement. Reshaping capitalism so it's more bearable for the plebs while we extract every last drop of wealth from the planet. If the system is on the edge then kick it off!

[@uncleshamus3451]

All this population can do is consume. More time off. More consumption 😩

[@DowntownsUptown]

I never thought I'd see the day when he'd engage in conversation based on the assumption that the stock market numbers actually represented the actual "state of the economy". Ignorance personified. All that insecurity was about job loss, wages, insurance, depleted savings, the fact that one's savings would be enough to live on, more less enjoy one's senior years or help out grown children here and there as there parents had done for them; the latter being part of the problem generated by the gross eccentricity of the parents born in the 30's or so. What do I mean by the latter? They take credit for all they've recieved along the way from their parents and bundle ut all into the category - some of which actually belongs there - of that absurdity known as the bootstrap theory, which is a complete hoax. No? Try it some time. Find a nice, sturdy pair of leather boots with the loops on the tops, get ahold of those straps, and pulllll with all your mite. Let me know when you find yourself standing upright! I entered into the work force in the early eighties, and it was already sliding down hill; tumbling after my son was born in '89. Now, tell me how the wonderfully steady economic status of the corporate world had - or has - anything at all to do with anything to do with

[@DowntownsUptown]

...the folks coming into the jobless status. Ronny Ray-Gun let them in, and it's never been the same since. Republican through and through, he was voted in by the idiots who voted him in. It's so much easier to blame them as opposed to the person they put into office.

[@fredfrond6148]

Andrew Yang, UBI stop the precarious nature of our society.

[@bobmfthomp]

So long as we have people who have all the wealth and power, we will always have precarity. Ubi is fine and good and would help people. Then the wealthy would undermine it just like they did the minimum wage. I mean the minimum wage was founded to be a living wage no matter who did the work. The wealthy used their power to keep the minimum wage as flat as possible knowing that the cost of goods would always go up and thus make the minimum worthless. They would do similar with the Ubi.

[@baltasarnoreno5973]

@@shaz7132 UBI is not intended to eradicate inequality. That its not its purpose. It never was. A country that has a UBI system will still have poor people and wealthy people. UBI is and does exactly what its name says it is and does: a guaranteed minimum income for every citizen between the ages of 18 and 65. It is a simple statement that says that no citizen will be allowed to live below a certain financial threshold. The state will provide a fixed and flat rate unconditional payment to all adults, whether they are in work or not, regardless of their earning potential or the value of their skills in the labour market, without any means test, and independent of any other economic or social circumstances. It can be very easily extended to cover under 18s and over 65s if we want to protect the retired poor and families with only one earner. And it could also be introduced alongside the existing social protection system which gives additional payments for people in very difficult circumstances who need extra help - like people with severe disabilities or people who care for them at home. Tou say that UBI would decimate healthcare. This is complete nonsense. Healthcare in European countries is a completely separate administration and is provided completely separately from the provision of social security services like unemployment payments, pensions, subsidies for low incomes, disability payments or maternity payments. Nobody here is denied healthcare because they are unemployed.

[@tracyleighbasham]

@@baltasarnoreno5973 your last statement is why his statement is valid here in the land of for profit healthcare. UBI will just allow all the private, for profit rent extractors to further extract.

[@baltasarnoreno5973]

@@tracyleighbasham Then maybe it's time for a publically funded healthcare system in the US, perhaps? Can't get enough political support for a publically funded healthcare system? Then you will never get support for a UBI either, and the whole question becomes moot. So maybe you should first get your political priorities right. Or maybe you should stop wasting your time on campaigning for the impossible, and go and find something more productive to do with your life.

[@tracyleighbasham]

@@baltasarnoreno5973 if I wanted to be a butt hurt ass, I could literally say the same about your UBI agenda. Also, I'm a private citizen, not a politician. I don't campaign. I just call balls and strikes. 😉