Global poverty: definitions and developmentsteppoeskelinen
Global poverty is a complex issue with varying definitions and measurements. Roughly one third of humanity lives in material poverty concentrated in Africa, Asia, and South America. While definitions of poverty differ and include economic, ethical, and multidimensional measures, global goals aim to alleviate poverty by focusing on direct poverty reduction as well as societal changes like urbanization and climate change. Trends show that those living on less than $1.25 or $2 per day has decreased globally excluding China, though some regions like Sub-Saharan Africa have seen increases in poverty. Exact measurements are difficult and poverty lines may not fully capture the social aspects that are important to individuals' experiences with deprivation.
The allocation of financial risks and social justiceteppoeskelinen
This document discusses the allocation of financial risks and social justice. It defines risks and examines how risks have become commodified and distributed in unequal ways through the financial system. Risks are now allocated through explicit mechanisms like insurance as well as implicit logic like bank bailouts. This has led to the emergence of a "financial risk society" and questions the classical justifications of capitalism. The document considers different perspectives on the relationship between risks, finance, and justice.
This document summarizes a presentation on equality, risks, and certainty in modern society. It discusses different interpretations of equality, from negative rights to addressing economic inequality. It also analyzes financial capitalism, noting how financial imperatives now dictate production decisions and government policy. Finally, it examines the temporal aspect of justice in a risk society dominated by financial interests, where exceptions to rules benefit the financial sector over ordinary workers. The presentation argues that theories of justice must account for hierarchies created by the current financial system.
Think tanks operate in an increasingly blurred landscape between research, advocacy, and politics. While some think tanks focus more on research, others function more like lobbying organizations or NGOs. There is diversity in the producers of social scientific knowledge, including different levels of reliability. Think tanks are not bound by the same peer review standards as academia and can choose propaganda over impartial analysis, like with climate change denial. Social science does not have definitive criteria to separate facts from values, and think tanks have flexibility in whether or not to adhere to scientific standards of integrity. Think tanks can point out wrong claims in politics but also pick their topics more freely than political institutions.
Global poverty: definitions and developmentsteppoeskelinen
Global poverty is a complex issue with varying definitions and measurements. Roughly one third of humanity lives in material poverty concentrated in Africa, Asia, and South America. While definitions of poverty differ and include economic, ethical, and multidimensional measures, global goals aim to alleviate poverty by focusing on direct poverty reduction as well as societal changes like urbanization and climate change. Trends show that those living on less than $1.25 or $2 per day has decreased globally excluding China, though some regions like Sub-Saharan Africa have seen increases in poverty. Exact measurements are difficult and poverty lines may not fully capture the social aspects that are important to individuals' experiences with deprivation.
The allocation of financial risks and social justiceteppoeskelinen
This document discusses the allocation of financial risks and social justice. It defines risks and examines how risks have become commodified and distributed in unequal ways through the financial system. Risks are now allocated through explicit mechanisms like insurance as well as implicit logic like bank bailouts. This has led to the emergence of a "financial risk society" and questions the classical justifications of capitalism. The document considers different perspectives on the relationship between risks, finance, and justice.
This document summarizes a presentation on equality, risks, and certainty in modern society. It discusses different interpretations of equality, from negative rights to addressing economic inequality. It also analyzes financial capitalism, noting how financial imperatives now dictate production decisions and government policy. Finally, it examines the temporal aspect of justice in a risk society dominated by financial interests, where exceptions to rules benefit the financial sector over ordinary workers. The presentation argues that theories of justice must account for hierarchies created by the current financial system.
Think tanks operate in an increasingly blurred landscape between research, advocacy, and politics. While some think tanks focus more on research, others function more like lobbying organizations or NGOs. There is diversity in the producers of social scientific knowledge, including different levels of reliability. Think tanks are not bound by the same peer review standards as academia and can choose propaganda over impartial analysis, like with climate change denial. Social science does not have definitive criteria to separate facts from values, and think tanks have flexibility in whether or not to adhere to scientific standards of integrity. Think tanks can point out wrong claims in politics but also pick their topics more freely than political institutions.
This document discusses two critiques of the concept of financial risk:
1) Risks cannot be objectively quantified and are socially constructed, yet claiming objectivity in risk assessments gives power to certain groups.
2) Risk allocation determines whose interests are prioritized in a crisis and has led to increasing social disparities.
While risks may be socially constructed, their distribution is real and shapes the social order of who is protected. Both the construction of risks and their unequal effects need addressing to build more egalitarian and secure financial and social systems.
Risk distribution and threats to democracyteppoeskelinen
This document discusses how the distribution of risks in the economy can threaten democracy by narrowing the democratic policy space. It argues that the increasing role of finance has externalized many risks from their originators onto governments and individuals. This has restricted policy options and encouraged antidemocratic tendencies as governments feel compelled to avoid risks materializing. The document calls for analyzing risk distribution through theories of justice and making these political choices around risk more explicit. Remedies proposed include re-regulating finance and shifting power from civil servants back to politicians.
Economics can be ideological by highlighting certain viewpoints over others and influencing perceptions of social and economic reality. While economics claims objectivity, some of its rules are descriptive and others are normative. Economics is also accused of reproducing class society by describing the bourgeois viewpoint and producing the idea of economic man. Additionally, economics can disguise politics and present market interventions as distortions from a free market norm, though historically markets have been created through political interventions. The essence of a "market economy" is changes in ownership structure and money/debt relations, not changes in markets, and most modern economic activity occurs within firms or through non-market mechanisms.
This document discusses how globalization is shaped by domestic political decisions rather than a lack of politics. While pressures of competition and economic theories promote uniform policies across countries, democracies still allow for political struggle. The document presents an empirical study of economic experts in Finland's Ministry of Finance who aim to influence political alternatives through framing issues like public finance crises and references to other international experts. These experts work to define what is politically feasible and establish institutional logics that prioritize their expertise and maintaining economic stability.
1) Traditionally, development policy aimed to increase production in low-income countries through capital injection, but this deepened inequality and modern poverty.
2) Poverty is multidimensional, involving a lack of both resources and basic functionings; its reduction requires both political organization and basic income support.
3) Unconditional basic income provides future orientation, micro-investment opportunities, and can reduce poverty cheaply in poor, unequal conditions, though it cannot address all development needs like maternal health or replace basic services.
This document discusses the varieties and stages of capitalism. It covers different theoretical perspectives on varieties of capitalism such as liberal market economies versus coordinated market economies. It also discusses the emergence and crisis of the Keynesian welfare state and post-Keynesian theories including the financialization of capitalism and emerging forms such as Asian capitalism. The document concludes by noting there are varieties of capitalism but theoretical and political uncertainty around the emerging form after the Keynesian welfare state.
This document discusses the role of the state in capitalism and accumulation. It argues that the common narrative of globalization leading to less government and more markets is questionable. The state plays a key role in fostering capital accumulation by supporting the profit motive through guaranteeing ownership rights and maintaining stability, while also taxing labor to fund necessary state functions. The tensions between the profit motive, wages, finance/production, and conditions of accumulation have led states to develop various responses, like controlling migration, increasing debt, and prioritizing certain economic interests. The state and market have always had a symbiotic relationship with internal tensions in capitalism.
1) The ecological crisis stems from simultaneous shortages of resources, pollution sinks, and certainty within capitalism. Any attempt to decrease production will lead to social crisis given the current system.
2) Addressing the crisis through consumer awareness, immaterial production, degrowth, or green investments does not overcome capitalism's driving force of endless accumulation and expansion into new areas of exploitation.
3) A truly ecological society requires revolutionizing social and productive relations to sustain ecological reproduction long-term, rather than prioritizing profitability and growth. Struggles over commons, cooperatives, and alternative economic systems are needed to impose limits on the destructive aspects of capitalism.
This document discusses two critiques of the concept of financial risk:
1) Risks cannot be objectively quantified and are socially constructed, yet claiming objectivity in risk assessments gives power to certain groups.
2) Risk allocation determines whose interests are prioritized in a crisis and has led to increasing social disparities.
While risks may be socially constructed, their distribution is real and shapes the social order of who is protected. Both the construction of risks and their unequal effects need addressing to build more egalitarian and secure financial and social systems.
Risk distribution and threats to democracyteppoeskelinen
This document discusses how the distribution of risks in the economy can threaten democracy by narrowing the democratic policy space. It argues that the increasing role of finance has externalized many risks from their originators onto governments and individuals. This has restricted policy options and encouraged antidemocratic tendencies as governments feel compelled to avoid risks materializing. The document calls for analyzing risk distribution through theories of justice and making these political choices around risk more explicit. Remedies proposed include re-regulating finance and shifting power from civil servants back to politicians.
Economics can be ideological by highlighting certain viewpoints over others and influencing perceptions of social and economic reality. While economics claims objectivity, some of its rules are descriptive and others are normative. Economics is also accused of reproducing class society by describing the bourgeois viewpoint and producing the idea of economic man. Additionally, economics can disguise politics and present market interventions as distortions from a free market norm, though historically markets have been created through political interventions. The essence of a "market economy" is changes in ownership structure and money/debt relations, not changes in markets, and most modern economic activity occurs within firms or through non-market mechanisms.
This document discusses how globalization is shaped by domestic political decisions rather than a lack of politics. While pressures of competition and economic theories promote uniform policies across countries, democracies still allow for political struggle. The document presents an empirical study of economic experts in Finland's Ministry of Finance who aim to influence political alternatives through framing issues like public finance crises and references to other international experts. These experts work to define what is politically feasible and establish institutional logics that prioritize their expertise and maintaining economic stability.
1) Traditionally, development policy aimed to increase production in low-income countries through capital injection, but this deepened inequality and modern poverty.
2) Poverty is multidimensional, involving a lack of both resources and basic functionings; its reduction requires both political organization and basic income support.
3) Unconditional basic income provides future orientation, micro-investment opportunities, and can reduce poverty cheaply in poor, unequal conditions, though it cannot address all development needs like maternal health or replace basic services.
This document discusses the varieties and stages of capitalism. It covers different theoretical perspectives on varieties of capitalism such as liberal market economies versus coordinated market economies. It also discusses the emergence and crisis of the Keynesian welfare state and post-Keynesian theories including the financialization of capitalism and emerging forms such as Asian capitalism. The document concludes by noting there are varieties of capitalism but theoretical and political uncertainty around the emerging form after the Keynesian welfare state.
This document discusses the role of the state in capitalism and accumulation. It argues that the common narrative of globalization leading to less government and more markets is questionable. The state plays a key role in fostering capital accumulation by supporting the profit motive through guaranteeing ownership rights and maintaining stability, while also taxing labor to fund necessary state functions. The tensions between the profit motive, wages, finance/production, and conditions of accumulation have led states to develop various responses, like controlling migration, increasing debt, and prioritizing certain economic interests. The state and market have always had a symbiotic relationship with internal tensions in capitalism.
1) The ecological crisis stems from simultaneous shortages of resources, pollution sinks, and certainty within capitalism. Any attempt to decrease production will lead to social crisis given the current system.
2) Addressing the crisis through consumer awareness, immaterial production, degrowth, or green investments does not overcome capitalism's driving force of endless accumulation and expansion into new areas of exploitation.
3) A truly ecological society requires revolutionizing social and productive relations to sustain ecological reproduction long-term, rather than prioritizing profitability and growth. Struggles over commons, cooperatives, and alternative economic systems are needed to impose limits on the destructive aspects of capitalism.
2. Aikapankki
• Palveluiden vaihtojärjestelmä, jossa suoritusten arvoa mitataan tunnin mittaisina
”toveina”
• Fundamentaalinen idea: Kaikkien aika yhtä arvokasta
• Kirjanpito, jossa voi olla +-50 tovia
• Osa ”vaihtoehtovaluutan” tai ”täydentävän valuutan” (complementary currency)
ideaa
• Merkittäviä organisaatioita esim Iso-Britanniassa ja joissakin Etelä-Amerikan maissa
3. Aikapankit Suomessa
• Osa kansainvälistä verkostoa: CES (community exchange system)
• Lähinnä Stadin Aikapankki, teknisesti ottaen kymmenillä eri paikkakunnilla
mutta volyymit erittäin pieniä
• Viime aikoina poliittista huomiota (veroviranomaiset)
• Verottajan ohjeistus (marraskuu 2013): Aikapankkitoiminta rinnastetaan
osittain veronalaiseen vaihtotyöhön
4. Verotus: miksi?
• ”Vaihdettujen palveluiden taloudellista merkitystä on pidettävä marginaalisena […]
Elinkeinotoiminnan muodossa harjoitettua toimintaa ei ole havaittu…”
(Verohallinto, harmaan talouden selvitysyksikkö)
• ”Sosiaalisen kestävyyden, kaupunkilaisten omaehtoisen elämän ja talouden vakauden
edistämiseksi kaupunki selvittää miten se voi tukea aikapankkien toimintaa.”
(Helsingin kaupunki, globaalin vastuun strategia)
• Toiminnan pieni volyymi: STAPin ennätyskuukauden transaktiomäärä 350,
tovivolyymi 1250
• Alustavia vastauksia: chartalismi, epäselvästi täydentävien/korvaavien järjestelmien
luonne, kommodifikaatio/dekommodifikaatio -hyvinvointimalli
5. Täydentävä / korvaava järjestelmä?
• Mitä korvaava järjestelmä? (markkinat / julkiset palvelut)
• Totaalinen kommodifikaatio: Periaatteessa kaikelle on kaupalliset markkinat, joten
aikapankki syrjäyttää jossain mielessä aina jotain teoreettisia kaupallisia palveluita
• Talouskriisimaat: aikapankit todellisia joustomekanismeja
• Englanti: sosiaalisen inkluusion kanava, osallistujat tyypillisesti hyvin pienituloisia (yli
puolella kotitalouden vuositulot alle 10k puntaa)
• Toisaalta ”Big Society” ja aikapankit hyvinvointivaltion purkamisen legitimoijana
• Hyväksyttyjä markkinoiden / julkisten palveluiden korvaajia
6. Entä Suomessa? (1)
• Aikapankkien käyttäjät: kyselyn vastaajien moodi:
• Nainen 76%, akateeminen loppututkinto 51%, yksinasuva 39% (vaihtoehtoina
”taloudessa aikuisia mutta ei lapsia”, ”aikuisia ja lapsia”), ikä 21-34
(38%), huomattavan vähän yli 65-vuotiaita, vain yksittäisiä vaihtoja (1-10) viime
vuonna (56%)
• Ammatillisuus:
• Liittyvätkö aikapankissa tarjoamasi palvelut ammatti-osaamiseesi?
• 10% kyllä, näistä 6% yrittäjä ja tarjoaa samaa, moodi: Ammatti-osaamiseni on
aiemmin hankittua ja ei liity nykyiseen palkkatyöhöni lainkaan
7. Entä Suomessa? (2)
• Palveluiden käyttämättä jättäminen:
• Kaupalliset, ei 81%, julkiset, ei 95%
• On taloudellista merkitystä (huomattavaa pikemmin kuin vähäistä) 10%, toisaalta
näille huomattava merkitys
• Syyt käyttää aikapankkia: ”vastustan kapitalismia”; ”haluan tutustua naapureihin”;
”tarvitsen apua” ->näitä motiiveja toisinaan vaikea erottaa toisistaan
• -> Tyypilliselle käyttäjälle ei erityistä taloudellista merkitystä, ei harjoita
”täydentävää” yritystoimintaa, eikä aikapankin rakenne pyri julkisten palveluiden
syrjäyttämiseen
8. Aikapankkien käyttö
• Haetut palvelut:
• Arjen apua
(siivous, muuttoapu, lastenhoito, eläintenhoito, lumityöt, autonrenkaiden
vaihto, kukkien kastelu)
• Pienet ammatilliset
(kieltenopetus, hiustenleikkuu, hieronta, verhoilu, puutarhanhoito, atkapu, kirjanpito, kielenkäännökset)
• On vaikea sanoa, missä menee avun ja ammatillisuuden raja
9. ”Mitä koet saavasi aikapankeista?” (1)
• 1 Aidot ihmiset (vs markkinoiden paheet). Kokemus ”aitouden”, ”inhimillisyyden”
jne katoamisesta markkinoilla
• ”Ihmiset vaihtavat palveluksia ihmisinä, eivät markkinatalousnappuloina rahan kiilto
silmissä;. ”Pientä jeesiä (erottuen kaupallisista palveluista)”; ”Henkilökohtaamisia
joista saa sosiaalisesti mielihyvää, eikä pelkkää tietokoneen kautta tapahtuvaa
palvelua..”; ”Aikapankkilaisilla ei ole taka-ajatuksena myydä tuotetta”; ”Kontaktit
lähempänä kaveruutta kuin asiakassuhdetta”; Neuvoja (normaali kaupassa
persoonatonta)”; ”Rehellistä jeesiä ihmiseltä ihmiselle”; ”Olen tekemisissä todellisen
ihmisen enkä kasvottoman palveluntarjoajan kanssa”.
10. Mitä koet saavasi aikapankeista? (2)
• 2 Toimii paremmin ja täydentää (markkinoiden hyveiden täydellistymä)
• ”Apu on nopeaa, joustavaa, vilpitöntä”; ”Aikapankin kautta testasin erään
yrittäjän palvelua, jota en olisi ilman aikapankkia testannut. Testauksen
jälkeen olen käyttänyt samaa palvelua aikapankin ulkopuolella.”; ”Hyvän
markkinointikanavan omalle osaamiselleni”; ”Saan yksilöllistä apua, siis
täsmäapua juuri omaan ongelmaani”. ”Jos haluaa "ostaa" esim tunnin
silitystä, niin se on useimmille kaupallisille yrityksille liian pieni yksikkö.”
11. Verotus (1)
• Maksetaan tietysti kunhan keino löytyy
• ”Aikapankin jäsenet voisivat esimerkiksi oman osaamisensa mukaisesti
avustaa kaupungin ammattihenkilöiden johdolla kaupungin ylläpidossa:
puistoalueiden kunnossapidossa, rakennustoimissa, siivoamisessa,
puhtaanapidossa, hoivatyössä, hoitotyössä.”
• ”Progression toteuttaminen?”
12. Verotus (2)
• 2 Verotus on väärin (quid pro quo, verotus yleensä illegitiimiä)
• ”Kaupunki/Valtio ei tee mitää hyvää Aikapankin suhteen joten ei ole mitään
syytä maksaa sille veroa aikapankin tiimoilta. Yhtähyvin valtio voisi vatia
veroa auringon katselusta.”; ”Anteeksi, miksi pitäisi maksaa veroa esim.
kaupungille? Mitä kaupunki on tehnyt tämän yhteiskunnallisen kanavan
hyödyksi?”; ”Vero on varkautta”.
13. Rahan poliittisuus
• Raha ja tuotanto: kumpi ohjaa kumpaa?
• Poliittinen neutraalius (”refleksiivinen” rahoitusteoria): raha ainoastaan
heijastaa tuotannon luomia tulo- ja varallisuuseroja
• vs kysymys rahan luomisen tavoista ja ehdoista on itsessään poliittinen
• Eräs vastaus jälkimmäiseen linjaan on ollut ”vaihtoehtovaluuttojen” /
”täydentävien” valuuttojen luominen: paikallisrahat, arvoa uudelleen
määrittelevät rahajärjestelmät
14. Mitä raha on?
• Rahalle voi antaa kaikenlaisia ilmenemismuotoja:
• Smith: kala, naulat jne
• Tai villimpää: "Esitän utopian nimettömästä kaupungista, jonka ainoana
valuuttana käytettäisiin verenseisautusyrttien positiivisia ominaisuuksia."
(André Breton)
• Mutta raha on aina vahvistettu juridinen sopimus, velkasuhteen merkintä
15. Samanlaiset rahat
• Sekä “toviraha” että “tavallinen” raha ovat molemmat pohjimmiltaan
velkasuhteiden kirjanpitojärjestelmiä
• Onko ”aika” itse asiassa yhtä tarkka mittari palveluiden arvolle kuin raha
(palvelut usein yksityisiä monopoleja, palveluiden tuottavuuden mittaaminen
vaikeaa)…?
16. Erilaiset rahat
• “Tavallisen” rahan poliittisuus: rahan luomisen ehdot (myös inflaatio)
• Aikapankkirahassa vallitsevan varallisuuden määrällä ei ole oikeastaan mitään
merkitystä, ainoastaan “rahan kiertonopeudella”.
• Esim. 100 toviyksikön luominen kaikille -> mitään ei tapahtuisi -> rahan luomisen ehdoilla ei
sinänsä merkitystä
• Toisaalta myös aikarahaa voi säilyttää “varallisuutena”. (Kuten monet näyttävät tekevän, koska sen
käyttäminen on “kiusallista”…)
• Transaktiot vs investoinnit: aikapankkiraha voi lisääntyä vain transaktioiden kautta, “tavallinen
raha” tulee kiertoon investointien kautta
• Rahan äärivaihdettavuus, likviditeetti, universalismi, ”short-termism” vs rajattu raha: Yhteisö
määrittelee sisäisesti rahan käytön rajat (arvot ja etiketti)
17. Poliittisuuden muodot
• Poliittisuus ei siis lisärahan luomisen ehdoissa vaan rahan rajojen kontrollissa
(”tovietiketti”)
• Poliittinen kysymys figuroituu aidosti yhteisön sisäisenä politiikkana:
perusarvot, edustavuus, rajojen venyttäminen
• Politiikan ilmenemismuotoja esim suhtautuminen yritystoimintaan, tavaran
myyntiin jne., nyt myös suhtautuminen verotukseen
• Viime kädessä kysymys aikapankkirahan universalisoitumisesta on yhteisön
sisäisen politiikan kysymys