1/13 This is neoliberalism:
Trump just increased work requirements for food stamps in order to "cut down on abuse within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).” The administration also cites the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. westernjournal.com/trump-admin-wo…
Trump just increased work requirements for food stamps in order to "cut down on abuse within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).” The administration also cites the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. westernjournal.com/trump-admin-wo…
2/ So since almost *EVERYONE* is employed, those still on food stamps are clearly cheating or taking advantage and need a subtle push off the dole and back into employment. Outgoing speaker @SpeakerRyan (color me skeptical about those 6.6M jobs...). From archive.li/SmWA6: 
3/ But US unemployment statistics are a rosy unicorn fairly tale that hides decades of wage stagnation, the underemployed, hidden unemployed, and those unhappily unemployed. foreignpolicyjournal.com/2018/03/08/mak…
4/ Unemployment statistics also don’t say anything about decades of income inequality. @ptcherneva:
5/ In other words, according to Trump and Ryan, food stamps, which are supposed to provide food for the desperate, are actually CREATING unemployment. There are so many jobs, and if only these lazy-ass moochers would stop playing video games, get up off their couches & apply...
6/ So, if you’re unemployed, It’s not the gov’t’s fault – it’s yours. Never mind that the Federal Reserve just made a move they ACKNOWLEDGE will result in a minimum of 1.2 M losing their jobs in the name of meaningless "fiscal responsibility." @billy_blog: bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=41208
7/ Why is the Federal Reserve doing this? Because their mandate from Congress, which used to be true full employment (where *everyone* who wants a job can have one), changed in the early 1980s to "maximum sustainabile employment." From: federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_128…
8/ See that? According to the Federal Reserve itself, the goal of "maximum employment" is due to factors that "may change over time and are not directly measurable," and where "maximum employment" is defined by the "its members' assessments” which “are necessarily uncertain."
9/ Indeed, a 2017 research paper by London School of Economics and Paris School of International Affairs (drive.google.com/file/d/1MMtR6A…) reached the conclusion that the central bankers who make these very decisions (members of the FOMC), make them MOSTLY based on personal ideology.
10/ So "maximum sustainable unemployment" is therefore defined as “whatever the hell they want it to be." Pay no attention to the fact that the bankers who decide whether people should be employed or unemployed...just so happen to profit more when unemployment is higher.
11/ But never mind never mind never mind! The one and only thing that matters, is that if you don’t have a job, if you are starving, if you are sick, if global warming consumes the planet, it is no one’s fault but your own. It is your individual and personal responsibility.
12/ In conclusion, to incentivize you to get a job, our government has decided to threaten you with starvation. But the government is also CHOOSING to keep millions unemployed, making it MUCH harder to find a job (or demand better!).
13/13 Our government chooses for us to be unemployed, and therefore impoverished and powerless (and unable to stand up). It then shames those who need to use any safety net program...because it’s our fault for needing it. We might as well get rid of them!
This is neoliberalism.
This is neoliberalism.
Thanks to @NathanTankus from @thepublicmoney for the FOMC ideology study and Steev Gonzo from MMT for @RealProgressUS (facebook.com/groups/MMTforRP) for the unemployment statistics information.
@threadreaderapp unroll
As shared on Facebook: facebook.com/10689119065225…
Neoliberalism, monetarism, and “fiscal responsibility.”
Numbers are more important than actual human costs...which is really only cover to mean, “my human costs as a rich person are more important than your human costs as a poor person.” @matthewstoller
Numbers are more important than actual human costs...which is really only cover to mean, “my human costs as a rich person are more important than your human costs as a poor person.” @matthewstoller
@threadreaderapp unroll
