@davies_will Isn't it overtly un-academic to teach 'anti-' anything?
But the real question is: what are we gearing up for? I imagine groundwork is being laid for massive HE reform, but will this be anything more that what we're already aware will be a renewed target: ie inflating S.T.E.M.?
@davies_will I read Hayek more than I do Marx (in fact I find Hayek a ton more interesting). Studied culture and critical - how do I know when I've turned (red)?
@davies_will You've been able to do courses on critical theory since the 60s. I've read that a number of Neoliberal philosophers read Habermas, Derrida and Lennin (not that I'm grouping all of them together under CT and/or Marxism).
Don't employ*ers* request #furlough?
#employees don't have a say in the matter, or am I wrong?
#WFH is an arangement/negotiation made privately between both parties. Nobody else's business.
Or am I wrong again?
@AaronBastani > Yes, it was 'free money' - they received it without the 'cost' of doing anythings, and they paid their mortgages; rents and payments...
There's your answer: furlough was a bailout for the usual suspects.
Why do we now need to x2 debits (to make a recession) to 'pay for it'?
@AaronBastani "its not free money, somebodies got to pay for it" - is surreal.
Money 'costs' what you need to do to get hold of it.
Furloughed workers saw the numbers in their accounts remain positive as the govt maintained the credits as well as the debits. >
@AaronBastani From the piece: "...But that would cost..." is baby talk - literally; even with the affectations; the linger and emphasis on syllables etc (not to mention the graphics).
[£X] doesn't 'cost' a government with its own currency; it (the central bank) is *required to create.