Naomi Klein Again.

Apparently buying insurance against disasters is a bad idea, shows how much of an uncaring capitalist bastard you are.

I wonder if her brain would explode if you pointed out to her that the origins of insurance companies are in mutual societies? You know, the common man banding together against the visicitudes of an uncaring world, owning the creation in common?

13 thoughts on “Naomi Klein Again.”

  1. You do us all a service Tim, reading the eye-bleeding nonsense in the Guardian so we don’t have to. As it has been said before (sort of), all that is necessary for nonsense to thrive is that intelligent men do nothing.

  2. “During the fires, the “mobile units”, racing around in firetrucks, even extinguished fires for their clients.”

    Oh, horrors!

    Let me get this straight – she’s complaining that people are paying to have someone else put out fires for them, other than the Fire Service (who they still support tax wise) …?

    Is she totally mad?

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    I wonder what else she objects to. How about people whyo tidy up their gardens, reduce fire hazards and so on? How about people who stay behind to fight the fire themselves? Or better yet spend their own money on sprinklers? Surely, in fact, that is exactly the same thing. Some people protect their houses by buying extra services, some extra equipment. Does she want a level playing field in disaster relief? So rich people have to go and get charity along with everyone else?

    Here’s a thought, how about making the fire services so damn good the rich don’t need to buy extra services? Thought of that Naomi? You know, like they could make crime so rare no one would need to live in a gated community.

  4. I have to confess to never having understood Naomi Klein’s status as an academic except perhaps in the role of a professional aunt sally for students to write tutorial essays about. Her wiki entry is illuminating and I was much impressed by this line:

    “She is a former Miliband Fellow at the London School of Economics.”

    Tim adds: Miliband Fellow ain’t an academic. It’s someone who turns up and gives a couple of speeches.

  5. God, I can’t tell which I find more infuriating her or the comments that agree with her. If the wealthy spend their money on expensive baubles it is seen as some grotesque extravagence, if they spend it on sensible services then it is an unfair advantage. Why doesn’t she just come out and say she doesn’t believe in an unequal distribution of wealth and the freedom of individuals to choose to generate and spend wealth as they see fit? She shouldn’t hide behind contemporary labels, Communist suits her fine.

  6. Actually, I believe the gist of her article is that if you spend your money in a way she disapproves, you are a heartless SOB who condemns the poor to cannibalism. Which I believe is her schtick.

  7. Bob B,
    Her status is largely about No Logo, which had numerous people supporting it like Radiohead and ironically established her as a brand with the anti-capitalist brigade.

  8. The origin of the London Fire Brigade (and others) was in the insurance industry. Home-owners who took out fire insurance would have the fire at their home extinguished, as part of the package. Both parties looked after their assets and managed the risk. And you can still get discounts on your insurance bill for installing safety measures. What’s the difference, apart from the scale?

  9. “What’s the difference, apart from the scale?”

    In a city, a building on fire is everyone’s problem: it spreads. Thus there is a public interest in having a proper fire service.

  10. Ha, you fools, she is just a good Canucki conman, or conwoman.

    It is immoral to let a sucker keep his money.

    I admire her greatly.

  11. “Thus there is a public interest in having a proper fire service.”

    Correct. But there is absolutely no suggestion whatsoever that the provision of these additional private services is in any way detrimental to the “proper” fire service.

    In fact, whilst the private service is dealing with one of its clients, the “proper” service is thus freed up to tackle fires elsewhere. What’s to complain about?

  12. I suppose that freedom of speech condones ignorance, but perhaps before you ramble off inate comments about Naomi Klein and her views you may want to look into them. I wonder if anyone of the people who placed comments here have ever read No Logo, or the Shock Doctrine. These are definetely books that anyone who has ever struggled to pay there doctor bill, has ever traveled beyond an american border, visited an american slum, or thought about the current american recession, or the security of their pensions, would benefit from reading.
    But I’m surely just a sucker, or Canucki conwoman…good luck to you all.

  13. “I wonder if her brain would explode if you pointed out to her that the origins of insurance companies are in mutual societies? ”

    Origin doesn’t map out what it will become. You guys are completely closed minded. When I see comments like your, it makes me fear the future of this doomed earth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *