How feminism became capitalism's handmaiden - and how to reclaim it | Nancy Fraser. As a feminist, I've always assumed that by fighting to emancipate women I was building a better world – more egalitarian, just and free. But lately I've begun to worry that ideals pioneered by feminists are serving quite different ends. I worry, specifically, that our critique of sexism is now supplying the justification for new forms of inequality and exploitation.
In a cruel twist of fate, I fear that the movement for women's liberation has become entangled in a dangerous liaison with neoliberal efforts to build a free-market society. That would explain how it came to pass that feminist ideas that once formed part of a radical worldview are increasingly expressed in individualist terms. Where feminists once criticised a society that promoted careerism, they now advise women to "lean in". What lies behind this shift is a sea-change in the character of capitalism. Feminism has also made a second contribution to the neoliberal ethos. Multinationales: trop riches? Trop puissantes? - rts.ch - émissions - geopolitis. Emission du 21 avril 2013 Certaines sont plus "fortes" que des États. C'est une réalité si on compare le chiffre d'affaire des plus grandes multinationales avec le produit intérieur brut de certains États. Ainsi, GDF Suez serait comparable à la Belgique, Shell à l'Iran et McDonald's à Chypre.
Les exemples de ce type ne manquent pas... Par leur poids économique, les plus grandes entreprises de la planète voient leur pouvoir grandir dans un monde qu'elles contribuent à mondialiser. Au-delà de ce constat, des questions se posent sur certaines pratiques de multinationales qui parviennent -légalement ou illégalement- à échapper à l'impôt et plus encore à propos d'atteintes aux droits de l'homme en particulier en ce qui concerne les conditions de travail.
Les multinationales sont-elles trop puissantes? L'invitée: Delphine Centlivres, directrice de Transparency International Suisse.
Marché Transatlantique. Apple, Google, Microsoft et Facebook : bienvenue chez «les Intaxables» Welfare fraud is a drop in the ocean compared to tax avoidance. Joanne Gibbons was sentenced to community service for claiming income support while holding down two paid jobs. Through accumulated payments of £66-a-week, the court heard, she collected £3,140 to which she wasn't entitled. Predictably, the Daily Mail is outraged. But here's the strange twist: had Gibbons claimed the benefits to which she was actually entitled, she could have collected £130 a week through family tax credits and child benefit. In total, Gibbons' fraudulent claims cost the taxpayer around £3,100 less than claiming what she was actually entitled to.
It's the reaction to Gibbons' claims which are particularly noteworthy. Matthew Sinclair, chief executive of the Taxpayers' Alliance – an organisation rarely troubled by wealthy people's tax avoidance – tells the Mail: "It beggars belief that somebody going to the lengths of making fraudulent claims would have actually received more in benefits had they been honest.
" The British public believe benefit fraud is a big problem. PETROLEUM2007.