Before I answer this question I would like to address two things. First off, yes I went with the Seattle Seahawks color scheme. Big deal. Secondly, if you enjoy the work of Ayn Rand, stop reading my blog and proceed to the nearest...bah..it wouldn't work. Her followers are too narcissistic to do us all non-Randroids a favor and rid us of their self-centered drivel. And warning: I wrote this as I went, it probably doesn't flow. :-)
To the topic at hand, in a way, yes...but I think people are more of a threat to democracy than anything. It is a growing trend in the United States to hate on capitalism and then simultaneously enjoy the fruits of it. People will blame corporations for the negative side effects that come with the free market, but haven't we all made a compact with ourselves? Don't we all know the source of the economic deals we are getting? The minimum wages and crappy benefits forced upon the workers, the hazardous effects on the environment, the businesses that ditch the local communities they thrived in to turn their allegiance to the global supply chains, and the CEOs who take their paycheck home in a Maserati. Yes, we do...and nothing is done about it. It's partially not our fault and it is not capitalism's fault. Capitalism's only role is to "increase the economic pie" and nothing more. It is democracy's role to act upon the public goods and achieve both equity and growth. There is not one democratic nation that can cope with the negative side effects of capitalism. This is not a failing of capitalism, it is a blurring of capitalism's and democracy's responsibilities, to the disservice of our democratic duties. The big corporations, in order to intensify their competitiveness on the global scale, have rendered the general population powerless by investing greater sums in activities such as lobbying, public relations, and many times even bribery. They preoccupy Congress with concours between competing industries or companies for weeks or months, incapacitating the government's ability to act upon citizen's needs or concerns.
However, people need to realize there is more to a democracy than just fair and free elections. Citizens need to join together and decide on a common good. Unfortunately the public is divided into two extremist groups: those who believe the market should rule and those that believe in preserving the communities as they are and protecting jobs. Instead of coming together and figuring out how to softening the blows of globalization, compensating for the losers, or slowing the pace of change. We'd rather get at each other's throats even though we all share a common distress. The problem comes down to the people either being too ignorant, too arrogant, and/or too lazy. Both democracy and capitalism have been on the rise for the past few decades. The majority of countries in the world are a part of a individual, integrated, and turbocharged global market. Nearly two-thirds of the nations hold free elections, just a thirty years ago only one-third. It is up to us as citizens to figure out a way to keep corporations buoyed by runaway economic success from undermining the government's ability to respond to our needs and interests. I open the floor. :-)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
You have taken an extreme case for both sides. There are corporations in the business to make money who actually do give a shit about the environment. Also, I'm not sure why the general population is powerless, they (generally speaking) own the companies themselves (stocks). Sure you can argue that hedge fund and mutual funds own companies, but then I counter saying who invests hedge funds and mutual funds...the people. -puke
I think the people are of two seperate minds. There are the consumers and investors who are more concerned with high returns and bargains and there are the citizens who are upset with the social consequences that come with the transactions. Would you say the majority of the people own very little if any stock at all? I am not trashing big business, I am actually in somewhat support of it, but I do not like how much power they have in Congress over the American people. We are supposed to be running the government not the corporations but for some reason we are entrusting these them with a kind of social morality and responsibility. We are letting them write all the rules for is. Bah, I am starting to ramble. To the point, I think we are turning capitalism into a form of government when it's purpose is to get deals for investors and consumers. Granted capitalism was founded on the most liberal and classical definition of freedom.
I disagree, it's not black and white. I am a capatilist pig, but believe in "green" movements, and social responsibilities. I think thrugh 401k's and such many americans actually do own stock.
I also disagree that big business has power over congress. This is why there are elections. When candidate A was found to vote on legislation that would help WalMart it's brought up. If the majority of people have a problem with it...then bam he's not elected.-puke
Greed, just like any form of dictatorship, comes from the need to control. Let either one take over the government and we are screwed.
Capitalism is an economic system, not a government system. It should be kept in check by the people. If the people don't have the balls to do so then they themselves will suffer the consequences and will learn a lesson the hard way.
But that's just how history seems to go.
the reason capitalism is so popular is that the american dream has been tainted by the ultrarich to be this unlimited wealth. society needs to recognize that no individual or family she be allowed to accumulate this unlimited wealth. we as a society should: make sure no single person can annually make more than 100 times the money earned by the average worked in a year (for example, if the average yearly wage is 40k, the compensated individual may keep 4 million and any excess will be donated to charity or government) and secondly no individual should be allowed to accumulate a estate more than 50 times the allowed income. so if the average annual wage is 40k no beneficiary will be allowed more than 200 million and any excess will likewise be donated. think about it all the billions and trillions that will be donated can be used to fix the problems destroying our society.
FUCK CAPITALISM, FUCK THE USDA, FUCK MUPPETS, FUCK BARBARA STREISSAND, FUCK MASSACHUSETTS AND THE PEOPLE FROM IT
GO YANKEES
Alright, but MOST people who own stock are only interested in the money they make from it. You and I are exceptions because we care about the environment but it is not true about every shareholder. It's not like many businesses really care either. Their only concern is the quarterly earnings statement and don't have a long term plan. I am starting to see some take a positive stance on global warming but it's still not enough. We're only 70 parts per million in regards to atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide away from where scientists draw the red line. Do you agree that we need to try to make a change?
Chris,
I agree what CEOs make is ridiculous but to say it is capitalism's fault isn't necessarily true. And how would you regulate that? Capitalism rewards the risk takers. Rockefeller earned the millions he made but the people that took over the company after him don't. If you pioneer a groundbreaking company that makes a huge, positive impact on society, why don't you deserve the large profits? Other than that, CEOs are like wide receivers, there are plenty of them. They do not earn everything they make because the hard part of running a company is already done (and that is to build it from the ground up). Japan allows CEOs to only make 7 times the amount of the average worker.
<3
Post a Comment