We’re fighting a war, and people still don’t see it

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 15 2010 @ 06:30 AM
link   
The Enemy: Capitalism

The government is seen by those on the right as dangerous or a necessary evil that must be restrained and restricted. They see the free markets of capitalism as the only way for this to occur. Those on the left believe capitalism is evil and needs to be restrained or destroyed and the state should replace it, which again is wrong.

These two different sects of beliefs still hold one thing in common, power by the few. In a free market capitalist system every is given the notion that they have the ability to succeed. But how do you succeed? There is only a certain amount of capital that is allocated into an economic system in a given year, dividing it up is how we receive our GDP Per Capita. For every to succeed we would need to have all incomes within a 5-10% departure from our GDP Per Capita, but this is impossible. The capitalist class demands that they receive a higher earning than the labor class, in an unrestrained capitalist system there is nothing to stop them from earning as high as possible.

With a restricted amount of capital in the economy this would force the exclusion of others, leading to unemployment, underemployment or slave labor. Eventually as economies drastically expand due to growth from free-markets and the exclusion of fellow citizens money flows upwards with labor to the capitalist class. As the capitalist class gains more income they control a larger portion of the nations wealth. When the economy reaches a recession from overproduction the labor class(workers) will become unemployed to maintain the wealth levels of a business, which lowers the wealth share of the labor class and maintains the wealth share of the capitalist class which grows in percent of GDP.

When a recession lifts and workers are hired again they must start again from the bottom up, creating more excess wealth in the hands of the few. With an overwhelming amount of the share of national income they have more freedom to bargain with other sects of the economy or to control them outright. This leads to a monopolistic affect upon the economy as fewer and fewer people are controlling more and more wealth and power. With an excessive amount of wealth they are permitted to influence television, politics, and all other aspects of life.

Our country eventually becomes run by a group of elite individuals which control almost all aspects of our economy. This leaves the labor class in a stagnant economic system and the ‘underclass’ in a depression. With the underclass in a depression and the property, capital and influence in the hands of the elite few they are isolated in obscurity, eventually forced into underclass communities as the capitalists relocate for cheaper labor and new resources.

The end result is a nation run by an elite few that own everything, keep the labor class in a stagnant economy and keep the underclass in a depression. This allows for the capitalist class to give their kids a high education, startup capital and influence; the labor class is allowed to give their kids a moderate education, minimal safety net and a job in the labor class; the underclass in allowed to give their kids a poor education, no safety net and a possible life of crime. This allows for the capitalist class to become thinner and thinner while keeping the majority of the other classes out, keeping the power in the hands of the few.





REMEMBER: I am not advocating for any other economic system, that is up for you to decide yourself which other economic system is best.




posted on May, 15 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
This is why all of the extremist political/economic viewpoints that people are so fond of always fail, because they all have a single glaring weakness that those who are in love with them willfully ignore. We need to create a hybrid that takes the best parts of several systems and enforces them from the start.

This is my concept, feel free to pick it apart as I in no way claim to have any actual expertise about economics.

First, there must be a way for people to work their way up, or at least get affordable job training so those who have the drive and ambition don't have to work at McDonald's all their lives. Also, the minimum wage needs to be higher so that those who have no choice but to work at McDonald's don't have to live with their parents or in a dump that a raccoon wouldn't sleep in.

Second, the greed of the corporate elites needs to be reigned in, and big time. Salary limits, the elimination of senate/congress lobbyists and all currency speculation/tax loopholes.

Third, their must be an upper limit on how big companies can get, perhaps an income limit or assets limit, or both. If a company gets too big, some elements of it need to be split off. And anti-competitive practices need to be punished with harsh prison sentences.

I know, it all sounds criminally naive, but I believe that it would work if it were actually implemented as conceived.



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by warpcrafter
 


I have taken economics and political science and philosophy. The political and economic system which you have expressed as the best is already one of the most popular political beliefs, while in most western countries it too has been corrupted into liberalization. It is known as Social Democracy



In general, contemporary social democrats support:
• A mixed economy consisting of both private enterprise and publicly owned or subsidized programs of education, universal health care, child care and related social services for all citizens.
• An extensive system of social security (although usually not to the extent advocated by socialists), with the stated goal of counteracting the effects of poverty and insuring the citizens against loss of income following illness, unemployment or retirement.
• Government bodies that regulate private enterprise in the interests of workers and consumers by ensuring labor rights (i.e. supporting worker access to trade unions), consumer protections, and fair market competition.
• Environmentalism and environmental protection laws; for example, funding for alternative energy resources and laws designed to combat global warming.
• A value-added/progressive taxation system to fund government expenditures.
• A secular and a socially progressive policy.
• Immigration and multiculturalism.
• Youth rights and lowering the voting age.
• Fair trade over free trade.
• A foreign policy supporting the promotion of democracy, the protection of human rights and where possible, effective multilateralism.
• Advocacy of social justice, human rights, social rights, civil rights and civil liberties.


That is what you support, correct? If so then you are with me, I am simply opposed to free-market capitalism and capitalism that is regulated without other alternatives. Social Democracy, IMO is the best because it combines the best of capitalism and the best of socialism with civil liberties and personal freedom.

[edit on 5/15/10 by Misoir]



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


That's pretty much it. I forgot to mention something that you brought up, and that is a definite arc of scrutiny regarding welfare-type benefits. It should be tied to strong oversight so that you know the people who receive it are doing their part to look for a job, get job training or otherwise do something that will end with them supporting themselves.

I strongly believe that industry at the corporate level needs government oversight, because, well, look what our current system of runaway greed has gotten us.

And finally, I am a believer in government being as small and efficient as possible, with the exact same requirements for productivity that stands in the private sector.



 
0

log in

join