Vintage Capitalism Pyramid Poster (1911)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3879f2fc3448.jpg[/atsimg]

This is from a 1911 Industrial Worker publication advocating industrial unionism. It also shows the critique of capitalism at the time.

Somethings just don't change.



ps. right click image and choose view image, to view whole thing



[edit on 24-7-2009 by warrenb]

here, i think this version will fit here in its entirety,

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e1efa610cd0d.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 7/24/2009 by Alaskan Man]

Sure, in N. Korea it is all different and Kim Jong-il daily goes out to rice fields while workers decide foreign policy waving the same red flag. I do not understand how anyone after Orwell can actually fall for this?

I love this poster, This poster is just as true today as it was before!

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge


I 100% agree.

There is no such thing as a perfect system. Every system has it's flaws as well as a hierarchy, including the elite at the top. The only thing really different is the lifestyle of the people.

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Feudalism, etc., all have the fat cats at the top. Even small, independent tribes in the third world develop hierarchy structures where the masses serve the alpha leaders.

So let's take a look at the people. In capitalism, if I'm unhappy living on tips as a waitress, I can go to school and become a doctor. I can start my own business. It's not easy but it is possible to go from rags to riches in capitalism. In the other systems, the people can be stuck in their position.

So again, not perfect- no system is. Capitalism does have it's drawbacks. However, the alternatives can be worse and the standard of living in non capitalist countries is deplorable. We do have some of the highest standards of living in the world.

Capitalism is a caste system in a sense but it is one of few where you can 'upgrade' castes.

And I also wanted to add, there was a recent humorous email going around how Castro had promised equality to the people of Cuba. And he lived up to his promise by making everyone equally poor. That's in the Socialist Republic of Cuba which has a single party system: Communism. And those people give their lives to get to capitalist America.

Capitalism isn't without fault but I'm unaware of any better alternative. There will always be the elite at the top regardless of the system. So we're left reviewing the difference: The standard of living of the people. Capitalism wins.

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

 

I 100% agree.

There is no such thing as a perfect system. Every system has it's flaws as well as a hierarchy, including the elite at the top. The only thing really different is the lifestyle of the people.

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Feudalism, etc., all have the fat cats at the top. Even small, independent tribes in the third world develop hierarchy structures where the masses serve the alpha leaders.

So let's take a look at the people. In capitalism, if I'm unhappy living on tips as a waitress, I can go to school and become a doctor. I can start my own business. It's not easy but it is possible to go from rags to riches in capitalism. In the other systems, the people can be stuck in their position.

So again, not perfect- no system is. Capitalism does have it's drawbacks. However, the alternatives can be worse and the standard of living in non capitalist countries is deplorable. We do have some of the highest standards of living in the world.

Capitalism is a caste system in a sense but it is one of few where you can 'upgrade' castes.

Well i gotta say, i agree with your statements 100 percent.

[edit on 7/24/2009 by Alaskan Man]

reply to post by AshleyD


You're unaware of a better system because you are poorly-educated and ignorant. I don't mean that as an insult, but it's the truth - there's a strong movement in our education system and public discourse to pretend that America's success was built on pure, raw, unfettered capitalism.

It wasn't. In fact our experiments with such a thing led to the Great Depression, and the current recession.

No, America's "golden age" came about through something perhaps best termed labor capitalism. A mixed system that used a basic capitalist framework, but was strongly regulated, well-taxed, and had a powerful and unionized labor force. It was a mixed system combining the advantages of capitalism (high productivity and big reward for initiative) with the best of socialism (workers' hands holding the business together, high material production, fair opportunity for all), and a minimal of both's drawbacks - Capitalism's "bust" cycle and socialsm's general lethargy.

However, a lot of this has been whitewashed by our modern conservatives, to the point where unfortunate people such as yourself honestly believe the best economic years our nation has seen were the product of capitalism, rather than capitalized socialism. It's the same boondoggle that has certain people thinking "trickle down economics" works, bespite thirty years of proof that it doesn't

As for standard of living, socialism actually wins there. Capitalism has extremes - Some people have a fabulous standard of living, while others are crawling on the streets and eating pigeons. Socialism meets somewhere in the median, where most people are comfortable and adequately housed and nourished. Personally I don't need a gigantic mansion, a fleet of vintage cars, and the latest technobabblers to live my life. I need a bed, a roof, and somewhere to keep my beer cold.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by TheWalkingFox]

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


So in socialism there are no classes?
power
politicians
police
beurocrats
workers. Without red flag though.

Capitalism has a lot of problems, especially since resources are limited but greed is not. Still Socialism has its problems too - inefficiency due to beurocracy overload will cause its own crisises. Not to mention Communism approach,that this poster clearly advocates.
Scandinavian countries are as close as it gets to Socialism and ones that have no natural resources, have economic problems too.

Originally posted by AshleyD
... There is no such thing as a perfect system. Every system has it's flaws as well as a hierarchy, including the elite at the top.

That is not the determining point. The real problem – in any political system – is how to avoid corruption and misuse of given power.

Originally posted by AshleyD
... Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Feudalism, etc., all have the fat cats at the top.

Again not the essential point. It is true “fat cats” will be often be at the top. But what matters is (again independent of the system):
- How exactly did they get there, by corruption or by quality?
- Do they – as leaders - abide to moral/ethical behavior?


These issues are the real "core" and concern of the Vintage Capitalism Pyramid Poster. Just stating every system has its flaws is meaningless and derailing the discussion.



[edit on 24-7-2009 by WonderfulWorld]

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


I think you need to watch who you are calling ignorant.

The reason why America was/is so prosperous is because of the switch to a debt based monetary system(fiat money), the acceptance of Keynesian economics, and a central bank.

The Great Depression was caused by the Federal Reserve, which is a central bank that is a communist plank, that manipulating interest rates causing an excess flow of credit and caused people to go to far in debt.

Then the Bretton Woods agreement signed in 1944 set the American Dollar as the world reserve currency which gave unprecedented leverage to the American dollar and allowed us to afford all the social safety nets, all the while going deeper in debt.

The socialist policies is what has caused the national debt and deficit to balloon. You don't have to look any further than California to see what socialist polices do to an economy.

Originally posted by AshleyD

So let's take a look at the people. In capitalism, if I'm unhappy living on tips as a waitress, I can go to school and become a doctor. I can start my own business. It's not easy but it is possible to go from rags to riches in capitalism.

It's the same in every system. Yuri Gagarine was born in a poor family. Joseph Staline was born in a poor family. But in every system, social promotion is difficult and hardly earned. Generally, poor stay poor and rich stay rich. The American Dream is an illusion.

You are right all have the fat cats at the top. The problem lies in how much pressure the low casts can handle.
The poster is from 1911. 12 hours working day with no holidays and basically no rights. We have all benefitted from the critics and the struggle of those who made this poster. Let's not forget that, some have died for this cause.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Foxy did you remotely read what I said or were you quick to pounce with your typical fist-swinging reflexes, sans reading comprehension.

I NEVER said 'pure, raw unfettered capitalism' nor did I ever claim 'the golden age' was a result of perfect, beautiful pure capitalism. In both my posts I also stated clearly capitalism had it's faults.

Also, rarely does it ever happen that any economic system in theory is reflected in reality. Communism, Socialism and Capitalism all sound good in theory. But once used, they are all doomed to human nature and human corruption and they are hardly ever executed to perfection without abuse of the system taking place.

This is common knowledge of which I thought every one was aware. But apparently not the ignorant and poorly uneducated. 'No offense.'

As for standard of living, socialism actually wins there. Capitalism has extremes - Some people have a fabulous standard of living, while others are crawling on the streets and eating pigeons.

Psst. Socialism also has extremes. In theory contrasted to in practice, socialism will also have your elitists and your poverty stricken. Once again, they all do. There is no such thing as a perfect system once humans get their hands on it. What I urged the reader to look for is what is working best once executed- not perfect, and not on paper.

Socialism meets somewhere in the median, where most people are comfortable and adequately housed and nourished.

In theory. Most work great in theory. Once we take a look at socialist countries, we see some of the same extremes taking place. Private ownership vs. state or community ownership can result in extremes. We have several socialized programs in our society but we still have people eating pigeons off the street, as you say.

Socialism meets somewhere in the median, where most people are comfortable and adequately housed and nourished. Personally I don't need a gigantic mansion, a fleet of vintage cars, and the latest technobabblers to live my life. I need a bed, a roof, and somewhere to keep my beer cold.

Great. Good for you. Capitalism can also give you that and also a choice to work for more if you want. Or did you think only socialism would provide that for you? Your statement is telling as you equate capitalism with wealth but socialism with meager existence.

Oh, and edited to add: Most countries do not have a single system in place but have a mix of systems. Sometimes subtle, sometimes obvious. For instance, capitalist systems can have socialized programs (but for some reason you put words in my mouth as if I claimed an American capitalism system stands alone without cross-influence). Please.

[edit on 7/24/2009 by AshleyD]