When most leftists and liberals decry the current American system, they talk about income inequality, corporate welfare, big business lobbying, and the like. They tend to call these things “the evils of capitalism” or something similar.
Well, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that leftists and liberals are wrong to call these things capitalism. The bad news is that leftists and liberals are right to call these things wrong. America has become corporatist rather than capitalist. In a fantastic interview with Larry King, Ron Paul distinguished between these two systems, as only Ron Paul can.
Here is a tidbit from that interview:
Michael Moore: I think capitalism as it is defined now has completely failed. Yeah, it hasn’t really failed the rich. It has actually helped them, the wealthiest one percent now have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined, so it’s a really good system for a few people.
Larry King: Hi, Ron, do you disagree with that statistic that Michael Moore just pointed out?
Ron Paul: No, and I’m not complaining about it as much as he does, but I think I understand it differently because when a country embarks on deficit financing and inflationism, you wipe out the middle class and wealth is transferred from the middle class and the poor to the rich and when we get into trouble, then the corporations come for their bailout and they get the benefits and the little people don’t.
So yes, there is some truth to that, but it’s the failure of the free market to exist, that is our problem. It isn’t the fact that we don’t have enough government, we have way too much government. The government created this monster. If he doesn’t like what we have, he has to look at what we’ve been doing for 30 or 40 years, it’s called interventionism. It’s called Keynesism. It’s called inflationism. It’s called Big Government. That’s the problem.
Boom. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out. After the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling in 2010, corporations could spend an unlimited amount on their preferred candidates. If you think this hasn’t resulted in corporate lobbyists securing even more big government promises for their special interests, you are a too-trusting soul (and I have some ocean front property in Kansas I want to sell you). Since that ruling, spending has absolutely sky-rocketed for elections. And that does not bode well for the average American.
Need more evidence that big banks and big business are constraining our civil government? Just look at what happened with the absolutely-not-free-market big bank bailouts. The civil government said there were banks that were too big to fail. So they gave them billions (trillions?) of our dollars so they wouldn’t collapse. What did these banks spend all that money on (aside from lavish executive bonuses and exotic getaways)? Take Chase, for instance. They used bailout money to purchase Washington Mutual (a bank that did not require a bailout, by the way). I banked with Washington Mutual before Chase purchased it. I loved that bank. There is a reason it didn’t need a bailout—it was a good bank. After Chase bought it, it became just like Chase—terrible. So the civil government stole our money to keep a failing business alive, redistributing money from average and middle class Americans to corporate elitists. How is that capitalism again?
True capitalism would have let the big banks die. We don’t have true capitalism though. We have crony capitalism, corporate welfare, and big government corruption. On both sides of the aisle. So next time liberals complain about capitalism, tell them they can complain about it if and when we ever get it.
This was the perfect explaination. Ive always been a huge supporter of capitalism. And have always been told it doesn’t work anymore. Only reason it doesn’t work is because the government took too much control of everything business related. So now the poor are too dependant for growth, the middle don’t get benefits and bear the main burden of taxes and regulations, and the corporations and rich get all the money then give it right back to the politicians for favors. Its not only crony capitalism and interventionism, it’s money laundering.
Ever play Monopoly? What happens at the end? Do you end up with a nice distribution where anyone who works hard can make it? No, you end up in state where 1 person owns EVERYTHING and no one else has a chance at all. There is literally no amount of work they could do nor entrepreneurial magic they could pull out of their ass that would allow them to get ahead.
“Competition” which benefits the consumer, and society as a whole is the whole selling point of capitalism, but what happens to a competition when someone wins? It stops. Thus you have one of the oldest known market failures that the game was created to illustrate.You have a monopoly.
If that were true, we would still be using the steam engine and rotary telephone. New inventions and demand occurs all the time as technology improves. No one holds a monopoly forever, if something better comes along. Or if a better business model comes along
There is no such thing as 100% capitalism or socialism. There never has been & their never will be.
Communism sure rings a bell. Or fascism. Or tyrants. China is actually waking up a little and allowing free market in pocket areas.
At the start off the game you have a bit of a capitalistic except one major problem to be a capitalistic society, the people would have to be able to do research, development and opening of new business. So what you really have is a socialistic world were the government has limited the people ability so much they can not expand and are forced to work with limited supply of businesses and jobs that already exist. In cases like this then yes in time one person will emerge as the winner. By that point the country would be a communist country and the Winner is the liberal dictator. How it always happens in world history. We can either learn from history or be doomed to repeat it over and over again… Liberals like to repeat it, as no liberal society has ever made it. Conservatives try to build a good capitalistic society, but in time liberal thinking always invades and destroys the country (each generation is a little lazier and want more for less work) . Look at Roman, it starts off as Republic just like the USA, in time the people became less involved in the government and the government grew. Then one man became emperor (dictator) of a big centrally powered country (communism). The power of that government and country collapsed shortly there after… Always happens in that order, just sometimes takes longer then other times, because depending on the wealth built up while it was a capitalist society.
Yeah, but facts tend to get in the way of liberals and winning elections.
Book report to the ShenValley Tea Party Patriots January
23, 2014
I have been reading about Alexander Hamilton. He was a
throw back. He advocated British Mercantilism, otherwise known as Crony
Capitalism. It is what we rebelled against from England. It is where the
monarch gives you a favor or a monopoly so you become very profitable and be rich.
Mercantilism results in great parties. Alexander Hamilton in New York City was
one of the “In” crowd. He went to all
the parties. Hamilton liked mercantilism so much that he wanted to do it
several different ways. He wanted Subsidies, tariffs, and grants, and he wanted
the blessing of a central bank. Does that sound familiar? It should. We are
living in Hamilton’s Dystopia.
1776 we declared Independence, but also that year Adam
Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. Hamilton did not like the invisible hand. He was
raised Mercantile and he was going to stay mercantile because he was good at
it.
Jefferson would not talk to him, and Aaron Burr shot him
dead.
However, Hamilton was survived by his mercantilist “American
Plan” because his follower John Adams appointed another disciple, John Marshall
to the Supreme Court. His findings permitted tariffs that caused so much
friction between manufacturing states and agricultural states that the country
was going to come apart, but Lincoln stopped that by killing 600,000 Americans
and enslaving us all. It stood like that for a while. The states were powerful
but captive until 1913. During that momentous year the Internal Revenue Service
was established by the Sixteenth Amendment and the States were emasculated and
subjugated by the Seventeenth. Then as the coup du grace a strong central bank
was established.
The author recommends that we undo and demolish the three
changes made in 1913. He wants us to repeal Sixteen and Seventeen and go to the
Gold Standard. I however believe that the FED can be controlled by going to a
Labor based Standard, repeal the Seventeenth amendment, and use my consumption
based Banker’s Tax or perhaps Chip Rothery’s Bottom up Sales Tax to replace the
IRS. Then stop Congressional micromanagement of spending and Presidential
hegemony by correctly dividing the spheres of power between Legislative and
Executive Branches. I have no problem with the Government being helpful, but it
should not create outcomes by picking winners and losers.
The book is, “Hamilton’s Curse” – Three River Press. It
has this Ron Paul endorsement, “(Tom Dilorenzo) is one of the leading economic
historians working today. (He) combines knowledge of the principles of
economics, solid historical research, and a passion for liberty.” I believe this
should be a school book. RWMondale
Very interesting.
A Totally Fair Tax System
I have
devised a simple and inexpensive way to fund the Federal Government. It is
based upon the fact that everyone is a producer and a consumer. I say let them
all get paid for what they make, encourage them to save, and then, when
they choose to spend it, tax them. I call
it the Banker’s Tax.
The
Banker’s Tax is consumption based. Stated briefly, “tax is taken when money is
removed from an FDIC insured account.” All expenditures will be taxed equally.
It will be totally automatic and cheep.
First, we will save most of the $400 Billion it costs us to
calculate our Income Tax each year.
Second, bankers get audited so we will recover the $300 Billion
that is currently lost to fraud.
Third, our products are at a disadvantage when they are sold into
countries that use Value Added Tax. This costs us $200Billion/yr in lost
orders. Additionally we can repatriate the $15Trillion that is off shore. All
of this savings will help us continue to receive investments from sovereign
wealth funds.
How the
Bankers Tax would work.
Under the
Banker’s Tax, taxes are collected every time there is a transaction. This will
result in multiple collections. Because of this multiplicity, the tax rate can
be much lower than the 23% required with the Fair Tax or the National Sales
tax. Under this system, export sales would be encouraged. They will be sold
outside of the American banking system so they will be tax free, but Imports
will be taxed at the same rate as everything else we buy. It will be an even
playing field.
Refund
mechanisms could easily be set up for charities, home ownership, or other areas
where the government wants to foster more activity.
Point well taken but I’d also add that “capitalism” doesn’t have any implied ethics built in. The drive to earn profits doesn’t necessarily mean a person will try to provide the best product or service. Some will, while others will look for loop-holes, short-cuts and the least physically demanding activity (e.g. speculating) to obtain wind-falls; it’s more about positioning one’s self with respect to the gravy train, than being useful. Also Mr. Minkoff doesn’t mention how banking is really the fly in the ointment of capitalism, it’s not about good or bad banks but BANKING. Dutch bankers bankrolled the first slave ships to America. Many US corps have surveillance cameras and we are very close to living in an Orwellian police state, the majority of surveillance being privately done. Capitalism is a THEORY that has NEVER existed in practice because real men will adulterate, shave weight, ethics, and collude in every way possible to maximize profits, if they can get away with it.
I do see your point. Capitalism does tend to spawn greed in a lot of business practices, that’s the nature of the beast. However, in a grander scheme of things, when the market is left free to it’s own devices (for the most part, some regulations can be in place) it’s by far the best choice, or lesser of the evils, to go with in a freedom based country. The weaker companies die off when their business models or products are not what the public want, and the better companies thrive, or go by the wayside when a better product comes along. Natural selection if you will, and so it’s been for several centuries, especially during the Industrial Revolution. Helps to spur the American dream and desire to be better and have more work ethic.
“Capitalism: Gods way of determining who is smart, and who is poor.” -Ron Swanson
right now in the United States there are 400 individuals who have more wealth than the bottom 150 MILLION people. Are those 400 people really THAT much better? Does each one work 3 million 750 thousand times harder? It’s impossible to imagine a model where that distribution reflects any kind of merit based or work hard based system. But lets say you’re happy with that. Is there a point where you’d say it’s starting to be a problem? What happens when 1 person or group owns 100% of everything? Everyone works for that person. Everyone shops at that person’s “company store.” How is that not serfdom? BTW, if the Financial crisis taught us ANYTHING it’s that Wall Street needs some regulations! We found out the hard way what can go wrong with trillions of dollars in unregulated trades!
Was it like that before the government got involved and turned it into a money laundering scheme? If what your saying is true, wouldn’t there already be a one world currency or one world corporation? There are always people with ingenuity, mavericsk, and entrpenures that will constantly come along.
Of all industrialized countries, only England has a lower upward mobility rate. That means if your parents are poor you’re gonna be poor. More so in the USA (land of opportunity) than in any other developed country except England. And they ALL have universal health care and many places with higher upward mobility have guaranteed income and higher minimum wages. So by and large places with a stronger social safety net, more worker and consumer protections in other words more (ghasp) socialism– you have a better chance of bettering your situation through hard work and innovation! In other words capitalism works better when there’s more socialism!
First of all, European socialist countries are realizing their financial mistakes with government healthcare, and are moving away from it. England is in deep financial trouble. Also, India is another example of what you are describing with their caste system.
Also, I don’t believe your policy of socialism spurring a persons desire to better themselves. If anything, its the exact opposite. Unions for example today, many dont have progress reports for their employees. The bad and lazy get treated the same as the good and hard working. And no one challenges it because of the unions threat to strike. And on top of that, the strangle hold they have can make them demand more wages for nothing! Second, I feel, and see, that throwing money at the lower income bracket with subsidies and crutches does nothing to motivate them. Yes there are those that actually do need it, but th e many that can perfectly well get off their butts and do something about their lesser state, rather than whine and complain, then cheer whne they get free money. Any common sense can show an average person wouldjust rather get free stuff rather than do honest work. And that is exactly what is happening today. 93 million work eligible Americans aren’t working. And why would they want to? Big Daddy government will bail them out. Just take it from those stinking rich! Its all spawned by jealousy. That jealousy should make them do something about it themselves, not the tax payers.
If what you say is true then why has the income inequality gap grown larger under 5 years of Obama’s quasi-socialist economic policies?
very incorrect. If you could not move up the financial ladder in the USA, you would have illegals running out of the country not into the country. If other countries had better health, guaranteed income and higher minimum wages making it so much better, again you would not have people trying to coming into this country. Illegal immigrates come from every country not just one.
There are 1,500 family in the world that controls some 80% of the worlds money. For the USA being such a young country to have 400 of them is very impressive. No they do not work harder, they work smarter… they have their money work for them and no you and I deserve none of it. There will always be super rich and there will always be super poor. The USA was the greatest country for distributing the wealth of the nation to the greatest number of people. Now that they government is stepping in, the middle class is disappearing. Just another thing that liberal actions are killing.
The other countries are all leaving socialism, because it does not work EVER!! We in the USA are being stupid and listening to a few liberal idiots who have no clue about economics and/or how to run and business or country. We still have a chance, just have to stop asking and wanting the government to take care of us.
The problem is human frailty. As people, we tend to be greedy and selfish unless conditioned otherwise. Capitalism is meant to pit those greedy, selfish people into competition with each other, whereas other systems attempt to find non-greedy, non-selfish people to oversee and bring order to the system.
No system has been found that find and keep those virtuous soles in charge for long. Capitalism has failures, but they’re nothing like the failures of central control.
I have to disagree as true capitalism does not reward those who cut corners or as a true free market rewards quality and penalizes poor quality. Most often mistake self interest for greed which are not the same thing. What we have now is corporatism which had a different name 70 years ago when it was called Facism. Private ownership of business that is heavily regulated in favor of big business who provide campaign funds and pay offs to the regulators to quash smaller competitors who don’t have the resources to comply with the constant flow of additional regulations. A wise man once said whenever government is in collusion with business, science or religion it leads to bad outcomes for the common man.
Tom I would not say you are disagreeing with ProfElwood, just covering a different area of issues. No system is perfect… so capitalism has its issues, but it is much better the any other system in place today. True capitalism would only happen in a world of non-greedy, non-selfish people… so best we can hope for is that majority of people will try their best to be fair and honest and therefore expect the same treatment back.
Capitalism is great, wonderful, and fantastic, if you’re a capitalist – as for the rest of us, well not so great, nor wonderful, nor fantastic.