Is Capitalism Under Attack In America?
36 comments | Share | Flag
John Stossel interviews the a member of Congress about the appropriate size of government. This video states that the government is presently 40% of the ecoomy, although the interviewee believes there is room for more.
But, you repeat yourself...
However, as you stated the friction is what is holding people back. Instead of getting out of the way, regulators, as well as other businesses feeding off of said regulators and who derive their revenue from "helping" businesses navigate roadblocks, have increased friction. Transactional costs for operating a business (as well as just living) are continually increasing.
Similar to you, I was literally thinking how many roadblocks one must overcome to operate a business. This should not be the way of things. I find the present dilemma frustrating.
I remember being surprised and concerned after the last election. I thought for certain that there would be a change of leadership, regardless of opponents as I thought the majority would be dissatisfied with the direction the country was heading, but I was mistaken.
One of my larger concerns is that many, apparently a majority, may like where we are heading.
I watch Stossel every week and have read two of his books.
True free market capitalism has never been tried. The further we drift from it the worse things will get overall.
I haven't read Stossel's books yet but they are on the list. I recently just became aware that he has his own show, which I was pleased to discover as I was a fan during his 20/20 days. I am making my way through the Stossel archives as time permits, I really enjoy his show as the views are very well aligned to my own.
I am becoming increasingly concerned that there are so many out there who believe bigger government is the answer. I believe that if Rangel had his way the government might encompass the entire economy, as based on this interview he certainly seems to have a statist slant. I suspect his intentions may be good, but the implementation is misguided.
But where is the "justice"? "Fairness" is a child's concept of "justice", where everyone gets a reward no matter what they did, making the reward meaningless. As a teacher of four decades, I have been stunned, year by year, to see capitalism vilified and socialism lauded in so many subtle and outre ways that it's hard not to assume "conspiracy". It isn't. It's a slide away from ethics and justice for the Democrats like myself, a selling of our ethics, cheaply, for a socialist agenda and a Utopian ideal that cannot be realized and would be destructive if it were.
I see the same shop closures that Abaco pointed out. But some shops are kept open no matter how they are run, like public school. I was told yearly to spend the money I was given or we wouldn't get it next year. I balked at spending it every year as I usually bought my own materials.
Yes, capitalism is under attack, and if you look at the Democratic Socialists of America, you'll see how. At one point they published, on their own website (I saw it) the list of Congress members that were members of the DSA.
It was stunning.
I stand alone, a JFK Democrat in an organization filled with socialists in Democratic Party clothing.
None of us can afford to play sheep any more.
And they're not done with tactics.
I especially found the JFK aspect of interest. Throughout life I had heard of nothing but positive accomplishments about JFK and had not really questioned the popular ideas and quotations of putting service before self. As I have been making my way through the various works of Ayn Rand and objectivism I had stumbled upon short critiques of JFK by Rand, mainly I believe in the form of collectivist language critiques and disapproval of government funding of the moon landing. After happening upon this I started to look at things with a more critical view.
As you are well aware, language is a powerful thing. I have experienced this firsthand in my professional experience. By being more critical of language we can spot these seemingly innocuous nuances and expose the true message of the messenger and receive an early glimpse into true intent and longer term implementation.
Substituting "I" for "we" seems harmless enough but the meanings, policies, and systems of catering to the "I" and "we" are worlds apart. "Public good" is another friendly sounding term, but in reality is often more sinister in its implementation.
Thank you for your meaningful and thought provoking comment!
We were in competition for our survival. We needed to have superior space power or we'd be facing a battle against the USSR for domination in space, and those that hold the high ground usually win.
It was competition along the lines of protection of our shores from enemies, perfectly in line with the Constitutional requirements of a Federal government - YET, it was not sold that way and the result was an erosion of the limits on Federal government.
Glad to be here amongst the group of you.
I have utter respect for what you are fighting for, and my goals are complimentary, just not your primary focus. I fight for free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, equality (real equality, not the garbage they use to push socialism nowadays), and although I also believe in the things you're all fighting for, they aren't MY focus. I doubt a single one of you is against free speech (government staying out of it, that is), free press (again, vs. government censorship), freedom of religion (though all religions are NOT equal - ask Jim Jones of the People's Temple), and equality.
They just aren't your primary focus.
Keep speaking up and fighting for the aspect of this country YOU prize most.
We'll meet in the center of the political aisle and drive in the golden stake of justice where the two railroad tracks match.
I am fairly new to the group (I think this may be my second day), but am really enjoying it thus far. Up until recently it has been difficult to find those who believe in these principles, or at least be willing to discuss them in an intelligent, rational manner. Since joining I have heard some really interesting perspectives, learned about new places and ways of living, and met some really intelligent people.
Glad to have you here in the group and especially in this conversation.
Anyone who starts out with a blatant contradiction like that is a pandering liar. They want you to believe that they agree with you and that you should agree with them when they suddenly flip a 180. What they are hoping is that you won't pay close attention and just keep nodding your head like "sheeple" (sheep+people - coined by Michael Savage).
This is how liberals operate. One of my favorite phrases to describe these tactics is "If you can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with balogna/BS". Since the arguments aren't sound, the brilliance part falls flat and they are left with the shovel.
Unfortunately I think many people are not even aware of the contradictions, perhaps even the people stating them, it just might make sense based on how they perceive the world.
Perhaps people should be better informed on how to "check their premises."
People stick the post office as an example of why the government shouldn't run business'. The post office would make money since it was privatized except that the government takes 5 billion off the top. How can anything expect to make money if they lose 5 billion off the top every year? Government needs to be downsized. If half of government was fired and most regulations done away with we would open the way for prosperity.
I had no idea about the post office. Although I suspect that its relevance is decreasing given increasing Internet communications and free market alternatives. What is the rationale for taking $5B off the top?
Thanks for taking the time to explain this.
I am curious as to if this may already be happening, at least with a select few. I cannot say for certain, but, I suspect it may be, if Atlas Shrugged is presently playing out as some believe. If so, how long until others follow?
I recall a theme in that novel about the worst kind of men coming to power when the producers go on strike...