Unbridled Capitalism, Death of Capitalism, Capitalism Revised, Obama's Socialsim
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Today's Zinger:
Give An Inch And They Will Take A Mile.
Opinion:
Looking back just one year ago no one could have predicted the dramatic shift in the economy, nor could anyone imagine the dramatic changes that the Federal Government would undertake in the name of supporting the economy. The Federal Government has loaned extraordinary amounts of money and even taken ownership through stock in the name of the US taxpayer to prop-up certain industries and companies (like financial services and the automobile companies). The Government has even overstepped its authority when the President took the unlawful act of firing management and placing their self appointed management in place. The Secretary of Treasury, Tim Geithner, has requested some of the broadest powers overseeing companies. These powers include the ability to take over a company if they appear unstable and could impact the general economy. All of these extraordinary changes are in support of the belief that the market cannot make the right decision and Capitalism is not working.
Many people look at the recent economic and socio-political decisions of the Federal Government and say we are on the fast track to Socialism. Others say that Capitalism unchecked resulted in the economic meltdown costing Trillions of dollars in wealth destruction and we require major changes in Capitalism. Some believe that the world has changed and we must change with it.
Well, the world has changed and the market is unable to self manage. Greed has taken the place of doing the right thing. Many individuals are more focused on their own self interest and will ignore the broader implications. It is not just business, it is all individuals. Take the example of Hollywood. Despite the vast evidence that correlates movie and television sex and violence to negative behaviors impacting our society, Hollywood continues to go for greater sensationalism for reasons of personal greed. Lyrics in many Hip Hop songs degrades women, honors gangsters, jail and death. Politicians lie and cheat for their own power and wealth. Video game makers push raunchier and more violent games each year, despite evidence that this is negatively impacting our children and even adults. And the list goes on. The truth of the matter is the broader issue of greed is far greater than a few million dollars paid to a few executives at GM or AIG. The decay of society can bring down an economy as much as a financial services company.
If we consider how all of these have impacted our society, shouldn't the government get involved in Hollywood, the music industry, video game makers and anyone that has a material negative impact on our economy or society? Where are the boundaries? Who makes these decisions? Under what circumstances should the government get involved? Or maybe the government should set some basic rules and restrictions, constantly test that the rules are working and then get out of the way.
If we accept the notion that our current economic situation is the result of a liquidity problem, then the government should fix the liquidity problem. Instead, we still have little change in the rules and regulations governing loans, required balances, accounting regulations, etc. Instead the government is interjecting itself into the management of these businesses. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it say that the government has any right to fire employees of a company or make the kind of decisions that it is forcing on companies. It is just a matter of time before there is a Constitutional challenge to the governments actions.
At some point we must begin to question if our Constitution provides the guidance we need in a changing world with new powers and competitors? Just because something has served us well for over 200 years does not mean that it will serve us well into the future. I believe the question should be asked? What do you think?
Today's Zinger:
Give An Inch And They Will Take A Mile.
Opinion:
Looking back just one year ago no one could have predicted the dramatic shift in the economy, nor could anyone imagine the dramatic changes that the Federal Government would undertake in the name of supporting the economy. The Federal Government has loaned extraordinary amounts of money and even taken ownership through stock in the name of the US taxpayer to prop-up certain industries and companies (like financial services and the automobile companies). The Government has even overstepped its authority when the President took the unlawful act of firing management and placing their self appointed management in place. The Secretary of Treasury, Tim Geithner, has requested some of the broadest powers overseeing companies. These powers include the ability to take over a company if they appear unstable and could impact the general economy. All of these extraordinary changes are in support of the belief that the market cannot make the right decision and Capitalism is not working.
Many people look at the recent economic and socio-political decisions of the Federal Government and say we are on the fast track to Socialism. Others say that Capitalism unchecked resulted in the economic meltdown costing Trillions of dollars in wealth destruction and we require major changes in Capitalism. Some believe that the world has changed and we must change with it.
Well, the world has changed and the market is unable to self manage. Greed has taken the place of doing the right thing. Many individuals are more focused on their own self interest and will ignore the broader implications. It is not just business, it is all individuals. Take the example of Hollywood. Despite the vast evidence that correlates movie and television sex and violence to negative behaviors impacting our society, Hollywood continues to go for greater sensationalism for reasons of personal greed. Lyrics in many Hip Hop songs degrades women, honors gangsters, jail and death. Politicians lie and cheat for their own power and wealth. Video game makers push raunchier and more violent games each year, despite evidence that this is negatively impacting our children and even adults. And the list goes on. The truth of the matter is the broader issue of greed is far greater than a few million dollars paid to a few executives at GM or AIG. The decay of society can bring down an economy as much as a financial services company.
If we consider how all of these have impacted our society, shouldn't the government get involved in Hollywood, the music industry, video game makers and anyone that has a material negative impact on our economy or society? Where are the boundaries? Who makes these decisions? Under what circumstances should the government get involved? Or maybe the government should set some basic rules and restrictions, constantly test that the rules are working and then get out of the way.
If we accept the notion that our current economic situation is the result of a liquidity problem, then the government should fix the liquidity problem. Instead, we still have little change in the rules and regulations governing loans, required balances, accounting regulations, etc. Instead the government is interjecting itself into the management of these businesses. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it say that the government has any right to fire employees of a company or make the kind of decisions that it is forcing on companies. It is just a matter of time before there is a Constitutional challenge to the governments actions.
At some point we must begin to question if our Constitution provides the guidance we need in a changing world with new powers and competitors? Just because something has served us well for over 200 years does not mean that it will serve us well into the future. I believe the question should be asked? What do you think?
Comments