"Capitalism created the greatest middle class in history"

[geniph]

I saw the above statement in another post recently, and can't just leave that unchallenged.

It is NOT capitalism that created the greatest middle class in history.

It is REGULATED capitalism that created the greatest middle class in history. The New Deal is what created the American Dream. The New Deal is not socialism, as the right wing would claim; it is regulated capitalism. Yes, it redistributes some wealth, as in socialism, but it does not nationalize all wealth nor share all assets equally. The greatness of the New Deal lies in the fact that it, for the first time in American, perhaps in world, history, leveled the playing field for those not born to affluence.

There is nothing wrong with capitalism, per se, in my opinion, but it must be regulated. Left unchecked, it becomes a destructive force, and quickly polarizes society into the rich and the poor. Wealth in an unregulated capitalist system tends to become more and more concentrated in fewer hands; wealth generates wealth. It becomes very difficult for someone without wealth to acquire it.

Never forget what Andrew Mellon said about the Great Depression: that it was simply the money returning to its rightful owners. The very wealthy did not suffer unduly from the Great Depression. Most called FDR a class traitor for imposing the New Deal on their formerly-unregulated larceny. (The top income tax rate was nearly 90% for a short time; this provided a very-badly-needed influx of money into the Federal treasury.) The neocons, today's descendants of those robber barons and inheritors of their legacy, despise the New Deal and everything it stands for. They will stop at nothing to complete its destruction, even if they have to bankrupt the U.S. economy to do it.

Without some form of regulation of capitalism, without controls on corporations and reins on the robber barons, you cannot have a large and thriving middle class.

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. It t'weren't capitalism. It was the GI Bill and other socialist like

programs.

[ShortnFiery]

4. LOL ... Great minds?

I promise, I independently posted this. My father was lifted up through his WWII service to include a Battlefield Commission that he retained after the war. If it wasn't for my dear deceased father working his butt off at night to score an degree in Civil Engineering, I'd probably still be back on the farm milking cows with my 2nd Cousins in South Dakota.

My father loved The Army and said, "Every day in the Army is like Sunday on the Farm."

Yes, it was those socialist programs that lifted up many Americans. Why, I bet the freepers would piss their pants to realize that the Active Duty MILITARY cares for it's troops and their families via the SOCIALIZED medical system? ;)

[radfringe]

62. and bush-onomy killed it... n/t

[ShortnFiery]

2. It was that socialist program known as the GI Bill after WWII

That lifted many families from the working to the middle class. :-)

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. I should know. The GI Bill pulled my family out of poverty in one

generation.

[geniph]

33. The GI Bill is certainly a factor for a lot of families,

although it had only a marginal effect on many, even many families of veterans (my father and two brothers were all eligible for the GI Bill, but none of them ever actually used any of the benefits, which is weird to me). But for the families who were eligible and who used it, yes, it made all the difference in the world.

Then again, I think the GI Bill is also part of FDR's (indirect) legacy! ;-)

[BlueEyedSon]

3. and a top marginal tax bracket of 90%

[sutz12]

5. And is now busily destroying said middle class.

:hide:

[twiterpatted]

7. your are absolutely correct.

[shance]

8. I'm beginning to wonder if true capitalism, like communism, is a myth.

fed to us to make us believe things are fair, when in reality, they are anything but.

There are simply too many prejudices, too much ignorance at this point, and too much imbalance in both power and opportunities for everyone, and between genders.

It could change, however the greed and hoarding of all the natural resources and all the power would need to be confronted.

And another issue is, will capitalism eventually eat up all of our natural resources?

That's a pretty daunting prospect. In watching the Bush Administrations rabid quest for all power at all costs, we are definitely headed in that direction.

What do we do about it?

I do believe if there weren't such a problem with such a plethora of immoral robber barons who want to keep everything for themselves, want to hold everyone else hostage, and have no intention of contributing to the good of the planet, we could actually have a saner planet. Of course, that requires courage, commitment and active participation by essentially every citizen in order to maintain and sustain a more harmonic existence.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

27. Unfortunately, so called free market Capitalism

Is identical to playing Monopoly. The rich, eventually, take everything. When you can amass enough wealth, you can buy the lawmakers and insure that you will amass more wealth.

Communism, wherein the state "distributes wealth according to your need" is equally fucked up. First of all, those who are "The Decider's" slant the program in their favor, then, they take away incentive to improve your lifestyle. If how much you can consume has no relation to how hard you work, what is the point of working hard?

Socialism, wherein we all owe a collective debt to society, and are not constrained from bettering our life through incentive, but are not excluded from achievement by a rigged system of reward, works for me. I think we all benefit from the interstate highway system. I do not have a problem paying taxes to help pay for it. I think Halliburton benefits more from the interstate highway system than I do. As a result, they should pay proportionally more to maintain it than I do.

This concept spreads the burden of our society, more equatable among those that benefit from our collective endeavors to make life better. Those who benefit most, should pay the most.

Unfortunately, our current administration would prefer a Feudal society where we are all beholden to the very rich for our very existence.

I say "Guillotine the bastards!"

[CommunistLeague]

56. tsk tsk

by merely looking at the title of your post it is quite clear that you dont know what capitalism nor communism is. You are looking at the USSR and China for communism i take it, and other state regulated societies like the US for capitalism.

the thing is, is that according to the historical conditions at the time, as well as the economic structures of the soviet union, many things that where done had a major point to them. It wasnt communism, (in referencing Marxs communism) one only has to read what marx wrote to understand whyd he be against such falsities, Communism is more than an economic system it is the drive for the abolishment of the alienation of man.

[Bill McBlueState]

70. well, that's your problem

"by merely looking at the title of your post"

Welcome to DU, but the best way to embarrass yourself is to only look at the title of the post. Especially when it's in quotes.

[geniph]

73. Actually, communism ISN'T an economic system

it's a political system. Socialism is an economic system.

[Seabiscuit]

9. The neocons haven't just trashed FDR. They've joined with the

mightiest of American corporations (which become mightier by the day as they reap unprecedented profits from the * tax cuts) to form a 21st century facist state.

[shain from kane]

16. Andrew Mellon, mentioned in the original posting, was involved

in a proposed military coup to replace FDR in the 1930s. So a fascist state has all ready been attempted by the so-called capitalists. I prefer to call them traitors.

From the internets:

"Alarmed by Roosevelt's plan to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, a group of millionaire businessmen, led by the Du Pont and J.P. Morgan empires, plans to overthrow Roosevelt with a military coup and install a fascist government modelled after Mussolini's regime in Italy. The businessmen try to recruit General Smedley Butler, promising him an army of 500,000, unlimited financial backing and generous media spin control. The plot is foiled when Butler reports it to Congress."

[geniph]

36. Smedly Butler saved this country

THAT was a true patriot!

[shance]

43. Yes he did.

He's an authentic American hero, unlike so many 'heroes' who are made up fiction in our history books.

[rman]

61. Only temporarily

We need another Smedly.

[Bill Wiltrack]

10. Regulated capitalism

with a heavy dose of social programs reinforced by a large Union contingency. Perhaps this will be the recipe of the next great middle class in the next great democracy.

[geniph]

19. If we can get it back, yes

and welcome to DU!

:hi:

[raccoon]

65. Interesting the way you said that,

"the next great middle class in the next great democracy."

I did a double take and realized, the next great democracy might be another country. I'd say the odds are that it probably WILL be.

Welcome to DU.

[newyawker99]

79. Hi Bill Wiltrack!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[lumpy]

89. Regulated capitalism

with social programs and union rights is the answer. It worked pretty well in the past. Corporate and banking deregulation has been destructive to a fair and equitable economic system.

[2Design]

11. socialize programs is what is supporting the republicans now

They are in many government jobs and protecting their jobs, pensions, and retirement fiercely - congress critters have raise their wages by 4000 ever since repubs got there. When you apply for state or federal jobs the application ask if you have served in military and give you priority - they have craddle to grave social programs but are against them for everyone else

[geniph]

35. Good point.

You're absolutely right - even some of the people that rail against "socialized" medicine have no qualms about using Social Security, Medicare, VA benefits, etc. Hypocrites!

[Pharaoh]

12. you are right geniph

capitalism is totally corrupt greedy and insane without regulation.........

when will the others wake up?

[ikojo]

13. UNIONS helped to create the greatest middle

class in history. Without unions and union wages there would not have been pressure upon corporate America to pay non union workers a living wage. As union membership has declined so too have corporate benefits. Corporations no longer fear unions or the possibility of their workforce becoming unionized.

[Bill Wiltrack]

14. Dead nuts on ikojo...

[Missy M]

21. I also believe the unions are what created the greatest....

middle class in history. The corporations were made to pay a decent, living wage and provide retirement benefits. Unfortunately, as we see the unions become less and less a force, we see benefits going away and decent wages being taken away.

[geniph]

22. Right, and regulated capitalism is what allows unions to exist

and flourish. The corporations were FORCED to accept unions by Federal legislation.

I'm a union member myself, and I most definitely would never downplay the role of the unions, but where there is unregulated capitalism, they are crushed out of existence. The only way they can compete against the power of the unregulated corporate "individual" is violently. We were definitely heading in that direction; that is one of the greatest aspects of FDR's legacy. He prevented this country from falling into violent revolution.

We need a new New Deal. We have to again reaffirm the rights of workers to collectively bargain; we have lost so many of those rights over the years. Right-to-Work state, anyone? I live in one.

[raccoon]

66. Yes! I live in a "right-to-work" state too.

You know those stats about the number of Americans without health insurance? I've never seen them broken down by state, but I bet that in right-to-work states there is a greater percentage of uninsured people than in the other states.

And by the way, great post. "regulated capitalism"--well said.

[Bozita]

15. FDR's New Deal saved capitalism from its own excesses

[eppur_se_muova]

46. NIcely put, is that a quote? nt

[Bozita]

53. Heard Thomm Hartmann state it ... frequently

He used it tonight while subbing for Randi.

[eppur_se_muova]

69. Thanks, not a radio listener. nt

[The2ndWheel]

17. Cheap energy created the middle class

Without it, we'd still have overt slavery.

[geniph]

20. Cheap energy is DEFINITELY part of the New Deal

The Tennessee Valley Authority and other publicly-owned utilities were a keystone of the New Deal. The only way to get, and keep, cheap energy, is to regulate capitalist ownership of the energy sources; they either have to be publicly-owned or heavily regulated.

[Ksec]

30. Unions created the thriving middle class

Lack of Unions are creating stagnant wages and benefits becoming dinosaurs.

One labor has no bargaining power against the giant corporate world. One million laborers have great bargaining power which equals the playing field.

[geniph]

34. Agreed. And the unions owe their existence

to the regulations placed on corporations forcing them to accept collective bargaining. Again, regulated capitalism. Before those regulations were put in place, corporations were free to ban unions, fire unionized workers, use violent measures to keep unions out, etc.

[katty]

18. and now it's crushing greed is grinding the middle class to dust

[leftofthedial]

23. it is the regulations that created the largest middle class in history

and the most successful economy IN SPITE of capitalism.

to survive (and for US to survive it), capitalism must be regulated to the point that it is no longer capitalism.

[Ms. Clio]

24. great thread

k & r

[Jade Fox]

25. Great post, Geniph....

What we are seeing now is an extreme form of what used to be called Monopoly Capitalism. Now, the Corps have banded together to protect themselves and each other from any serious competition (can you say NAFTA?) or regulation from any quarter.

[geniph]

31. Right, and this absurdity of a corporation being an "individual"

is making it worse. It's a total legal fiction, but it extends civil liberties - the civil liberties that are being abrogated from the rest of us! to an amorphous, undefinable entity.

That is one seriously hosed-up system. We're building that bridge to Feudalism just as fast as we can!

[Ksec]

26. Capitalism without regulation is a failure

Without lots of regulation, the economy goes to the cheapest labor source, and that means the workers get fked. The middle class became great when Unions became strong.

[6000eliot]

28. Whoever created it

the Republicans, starting with Ronald Reagan, are killing it.

[Initech]

29. George Carlin said it best:

"The upper class has all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class pays all the taxes, does all the work. And the poor are there, just to scare the shit out of the middle class. Keep them showing up at those JOBS!"

[SoCalDem]

32. Unions and a booming postwar period made the middle class n/t

[Terran1212]

37. Exactly; HUGE state intervention in the middle of the 20th century

The closest things we've ever had to unregulated capitalism were even bigger failures than the Soviet Bolshevekism and whatnot.

[geniph]

38. Darn it, I want one more vote!

hahaha...one more vote, and I might even make it to the Greatest page. Usually, the only posts of mine that make it that far are jokes. ;-)

[Kansas Wyatt]

39. Haven't you all noticed what has been happening to the New Deal

The last few decades?

The Wealthy Elite and Corporate America, have been using their bought and paid for politicians to slowly re-write the New Deal. Year by year, they have laminated and rearranged laws and policy to turn the New Deal into a regressive tax system to collect from the working class to accumulate wealth for the Wealthy Elite and Corporate America.

[geniph]

41. I think I said that in my original post

they will do anything to dismantle it, including a full-on bust-out of this country's economy.

[Kansas Wyatt]

42. Somewhat, however

When one steps back and looks at the last few decades, elected representatives have gradually rewritten the New Deal, so that the working class (middle & lower classes) ends up in a regressive tax system (income & payroll) on their labor that enriches the Wealthy Elite and Corporate America. The working class lost ground for the fruits of their labor, as a result. They have reversed what the New Deal was all about, and it began long before BushCo entered the picture. BushCo is only the climax, and has successfully completed merging the Federal Government with Corporate America, where the working class is owned by the Corporate Government Store.

Yes, they are trying to get rid of the New Deal, but they are using the New Deal itself to accumulate and reclaim wealth they lost to it and the prosperity it spread around.

[katty]

81. FDR was one of their class&he betrayed them, their goal:

shatter the New Deal once and for all.

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. It is not capitalism or "regulated" capitalism: it is the labor movement

pure and simple.

Capitalism has no interest in doing so, and "regulated" capitalism is an effect of struggle, not a cause of anything. Both positions are lies.

[mmonk]

44. You've got it. Capitalism with rules. Not the free for all stuff

we're encountering now.

[katty]

83. Laissez-faire today

more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_capitalism

Criticism

As both laissez-faire and free markets are largely idealized concepts, critics use similar arguments against both, focusing largely on the inapplicability of any idealized theory of market economy to real world conditions. However some also have critiques of the intrinsic properties of theoretical "laissez-faire", maintaining that it has inappropriate bias of private over public goods, generates pervasive externalities throughout the system that invalidate economic calculation, etc. For example, critics believe that market failures are difficult to address in any meaningful way with market devices alone, and thus require regulation by a guardian central government or necessitate innovations in mechanisms and institutions that would effectively internalize external costs. Critics may consider laissez faire as only an ideological veneer, including for the public a simple type of folk mythology appealing to nostalgic sentiment, obscuring what is actually a system of localist protectionism often associated with typically conservative politics, which in turn may only function in the context of elite-controlled economic expansionism, (or economic imperialism).

Some perceived market failures:

Markets without government intervention are claimed to aggregate into monopolies. One often claimed example of this is Standard Oil. However, it must be noted that when the trial that ultimately resulted in the government-imposed breakup of Standard began, the company was in competition with over 100 other refiners and Standard's share of oil refining was 64% from its high of 88% in 1890.
Markets without oversight are claimed to tend toward collusion as in Archer Daniels Midland
Markets without oversight are claimed to tend toward fraud as in Enron. However, laissez-faire does not mean there is no "oversight." In a laissez-faire system, fraud is illegal, and the state intervenes to stop it. Laissez-faire does not mean the lack of regulation, but the lack of regulations that go beyond protecting individuals from force and fraud.

[eallen]

45. The bourgeoisie existed long before the Great Depression

I agree with you that government interventions, from the GI Bill to Social Security, are responsible for the size and robustness of the middle class in the 20th and 21st century US. That said, capitalism created the middle class long before the Great Depression. And even before the US. It was smaller and more tenuous. Partly because capitalism was younger. Partly because of the lack of government infrastructure. Nonetheless, it is correct to say that the middle class is a result of capitalism.

[eppur_se_muova]

47. Wish I could remember who made this analogy...capitalism is like a hockey

game. Unregulated capitalism is like a hockey game with NO REFEREES. If you don't want bloody gang warfare on ice (think "Rollerball" with SHARP skates) you have to have referees, and they have to have authority. Even Joe Six-Pack understands that.

[geniph]

75. Great analogy

I am SO stealing that! ;-)

[OnionPatch]

48. This point is right on and bears repeating and repeating

It's unbelievable that so many people have been brainwashed into thinking that capitalism created the middle-class. Capitalism has been around forever in various forms, usually not all that regulated, but when has there been a middle-class such as existed in twentieth century America? It was only when we made rules to level the playing field and taxes to address the way wealth accumulates that a such a large middle-class sprung up.

[eallen]

68. Sorry, but no. Read Marx on the subject.

Capitalism evolved from feudalism. Mercantilism might be viewed as an early form of capitalism. In any case, there is a specific history of the evolution of capital and equity markets, and the legal infrastructure that supports those. The possibility of capitalistic evolution was kept at bay throughout much of Europe during the Christian millenium, if for no other reason, because interest was banned.

Marx also recognized that capitalism was responsible for the industrial revolution and the unprecedented productivity that brought, as well as the creation of the bourgeoisie.

Personally, I love pointing out to right wingnuts how well Marx understood capitalism. I only wish more of the left understood it half so well as Marx.

:hippie:

[Joe Chi Minh]

80. Spot on. Unregulated capitalism is just another term for rampant

greed and the mailed fist. Mellon was the perfect personification of rampant greed/unregulated capitalism. It stands to reason that societies as a whole can only flourish when capitalism is regulated.

Adam Smith, whom the far right have the brass neck to claim as their great guru, warned against allowing businessmen a free hand, since they only think of their own personal/local welfare. He also warned against allowing them in government. What he'd have made of our corporatist governments, the lobbying in Washington, the treasury appropriations for the defense industry and the corruption of the voting-machine manufacturers, doesn't bear thinking about! He was, in fact, a moral philosopher, (evidently not in name only), not an economist.

If this Administration hasn't made clear that the rich - in particular, the right wing - don't regard their fellow citizens even as sentient human beings, never mind US citizens, whatever could? With so many people living on the streets, it's clear that they show more concern for their family pets.

[katty]

84. bush&co prefer the feudal system and it shows

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

49. Capital-ism is about CAPITAL aka BIG MONEY not people ...

Quite frankly, reading Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States", I'm actually surprised that the middle class was allowed to rise!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_People's_History_of_the_United_States

As some other posters have mentioned, the rise of the middle class owes a lot more to labor and all those willing to stand up to "the capitalists", sometimes facing punishment, torture, and death.

You might want to take a look at this timeline and ask yourself if it was capitalism that was really standing up for the little guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_labor_issues_and_events

Even better you can read Zinn's book ONLINE here:
http://historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeopleshistory.html

I recommend these chapters that really highlight how "helpful" capitalism has been to creating the middle class:

11. Robber Barons And Rebels

12. The Empire and the People

13. The Socialist Challenge

14. War Is the Health of the State

15. Self-help in Hard Times


On another note, the key to "Free Markets" is actual competition, while the impetus of capitalism is to use your capital to remove competiton, either by buying them out, knocking them out, or just plain collusion to have a fake competition... Sound familar??

[Scriptor Ignotus]

64. i'm reading that book now

and was thinking the same thing. I guess the rich knew they had to give up some of their power in order to keep the mobs at bay.

[geniph]

76. No, it was one particular visionary among the rich

and for his visionary idea of REGULATED capitalism, he is vilified among the rich and the neocons as a class traitor.

FDR prevented this country from degenerating into violent revolution. I really believe we were inches away from it in 1932.

[Tactical Progressive]

50. Unregulated capitalism reached its peak

during the Dark Ages.

[geniph]

85. And that's today's neocons for you:

Busy building that bridge to the 15th century!

[Jamison]

51. Education also used to mean something back in the day.

Education also did not cost an arm and a leg like it does today too. Example: my uncle graduated from the U. of Missouri in 1958 with a degree in journalism. I think he told me one that his tuition and room & board for his last year there was maybe $450. He was able to pay his way through school working as a painter part-time. He also got a great job with a St. Louis newspaper when he graduated. In those times, you didn't even NEED college, you could get into the trades, join the union, and you'd be set for life if you worked hard. If you did have a college degree, well things were even better, and you'd always be in demand for jobs with good salaries. If you had enough ambition to go on for a graduate degree, then that was really your ticket to the good life.

Today, college is VERY expensive, and even community colleges are becoming pricey. If you only have a high school diploma now, your employment opportunities are grim and will often involve jobs that pay minimum wage more a less. If you have a bachelor's degree, it's not really a whole lot better here in Bushco's economy. I know a number of people with degrees who are waiting tables, working at Target, etc. Even if you have a graduate degree, that doesn't guarantee you a decent job anymore like it used to.

[Autonomy]

52. I've a controversial opinion on this topic:

but Renaissance-era English primogeniture, the vestige of the dying feudal system, created the greatest middle-class in history. When the highly educated latter sons of an English nobleman or aristocrat came of age, they often went into military service, trades, politics, science, religion, or the arts. They became known as the gentry. The sons of the gentry became the upper-middle class of England in the 1400s-1945.

Colonialism and expansionism slowly weakened their stature, but in its prime the system produced some of the greatest artists, artisans, trademen, military leaders, scientists, philosophers, etc. Their value was dependent wholly on their education and their personal output, and not by ownership. It was a meritocracy of sorts, at least for a segment of the population. In the post-colonial phase (including now), wealth is aggregated more often by an ownership class, a revivial of the feudal system in many ways, with the result being the slow death of the middle class.

[JCMach1]

54. Bullshit... it was America's unique combination of Capitalism + Socialism

In the form of the social safety net enacted after the Great Depression...

The Repugs are systematicall destroying everything that made America what it was.

Why do you think they hate Social Security so much? It is almost the last remainder of what made America great!

[geniph]

77. Um, if you read my entire post

that's exactly what it said.

[JCMach1]

90. That was for the article-- not your post...

:)

[geniph]

92. Oh good!

I was afraid you thought my whole post was bullshit. ;-)

[applegrove]

55. Absolutely. Mixed Market economies created greatest middle class.

Capitalism was a part of that. But not all. Income taxes were part of it too!

[EstimatedProphet]

57. K&R

[conflictgirl]

58. Damn skippy

And unregulated capitalism is exactly what is destroying the middle class right now.

[eridani]

59. I'll admit it--I don't like the idea that it's OK to make money from just-

--owning the means of production, and that's what capitalism is. It isn't true that the only other option is that the state owns it. What about everybody owning their own means of production, either as individuals or collectively?

Given that there isn't an obvious way from here to there, I'll settle for regulated capitalism in the meantime.

[B Calm]

60. Republicans = Corporate Freedom and Individual Responsibility

Democratic = Corporate Responsiblity and Individual Freedom

[Canuckistanian]

82. That's a good slogan

An original?

[B Calm]

99. Not sure where I heard it. Probably from my dad years ago ..

sig line is Dad's for sure!

[slybacon9]

63. Until the next, greatest middle class comes along

I mean, since this one is over and done.

[tjwash]

67. FDR created the greatest middle class in America, by cutting...

...the unchecked capitalism that caused the great depression, off at it's knees.

His New Deal reforms went way beyond any previous legislation. Hence, the alphabet soup programs of the New Deal were established: the NRA, AAA, TVA, CCC, SEC, HOLC, and SSA (Social Security Act). The government slowly brought workers back into the work force, either by direct or indirect relief programs -- by injecting socialism into the nation's economy.

[Beelzebud]

71. True. And Unregulated Capitalism destroyed it.

[Ganja Ninja]

72. It was organized labor that stood up to the capitalists and ...

created the middle class in America.

[geniph]

78. You really can't regard them as separate

The rise of organized labor happened before the New Deal, but it was being violently suppressed until federal legislation was put in place forcing employers to accept collective bargaining.

They are not separate. It is not a coincidence that as the New Deal is systematically dismantled by the oligarchy and capitalism is deregulated, the unions are suffering.

But one thing has to be borne in mind: the unions need REGULATED capitalism too. There have to be producers; there have to be entrepreneurs; there have to be some form of corporations. Capitalism is not, in my opinion, a bad thing. I do think it promotes a certain individual creativity that collectivism does not, because there are incentives for innovation. However unregulated capitalism quickly becomes entirely evil.

Regulated capitalism includes collective bargaining with labor. Unregulated capitalism is free to exploit labor however they can get away with it, up to the point when the labor force violently rebels and takes the means of production away from the owners.

[ComerPerro]

74. We are moving toward unchecked capitalism, and its actually

destroying the middle class.

So, I agree with you

[cassiepriam]

86. And now it is going to wipe out the middle class.

Capitalism the oil mafia way, that is...

[PATRICK]

87. The abuse of any system

That chicken and egg thing might apply. When the middle class seized more power it prospered and capitalism worked better.

But any way my take is that the Bush regime is doing to America and capitalism what Stalin did for Russia and Communism. In most if not all major areas it seems very parallel. So if a handful of top schmucks can take down the huge human economic and poltical infrastructure what does that say about the system or systems or any class of people?

[cassiepriam]

88. Excellent point you are making. Any system can be used

for good or bad. It isn't the system, it is the people running the system. We have seen that an extremely capitalistic society like we have become, can install a dictatorships that rivals the Kremlin.

And you are spot on, what does it say about the American people that they have allowed a group of thugs to take down America?

I will grant that the thugs are quite clever. Had to be, to install a dictatorship in America.

[PATRICK]

91. But not so much clever

as enabled and ruthless and protected- even by what should be their ideological opposition. The reason power has gone so quickly bad, decadent and incompetent does not speak to cleverness so much as long building entitlement, bad habits and a pre-decayed aristocracy that is totally unfit for command even in the good old king/tinpot dictator mode.

The brainy communists knew Stalin was destroying everything but they were afraid, ineffective and hoisted on their own coup petard. Of course, they knew they would be shot- and were and Communism in its last holdouts still clings to "Stalinism" for its ruthless grip on totalitarian power. The market people when not addled by greed should remember that "Bushism" is only a mangling of the English language, not a
force for self-preservation. The extreme damage of bowing to these leaders is truly bizarre and apocalyptic in its own right. When the lies blow away from the shattered landscape the whole system will crumble like the Berlin Wall, suddenly and with little fanfare, and a huge social hangover.

[cassiepriam]

96. Maybe "decayed, entitlement, and bad habits "describes

Americans as well. We are a spoiled lazy people who spent
8 years enjoying the hounding of Clinton over his sex life. No one did
much to stop that madness.

But if adversity builds character, I think the American people will be
getting some character building moments over the next decade, as the fall out
from their bad choice of leadership hits home in a hard way.

[geniph]

93. What does it say about the American people,

that we have allowed a gang of thugs to take over America?

It says that our vigilance has waned, that we have become too complacent, and it is time once again for the great masses of people who are not part of the oligarchy to make it clear where the real power lies.

You just can't get any better than the way Paddy Chaefsky (sp?!) put it in Network:

I'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!

[cassiepriam]

95. This is no longer about BushCo, it is about the American people.

Can they exhibit independent and intelligent thinking?
Do they have a moral compass? Can they put greed and fear aside,
to make the best decisions for themselves and future generations?

[Imagevision]

98. it is about the American people? who Bush controls sending jobs to India

[Johnyawl]

94. One of my long standing rants...

...not only did REGULATED capitalism create the largest and wealthiest middle class in history, it also won WWII, and the cold war.

Good post, Sweetie.

[Imagevision]

97. Bush stated recently India's middle class will increaase by 300% this year

and we know the middle class in the good ole USA has taken a serious hit.