All of this talk about the "free market"

[PrincessFiona]

is such bunk.

Let me make sure I understand....

sending jobs overseas so that corporations can save money and ceo's can keep multi-million dollar salaries? check.

stripping employees of healthcare benefits and watering them down to maintain CEO bonuses? check


Refuse to raise the minimum wage to a living wage while paying CEO's 250-600% more than employees? check, check, check

The government has NO place in the free market.

Our country is founded on the principles of a free market economy....suck it up, pull yourself up by your bootstraps...it's what the "market" wants.

Soooo....

People lose their jobs to outsourcing and get jobs that pay less money...they can't afford their mortgages and end up going into foreclosure...

Healthcare costs continue to rise and individuals with no health insurance (or inadequate insurance) can't pay their medical bills....leading them to not be able to afford their homes and to run out to the mall shopping.

Predatory lending by credit card companies allows cc companies to spike interest rates above 30% for one late payment and even if it is the fault of the postal service.

Big corporations see the free market at work. Ooops, you mean if people aren't earning a living wage, don't have insurance benefits and can't pay their mortgages anymore that they might not be able to run out to the mall and spend money that they don't have on their credit cards ripping them off at 30%?

Solution? NOW it's time for the free market to step aside and let govt. get involved.

Forget a real discussion about CEO compensation, healthcare reform, living wage etc....lets' make it easier for people to get balloon mortgages and give everyone a little 300-600$ bandaid.

How on earth is that anything besides a govt. bailout for a free market system that is broken and refuses to take responsibility?

kris

[poky]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

[PrincessFiona]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

PS...just to be clear, I believe that every working american should have healthcare, that ceo's shouldn't be getting multi-million dollar contracts while they outsource, downsize and run companies into the ground and we should have a living wage in this country. My sarcasm might have muddied the waters there.

[poky]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

PS...just to be clear, I believe that every working american should have healthcare, that ceo's shouldn't be getting multi-million dollar contracts while they outsource, downsize and run companies into the ground and we should have a living wage in this country. My sarcasm might have muddied the waters there.

Heh. It was perfectly clear to me. I speak sarcasm fluently. And I agree 100%. To mix a metaphor, the free market isn't really "free" when the playing field's at a 45-degree slant.

And I'm perfectly aware that leveling the playing field, globally, should mean that most of us in the first world will have to lower our standard of living, because the planet just plain can not support almost 7 billion of us consuming like we do. And I'm fine with that. (Fewer people would be even better, but I'm not going to go there - I don't begrudge anyone however many kids they can love and provide for, I just wish there were fewer of us, in general)

[PrincessFiona]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

I speak sarcasm fluently.

OK....this is absolutely the best quote of all times!!!!!!! I love it!

Kris

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

Kris,

When you eloquently railed against the AMT, I had hopes for you. You are letting me down.

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

\
How on earth is that anything besides a govt. bailout for a free market system that is broken and refuses to take responsibility?

Maybe this speaks more to the moral bankruptcy, rather than the actual bankruptcy, of many entities in the free market system that are currently looking for a bail-out, but...

Pope John Paul II once said that capitalism unchecked by morality will self-destruct.

I think that can be applied to many companies today. When your legal fiduciary duties to your shareholders are interpreted as only commandment--the immediate result of a raise common share stock value--you will do absolutely anything you can to boost that price. Even if it not in the long-term interest of the company or its shareholders. And failing to do that eventually trickles down to everyone else, including company pension holders, consumers, and taxpayers.

[mommax3]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

I agree with ladybug. The problem is greed. I don't know what the answer is, but I can tell you that lately I have really been examining my life to make sure I am not part of the problem.

Sally

[Rapunzel]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

Maybe this speaks more to the moral bankruptcy, rather than the actual bankruptcy, of many entities in the free market system that are currently looking for a bail-out, but...

Pope John Paul II once said that capitalism unchecked by morality will self-destruct.

Yes. I've been trying to suss out a cohesive answer to this that didn't sound...I dunno...religious. Hold on to your Huggies because I'm going on a wild ride. If we are nothing more than a clump of of cells (size being relative) then why should a CEO or government give two shits about you? Until we can say every life has potential that deserves to be realized and supported then don't expect a CEO or anyone else to care. It's square one. Everything else stems from that assignment of value. You cannot build a culture that cares with out giving absolute! value to each life. :huh: It all flows from there. That said, ultimately, the republican party hasn't done much to change this value, either in utero or out (although I give big kudos for the halt of federal funding to embryo stem cell research). Not that I expect a political party or laws to change what's in people's hearts. It can't, and I don't expect that when I vote.

It's a much bigger problem than a handful of CEO puppeteers. They're only a highly visible manifestation. But I get that you have to start somewhere. Maybe the top is a visible place to start. Ultimately, lasting change must come from the bottom and I'm not talking about bootstraps.

You managed to connect the economy with stem cell research.

Impressive.

[Vishenka69]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

Everything is a cycle and you have to let it run it's course before it correct itself. Two hundred years ago Roosevelts, Carnegies and Vanderbuilds were raking in big bucks that many felt were at the expense of the workers, that resulted in unions and various other social reforms. Now we're coming back to somewhat similar situation with the CEO's, which will once again correct itself in due time. Perhaps not as fast as some would like, but that's a whole other issue.

I know it's not very popular opinion but I'm a huge proponent of Ayn Rand philosophy.

[poky]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

Everything is a cycle and you have to let it run it's course before it correct itself. Two hundred years ago Roosevelts, Carnegies and Vanderbuilds were raking in big bucks that many felt were at the expense of the workers, that resulted in unions and various other social reforms. Now we're coming back to somewhat similar situation with the CEO's, which will once again correct itself in due time. Perhaps not as fast as some would like, but that's a whole other issue.

I know it's not very popular opinion but I'm a huge proponent of Ayn Rand philosophy.

Except...it doesn't just "correct itself" by people sitting around and waiting for it to do so, assuming that it will, on its own. It gets corrected by people recognizing the injustice and forcing a correction.

[Rapunzel]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

This is a difficult thing to have the government fix, though.

For instance, do we have the government put a limit on how much any US citizen can earn in any given year? Is that a road we want to pursue? What happens when/if it becomes a salary limit based on your profession? What if people then petition the government to limit physician's salaries because they "make too much"?

And, what happens to small businesses and just-starting businesses if policies are implemented that essentially put them out of business? Raising the minimum wage and requiring smaller companies or new companies to follow guidelines providing a certain type/amount of insurance has the negative effect of decreasing competition because it's often only the large mega-corporations that can more easily absorb these cost changes. And, requiring companies to spend more translates to higher prices to offset the money drain. Which leads to another question: Do we require all industry to be not-for-profit? Is it wrong or evil for a company to make a profit? Is it wrong for the head of a company who does a good job protecting thousands of jobs and/or creating thousands of jobs to be rewarded?

If we forbid companies from sending work overseas what does that do to our various trade agreements? Do we null them all and start over from scratch? What do we do if other nations close all of their factories here in retaliation for us requiring all American companies to pull out of their nations? Is it possible to do this and not completely destroy the economy here?


I do have a problem with our current economy. But, any solution will be a limited and, possibly, useless one unless we remove the crushing stone from the backs of the populace in the form of unbelievably high taxation. If we do away with taking out money for federal purposes a little at a time during the year and, instead, go back to requiring a lump settlement of taxes at the end of the year as was previously done long ago we will see tax reform - real tax reform. Why? Because when people see the amount of money that 20% or 30% of their income equals they will be horrified enough to require true change. When a family sees that they are really paying $24,000 a year from their middle-class pockets THEN we will see some action that will lead to positive economic growth.

If you want to immediately and more permanently alleviate the financial burdens most people face, if you want to immediately and permanently raise the amount of pay a family takes home, if you want to help people afford to buy their own medical insurance - remove the crushing taxes from their backs.

The truth is that the ever increasing amount of government programs we see in our federal government is a monster that requires a diet of ever-increasing money from everyday people. The American public has been fed the lie that they can have their government babysit every aspect of their lives and "protect" them from themselves essentially AND, at the same time, they can have more of the money they earn. The fact is these two financial paths directly conflict. You cannot take someone's money and promise them it will lead to them making more money or having more purchasing power or being able to afford more. It has never worked that way. Ever.

The road we are currently pursuing has caused undue hardship on almost all of the American population. FDR's socialist programs' fruits are being reaped still - many years later.

We cannot have a serious discussion of helping Americans financially without addressing the crushing tax burden we all face. And, that necessitates honest assessment of just how much we want our government to grow. In other words economic growth is negatively tied to the increasing size of our government programs. That's just a fact - and it's the elephant in the room in this conversation.

[Rapunzel]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

And, yes, this is a problem of greed.

We have a greedy federal government that serves a greedy populace who have the unfounded belief that if they keep giving money to the monster that is the government it will wildly reward them (via various government programs and handouts) someday - somehow.

The amount of money I am paying this year in taxes from my husband's income is staggering. And, that is money that will not enter the economy. Instead it will disappear into the abyss of government pork, "social" programs that have yet to actually solve a social problem, and gifts to nations which would like to see me dead.

In many ways blaming the easy target of greedy business is a red herring.

We need to addess the real problems of failed government-run social programs, failed foreign policy financial contributions, a morally-bankrupt social class of professional politicians and the thousands of underlings in professional politics, etc.

Rather than looking to the federal government as our saviour we need to face the reality that the federal government is the biggest part of the problem.

[Vishenka69]

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

Everything is a cycle and you have to let it run it's course before it correct itself. Two hundred years ago Roosevelts, Carnegies and Vanderbuilds were raking in big bucks that many felt were at the expense of the workers, that resulted in unions and various other social reforms. Now we're coming back to somewhat similar situation with the CEO's, which will once again correct itself in due time. Perhaps not as fast as some would like, but that's a whole other issue.

I know it's not very popular opinion but I'm a huge proponent of Ayn Rand philosophy.

Except...it doesn't just "correct itself" by people sitting around and waiting for it to do so, assuming that it will, on its own. It gets corrected by people recognizing the injustice and forcing a correction.

Yes, people, not the government. If the shareholders or members of the board decide to lower the salary of their CEO it's one thing, if there's a federal cap on how much they can make, it's totally different.

Re: All of this talk about the "free market"

You managed to connect the economy with stem cell research.

Impressive.

I agree, that is impressive

It's true though. We live in a country and society that cares more about sexuality equality, but aborts half of the pregnancies that come up positive for downs syndrome. We see homosexual people on almost every t.v. show but I hardly ever ever see a character who just happens to be blind, or in a wheel chair (and that is pretty much the disabilities that are show on the media, someone who can't walk for some reason or another) , or who is deaf, or who happens to have on of the other thousands of disabilities out there. We care about what is cool to be passionate about, and when we focus on one thing, we think it means we are thinking about equality on all issues, and that is so not true. Right now it's about sexual equality and going green. That is what the media is focusing on, but the other deep issues of real quality of life get thrown to the gutters. I agree, people need to look a little deeper, care a little more, be a bit more selfless - to really get some super reform. We idolize the things we say aren't fair. Fat rich CEO's, or Movie Stars, or Atheletes or Muscians - we say they have to much, but we idolize thier lives on pop t.v. shows, we almost demand they have that much money to worship the life we wished we had, instead of claming it as unequal wealth that they don't need.

But this of course if a philosophical arguement. It's hard to take the change of heart to actual policy.

It's a huge issue with lots of facets, we can all disagree about parts of the problem, but until it's pulled hard by the reins it will indeed go on until we destroy ourselves like Rome's empire did, the Ottoman empire did, the Egyptians, and so on...



I hope that something does change, any good change right now, even if it was just one, would make a difference.