This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: "American Capitalism" No Longer Serves Society
Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,
One hundred years ago European civilization, as it had been known, was ending its life in the Great War, later renamed World War I. Millions of soldiers ordered by mindless generals into the hostile arms of barbed wire and machine gun fire had left the armies stalemated in trenches. A reasonable peace could have been reached, but US President Woodrow Wilson kept the carnage going by sending fresh American soldiers to try to turn the tide against Germany in favor of the English and French.
The fresh Amerian machine gun and barbed wire fodder weakened the German position, and an armistance was agreed. The Germans were promised no territorial losses and no reparations if they laid down their arms, which they did only to be betrayed at Versailles. The injustice and stupidity of the Versailles Treaty produced the German hyperinflation, the collapse of the Weimar Republic, and the rise of Hitler.
Hitler’s demands that Germany be put back together from the pieces handed out to France, Belgium, Denmark, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland, comprising 13 percent of Germany’s European territory and one-tenth of her population, and a repeat of French and British stupidity that had sired the Great War finished off the remnants of European civilization in World War II.
The United States benefitted greatly from this death. The economy of the United States was left untouched by both world wars, but economies elsewhere were destroyed. This left Washington and the New York banks the arbiters of the world economy. The US dollar replaced British sterling as the world reserve currency and became the foundation of US domination in the second half of the 20th century, a domination limited in its reach only by the Soviet Union.
The Soviet collapse in 1991 removed this constraint from Washington. The result was a burst of American arrogance and hubris that wiped away in over-reach the leadership power that had been handed to the United States. Since the Clinton regime, Washington’s wars have eroded American leadership and replaced stability in the Middle East and North Africa with chaos.
Washington moved in the wrong direction both in the economic and political arenas. In place of diplomacy, Washington used threats and coercion. “Do as you are told or we will bomb you into the stone age,” as Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told President Musharraf of Pakistan. Not content to bully weak countries, Washington threatens poweful countries such as Russia, China, and Iran with economic sanctions and military actions. Consequently, much of the non-Western world is abandoning the US dollar as world currency, and a number of countries are organizing a payments system, World Bank, and IMF of their own. Some NATO members are rethinking their membership in an organization that Washington is herding into conflict with Russia.
China’s unexpectedly rapid rise to power owes much to the greed of American capitalism. Pushed by Wall Street and the lure of “performance bonuses,” US corporate executives brought a halt to rising US living standards by sending high productivity, high value-added jobs abroad where comparable work is paid less. With the jobs went the technology and business knowhow. American capability was given to China. Apple Computer, for example, has not only offshored the jobs but also outsourced its production. Apple does not own the Chinese factories that produce its products.
The savings in US labor costs became corporate profits, executive renumeration, and shareholder capital gains. One consequence was the worsening of the US income distribution and the concentration of income and wealth in few hands. A middle class democracy was transformed into an oligarchy. As former President Jimmy Carter recently said, the US is no longer a democracy; it is an oligarchy.
In exchange for short-term profits and in order to avoid Wall Street threats of takeovers, capitalists gave away the American economy. As manufacturing and tradeable professional skill jobs flowed out of America, real family incomes ceased to grow and declined. The US labor force participation rate fell even as economic recovery was proclaimed. Job gains were limited to lowly paid domestic services, such as retail clerks, waitresses, and bartenders, and part-time jobs replaced full-time jobs. Young people entering the work force find it increasingly difficult to establish an independent existance, with 50 percent of 25-year old Americans living at home with parents.
In an economy driven by consumer and investment spending, the absence of growth in real consumer income means an economy without economic growth. Led by Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve in the first years of the 21st century substituted a growth in consumer debt for the missing growth in consumer income in order to keep the economy moving. This could only be a short-term palliative, because the growth of consumer debt is limited by the growth of consumer income.
Another serious mistake was the repeal of financial regulation that had made capitalism functional. The New York Banks were behind this egregious error, and they used their bought-and-paid-for Texas US Senator, whom they rewarded with a 7-figure salary and bank vice chairmanship to open the floodgates to amazing debt leverage and financial fraud with the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
The repeal of Glass-Steagall destroyed the separation of commercial from investment banking. One result was the concentration of banking. Five mega-banks now dominate the American financial scene. Another result was the power that the mega-banks gained over the government of the United States. Today the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve serve only the interests of the mega-banks.
In the United States savers have had no interest on their savings in eight years. Those who saved for their retirement in order to make paltry Social Security benefits liveable have had to draw down their capital, leaving less inheritance for hard-pressed sons, grandsons, daughters and granddaughters.
Washington’s financial policy is forcing families to gradually extinguish themselves. This is “freedom and democracy “ America today.
Among the capitalist themselves and their shills among the libertarian ideologues, who are correct about the abuse of government power but less concerned with the abuse of private power, the capitalist greed that is destroying families and the economy is regarded as the road to progress. By distrusting government regulators of private misbehavior, libertarians provided the cover for the repeal of the financial regulation that made American capitalism functional. Today dysfunctional capitalism rules, thanks to greed and libertarian ideology.
With the demise of the American middle class, which becomes more obvious each day as another ladder of upward mobility is dismantled, the United States becomes a bipolar country consisting of the rich and the poor. The most obvious conclusion is that the failure of American political ledership means instability, leading to a conflict between the haves—the one percent—and the dispossessed—the 99 percent.
The failure of leadership in the United States is not limited to the political arena but is across the board. The time horizon operating in American institutions is very short term. Just as US manufacturers have harmed US demand for their products by moving abroad American jobs and the consumer income associated with the jobs, university administrations are destroying universities. As much as 75 percent of university budgets is devoted to administration. There is a proliferation of provosts, assistant provosts, deans, assistant deans, and czars for every designated infraction of political correctness.
Tenure-track jobs, the bedrock of academic freedom, are disappearing as university administrators turn to adjuncts to teach courses for a few thousand dollars. The decline in tenure-track jobs heralds a decline in enrollments in Ph.D. programs. University enrollments overall are likely to decline. The university experience is eroding at the same time that the financial return to a university education is eroding. Increasingly students graduate into an employment environment that does not produce sufficient income to service their student loans or to form independent households.
Increasingly university research is funded by the Defense Department and by commercial interests and serves those interests. Universities are losing their role as sources of societal critics and reformers. Truth itself is becoming commercialized.
The banking system, which formerly financed business, is increasingly focused on converting as much of the economy as possible into leveraged debt instruments. Even consumer spending is reduced with high credit card interest rate charges. Indebtedness is rising faster than the real production in the economy.
Historically, capitalism was justified on the grounds that it guaranteed the efficient use of society’s resources. Profits were a sign that resources were being used to maximize social welfare, and losses were a sign of inefficient resource use, which was corrected by the firm going out of business. This is no longer the case when the economic policy of a counry serves to protect financial institutions that are “too big to fail” and when profits reflect the relocation abroad of US GDP as a result of jobs offshoring. Clearly, American capitalism no longer serves society, and the worsening distribution of income and wealth prove it.
None of these serious problems will be addressed by the presidential candidates, and no party’s platform will consist of a rescue plan for America. Unbridled greed, short-term in nature, will continue to drive America into the ground.
- 71 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


Trust no one.
Capitalism not yet tried.
What we have is not capitalism, it is corporate oligarchy.
what the fuck are these propagandists selling?
*bwack that's capitalism* *bwack that's capitalism* *bwack that's capitalism*
They just want the unwashed masses to blame this all on "capitalism" when TSHTF, so the masses turn to something else, like communism, which is instead of the 1% having all the wealth, its the .001%. The sheep will beg for MOAR of what they hated before.
It is also technology.
I remember calling someone before answering machines.
If they weren't home it just rang open and you weren't charged for the call.
Then you were auto answered with an answering machine, and even if you didn't leave a message you were charged by connecting to this machine.
Trust me, I worked in early telecom, they are straight up evil.
It was never meant to serve society,
only their club.
-ism's...divide, conquer, and control
We are fooled.
i have a great respect for the most part for paul craig roberts, but he is dead wrong about capitalism; he mistakes corporatism for capitalism over and over again, and he believes in the legitimacy of the state.
the sins that he ascribes to capitalism actually arise not from the free market, but rather through the inequitable granting of powers and privileges by the state to crony corporatists.
no human being has legitimate authority to rule over any other human being through force; if it's not voluntary, it's not right.
"...but he is dead wrong about capitalism; he mistakes corporatism for capitalism over and over again, and he believes in the legitimacy of the state"
pardon me, but those two are too often the refrain and chief excuses for the libertarian (aka anarcho-capitalist) position, here on ZH
A) it ain't (pure) capitalism, so count me out
B) there is no legitimacy in the state, so count me out
problem is, capitalism requires some kind of protection for property rights, and there has never been (yet) any alternative to some kind of state, order, whatever
in this, the libertarian is a kind of purist that blocks everything and criticizes everything... without ever putting any skin in the broader game
if you want to be counted out... why so vocal? there is a thing that can be called libertarian support for a number of policies in the US
even we foreigners in foreign lands feel this political push from the US. so you do push... but don't own up your push, my friends
pcr's key part of his (btw imho conservative) rant: "Among the capitalist themselves and their shills among the libertarian ideologues, who are correct about the abuse of government power but less concerned with the abuse of private power, the capitalist greed that is destroying families and the economy is regarded as the road to progress. By distrusting government regulators of private misbehavior, libertarians provided the cover for the repeal of the financial regulation that made American capitalism functional. Today dysfunctional capitalism rules, thanks to greed and libertarian ideology."
in this, I agree with him. Libertarians generally are wonderful and great and swell when it comes about pushing against the abuses of government power
on the other side, libertarians invariably side with individual and private interests... regardless, dogmatically and unblinkingly, be them corporations or oligarchs
"libertarians invariably side with individual and private interests... regardless, dogmatically and unblinkingly, be them corporations or oligarchs"
I agree with some libertarian ideas, not all. I hear the rage against government tyranny from the libertarian crowd but very, very little about private tyranny. It makes me suspect. I am sure corporatism loves nurturing the libertarian hatred of gov't. as it serves their needs as well. Until I see libertarians go after BOTH kinds of tyranny, private and governmental...my mind's jury is still out debating.
please provide some specific examples of what you're talking about when you say "private tyrrany".
i would be happy to discuss it if you can define and/or give some examples as to what you're referring to.
i expect that you're talking about either:
1) government privelege granted to private interests (eg, the counterfeiting ability of the fed), so it is still government-backed tyranny
or
2) regular old crime, which should of course be opposed and stopped, but it is not tyranny
I got a deal you can't refuse..
Youse guys each gives me one lousy G-Note a month and I will guarantee you that de' bad element what's been F'n up de' neighborhood won’t be continuing to bust youse windows and threatening youse kids.
Weese a group of private enterpreenures what’s got youse best interests at heart.
..and we ain't no tyrants.
..and oh, since you ain’t got no credit from de’ bank, I’ll spot you two hunnert bucks and it will only cost you twenty bucks a week until you pay it all back.
.. and hey, here.. pick three numbers, gimme’ a buck and I gives you dis chit… if you numbers come up you wins a hunnert bucks!
Sweet, huh????
..so somebody tell me the difference between my buddy Guido above's tyranny and your governments.
Hmm.. "policy”... police.. polizei.. politie.. policja.. policía.. polis ???? .
I wonder if there is a common thread there somewhere.
"on the other side, libertarians invariably side with individual and private interests... regardless, dogmatically and unblinkingly, be them corporations or oligarchs"
True enough, we tend to think most people are like us and have that inate sixth sense to clearly see through the vapid shallowness of a Soros or a Buffet.
Yet we are to be demonized because we have it and others don't? We are asked to bend our character, our integrity to, somehow conform to some greater societal good run by cronies enacting ridicuous laws that have zero chance of correcting the issue the laws were created to address?
Tell ya what, you guys correct the world wide failure of statism and we'll take another look at it ;-)
nmewn, I don't think you can count a moderate symphatizer like me as a demonizer. the problem of statism is still clear for me: how does your alternative look like? meanwhile, the US specific failure of the US private prison complex does bear all the imprints of a failure of partly applied libertarian principles. among many others. my rant on this is that you do have influence, and you do exert that influence... in part of what is the end product in the US, which then reverberates across the globe. statism, btw, can be measured. in dollars and soldiers and bombs. private prison systems which then make justice more private can be measured, too, in number of prisoners versus population
my personal problem with any US libertarian is thus: you do help to shape a system... while washing your hands about consequences. limited liability squared
Well, I'm mobile now so this will be short.
Yes we influence. No, privately run prisons are a manifestation of cronyism and we are not hypocrites for voting for LESS crony statism.
This is easy: when your market share depends on your lobbying, that is not capitalism. That is force. Force is what we have now, not capitalism.
and what is the proper libertarian response to force? is there any? except the "arm yourself", which is not sufficient in many cases?
You really haven't done much reading or studying have you?
Collective security does NOT require surrendering your rights to a "government".
TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.
A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another; there being nothing more evident, than that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection, unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty. [here Locke refers to a deity]
But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another's pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our's. Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
Sec. 7. And that all men may be restrained from invading others rights, and from doing hurt to one another, and the law of nature be observed, which willeth the peace and preservation of all mankind, the execution of the law of nature is, in that state, put into every man's hands, whereby every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree, as may hinder its violation: for the law of nature would, as all other laws that concern men in this world 'be in vain, if there were no body that in the state of nature had a power to execute that law, and thereby preserve the innocent and restrain offenders. And if any one in the state of nature may punish another for any evil he has done, every one may do so: for in that state of perfect equality, where naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction of one over another, what any may do in prosecution of that law, every one must needs have a right to do.
well, thanks. is it... libertarian? in the anarcho-liberal sense that so many here follow? you know, base on voluntarysm only
because again, it sound very good, but here:
"...all men may be restrained from invading others rights, and from doing hurt to one another"
who does this restraining, which imho is an euphemism for the use of force? I see here a lot of "state of liberty" and "state of nature"... is there a state, period, in all this?
and where is the "state of equality" if my ship has twenty guns and the gentlemen on the other ship have forty?
how would this "collective security" look like? a non-state, non-public navy? and so we come back to commercial security and... mercenaries
Witin power inherently lies the possibility of abuse. When power is centralized, kept concentrated, the scope of that abuses increases exponentially.
Let's do a body count. Every petty bandit, organized pirate fleet, and aspiring local warlord versus....The 20th Century. Whose plunder was more rapacious and insidious, Al Capone or Uncle Sam?
The anarcho-capitalist/voluntaryist ideology is not utopian. Nobody has ever claimed it to be. The problem critics have, is that when nearly every problem facing our world can be attributed to The State, they associate voluntaryism as utopian because they ultimately have only doubt as argument against it. When there is a question of whether power is better centralized or decentralized, history has proven the later has a lower body count, among other crimes. That simple concept is lost on just about every critic.
"The anarcho-capitalist/voluntaryist ideology is not utopian" an assertion lacking proof, so far
my criticism, spread over several comments here reflecting the one criticism from the author of the article, is that US Libertarians do help shape this very state they abhor... by application of pressure versus only one part of the problem
Al Capone, the British East India Company and Uncle Sam (or european polities, in my case) all use/used force
And Anarcho-Capitalist/Voluntarist/Libertarian ideology has little answer, or worse, evasive answers to force (or territory/jurisdiction). Except vague well-wishing. so imho it's a lop-sided ideology
with, specifically, an "American Capitalism" as a result of various pressures including Libertarian ones that, as the author asserts, "No Longer Serves Society"
If McDonalds tried to coerse people tomorrow, it would be shuttered a few days after. Monsanto would be barking in the wind unable to shutdown any competition without The State. Pharmaceutical companies, or any company trying to use patent law as a sword to cleave apart competitors would be non-existent were it not for The State. Banks would have vanished into insolvency, were The State absent. Do you not understand yet?
Voluntaryists argue that THE SCOPE AND DEGREE of damage wrought is dramatically less sans The State. The kind of damage corporations committ is only possible through using the machinery of The State--which exists because of an ignorant but tacit consent of the broader population. The degree of force required to repell a highwayman, or even an aspiring local warlord is trivial compared to the armies fielded by The State. The myth of the benevolent state needs to be destoryed, because like the non-secular religions before it, is one of the few mechanisms which can cause (through passivity) otherwise good people to contribute to monumental horrors. If you need citation--see: all of modern history.
ok, then I'll put my statist hat and ask: how can you even allow private prisons? aren't you aware of the consequences? of the private interests there that result in lobbyism, and then, with advancing corruption... cronysm?
*Sigh* "Private" coersion can never reach the depths or degree of "Public" coersion, because of belief. McDonalds straddles the world, yet if tomorrow it began attempting to compel people to do anything at all--that corporation would crumble in days. The State is still flourishing upon the myth of the "social contract" and to a degree has the tacit, if ignorant consent of most of the population the world over. Nearly all "private" abuses are enabled entirely through utilization of State power where they would not otherwise be possible. When you put your big-boy pants on and pay a fucking modicum of attention, this becomes obvious.
@ghordius,
you're mistaken about a number of things
libertarian (aka anarcho-capitalist)
not at all the same, you should understand the difference if you're going to attempt to talk about such things. libertarians believe in limited government. anarchists believe in no goverement. very different.
"problem is, capitalism requires some kind of protection for property rights, and there has never been (yet) any alternative to some kind of state, order, whatever"
incorrect. people are capable of protecting their own property, either themselves, or with private security companies and/or insurace companies. gun laws and the oppressiveness of the state prevent private citizens from defending their own property.
your sad, defeatist attitude of, well, if the government doesn't do it for us then it can't be done, is loser-talk.
"in this, the libertarian is a kind of purist that blocks everything and criticizes everything... without ever putting any skin in the broader game"
what is this "broader game" that you're talking about? are you suggesting i should get involved in politics in some way? i'm not interested in participating in your corrupt broken system. if that's your thing, go for it, just leave me out of it. i'm content to live my life in peace and i want no part of it.
"on the other side, libertarians invariably side with individual and private interests... regardless, dogmatically and unblinkingly, be them corporations or oligarchs"
ghordius, i notice that you've said a lot of words but absolutely refused to address the primary point that i made in my post that you replied to: that the abuses committed by the oligarchs / corporatists / cronyists are enabled by the granting of priveleges by the government. without that government privelege, that power to abuse goes away.
no, it's not the same... and yet it's nicely mixed up. even here, people use interchagebly the no-state and the limited-state arguments
people are capable of protecting... what? if we get to the point where global security consists in a dozen companies with legions of mercenaries, power is then in the hands of those companies
already now the US uses as much mercenaries as soldiers, doesn't it? already now most conflicts involve more mercenaries then soldiers
this is the main problem of your position: the belief that without state influence, people are all nice little hobbits in the shire. that's not historical at all
in fact, the ancient term oligarch started with the description of private people that had their private fortresses and private armies that got deployed for private reasons
the argument of "without that government privelege, that power to abuse goes away" is only half-correct. it's it is diminuished, not goes away
even in your argumentation, you go back to a mixture of little-state and no-state arguments, using the no-state = no-power = no-violence = no-assholes = no-war fallacy
part two of my rant, continued
roberts here claims, imho, that you do shape what as end-result can be called "American Capitalism". not fully, but part of it. you are part of the equation, you are partly responsible for the end-result
if I would not sympathize with part of your issues, I'd side with those who would call you the Party of The Oligarchs
if your lop-sided ideology would be adopted in the whole world, we'd have the power vacuum left by all "statist" institutions filled out by private power
no state armies... but private mercenaries. no states, no countries, but megacorporations with private courts ruling out what justice is, with private police - pardon - "security" forces that would of course use the private US prison establishment that you already helped to get into shape
some of your preferred solutions are already in place... while you don't own up to them because... well, purism, an easy way to wash your hands from the partial results
you gaze with one eye... and keep the other firmly shut. and you have a very lopsided view on history, thinking that you haven't had a go up to now
which is wrong. in the British Empire, your views were already applied, once. one sterling example is the British East India Company
a fully orthodox application of libertarianism. a private company, with a private army and a private navy, exercising a private rule and justice over territories
all very... voluntary. except for those in India that had to cope with the other end of this stick, but they did not count
this is the kind of world that you help foster. neo-feudalism has it's support... by you. oligarchs have their support... by you. rule by corporations has it's support... by you
rule through money and private courts has it's support... by you. a support best seen when you help to block any "statist" trying to regulate private interests... regardless
own up to the end results of your influence. "American Capitalism" is also shaped by you, your influence is undeniable... and yet you deny it and wash your hands from it
The British East India Company received a charter, a license to operate from the state, in this case Queen Elizabeth.
fully correct. would that Company have been better if it was a fully pirate outfit? meaning that the perfect and orthodox libertarian corporation is pure piracy, pure profit through "might makes right"? the real question is redress. if any outfit of profit-seeking gentlemen stop my ship and takes my cargo... where do I seek redress? was it my fault for not being better armed? at which point, is it ok if I am the one taking the cargo from those gentlemen? my point is simple: if libertarianism is about the individual... what happens when other individuals band together against this individual?
there is the world of the US mainland, sheltered by many influences, and incapsulated in a global empire. the eye in the storm, at it's calmest in a rural village far from everything. like The Shire of the Hobbits. and then... there is where things get a bit more complicated, the rest of the world. I see your philosophy as well adapted to the eye in the storm... only
Lol...perhaps you should have hired some Hobbits to guard your cargo ;-)
Bingo. Nice supplement to PCR on the libertarian neo-liberal horror perpetrated upon the world. Next up: TPP and all its monster children to formalize the inevitable result of a corporate NWO. Well done, useful libertarians! Your Masters thank you with a pat on the back and a push into the trenches where you can join in celebration of your "free markets."
What? TTP is an extralegislative document that would be so much scribbling were The State not going to enforce it. You're blaming the horror that is the TPP, a reality only achievable through State enforcement, on "free markets"? Are you fucking stupid?
It's the obvious and foreseen by all (except the libertarians) end result of the "deregulation" that libertarians played inexhaustible cheerleaders for. And don't forget the wondrous Galt!!
Just as PCR calls it: You assholes played useful idiots for the fucking private pirates that everybody else saw plain as day would be the result of the infantile idealism driving your calls to "free" markets . . . how that played into this shit is obvious to everybody but you.
Sorry, I still can't remember I have to be more clear with you people! But I was simply punctuating PCR and Ghordio's string of development, so perhaps you should've paid attention.
Having no institutional power representing the collective to hold unrestrained private economic powers in check is an insane fantasy.
Even the socialists make better sense.
So you got what you were cheerleading for, "free" markets. Your services were vital. Mises and Hayek, too.
Neoliberalism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
When ill, is it better to cure the disease or merely treat symptoms? I do give a fuck about what harm corporations do--I just argue that they wouldn't be possible without using The State as a vehicle! Don't you get it? The State, what you seek for protection, is THE VERY FUCKING THING that the corporations use against you! I'll bullet point it for you.
1. You legitimize the monopoly powers of The State
2. Corporations have significantly more access and influence to The State.
3. The State sets up rules which favor Corporations and disadvantage you because Corporations have greater influence than you do.
4. You life fucking sucks now, and you bleat and whine to The State to save you from Corporations.
5. The State doesn't give a flying fuck what you think, because you hold it as an inviolable institution and therefore will never challenge its abuses in any meaningful way.
Did I miss something?
Furthermore, there is nothing remotely free market about anything in the US. Get a grip.
Well, you keep missing what the rest of us accept for the obvious, which is the inevitable reality that the collective will always--hopefully, until the alternative dystopia is imposed--band together to protect itself from the all the more inevitable excesses of the private pirates and warlords that will otherwise rule by their own arbitrary force . . . with a set of rules that need not ever please anyone except them whats got the gold.
The outright purchase of this governing institutional system we suffer now fails to illustrate for you the truth of that point, but merely puts some scented oil in your hand for the infantile maturbatory fantasy of a world without government where this shit wouldn't have happened quicker and easier. Hell, it never would have happened at all as you imagine it. You don't seem to recall your history, either, because it's all right there.
Yeah, okay, y'all got misused. Boohoo, how could the oligarchs financing such crazy shit from the shadows just fuck you in the face and leave you like that having to bear much of the blame for the full consensual service you delivered? Cuz you were only in it for love?! Free markets, cutting loose the free shit army, definitely cutting taxes on the rich and their corporations, reforming government at least to stop interfering in business, privatizing everything under the sun . . . it all sounded good to you! Now we were getting somewhere! Too bad it didn't end up being where you thought.
Blindly cheerleading for the wrong shit at the wrong time for the wrong people rightly saddles you--and only you--with an appropriate share of your own very special blame.
Will y'all ever drop the precious fantasy that you imagine protecting you--because you never argued for anything but your perfect world and your ideas just didn't turn out that way--and just man up to accept your blame here in the real world?
People once thought life without a Feudal Lord was fantasy too--far longer than we've lived without them. You make no arguments, other than doubt. You embrace a monlithic, leviathan warlord out of fear for hypothetical tyrants a fraction of what present is. Good luck petitioning your secular God to save you when it is, in fact, the very instrument of your slavery and misfortune. If my goals of diversifying power are a pipe-dream, it is only because of people like you who plead for false gods to spare them from the disasters that they create.
Sums it up as well as anything. I prefer that the warlord I suffer have a formal--albeit currently unrecognized--legal recourse process.
Alternatively the current oligarchs who would retain their crony-capitalist (under your reckoning, I would guess) riches will retain their power under your theory . . . unless you're arguing for everyone to be busted to zero for a start-over.
Of course, that would make you a communist, so we never hear about that fundamental assumption of original level playing field necessary to bring the libertarian fantasy into a coherent analysis of existing reality and a path forward into that promised land.
Sorry for being so freely offensive in tone previously, btw. Tough stretch of major work hours. Your graceful forbearance appreciated.
Its called 'Political Economy'. There has never been a free market and there never will be. All markets are regulated, controlled and manipulated. In fact some markets would not exist without a supporting government framework. It is, therefore, impossible to separate the 'State' from the economic system. That is why we have product standards, regulation, anti trust, etc. to mitigate and manage the extremes and excesses of the system. Over the years we have been duped into the removal of all of our safeguards - politicians and regulators are owned by those exploiting the system for their own gain at the expense of the rest of the community.
+1 as such, you could even count "the company", in it's current US form, as a state-sponsored form of discrimination of the individual. because "the company"... enjoys legal protection from complete liability per definition. hence the label "limited liability". but "the company" enjoys also US libertarian support for being private, i.e. more worthy then the dreaded "state". up to the point that by now, any "the company" is more of a favoured political actor then the individual, up to the point that it enjoys more "human" rights... then the individual. another misapplication of lop-sided libertarian attitudes, best seen in "companies are human, too, and my friends" (misquoted on purpose)
Riiight. So tell me, is the FDA not the most anti-competative, ineffective, and inflitrated agency? Oh wait, maybe you're refering to the SEC, they're truely noble warriors for the prolietariate. I guess I should also have a moment of silence for the honorable Justice Department, which protects us all from the ravages of militant, assault rifle bearing, drug cartels. Do I need to continue?
Swirl your alphabet soup alittle more and tell me exactly which of those fucking agencies is not a tool for your serfdom. Don't be such a fucking child. I am so sick of this preferance to the "Devil you know" bullshit despite the fact that your obvious Stockholm Syndrome makes your basis for rational judgement null and void.
part three of my rant, continued
""...but he is dead wrong about capitalism; he mistakes corporatism for capitalism over and over again, and he believes in the legitimacy of the state" "
corporativism has two aspects/meanings. one was applied by Mussolini's fascists, and does not count, here, fascists (classic) being anti-liberal, and so anti-libertarian. there, "corporations" were state-controlled medieval-guild-like bundles of interests, a form of regulation
the other is... when corporations - in the sense of private firms, i.e. private interests - win. over the state. regardless. always
and this phenomenon of corporativism is actively and fully endorsed by libertarianism... through the back door of actively hemming every state activity
libertarianism, in it's current US main shape... fosters corporativism in it's current US main shape
"no human being has legitimate authority to rule over any other human being through force; if it's not voluntary, it's not right"
it's a worthy tenet. sounds good, is good. the problem is that as a tenet for human affairs, it's incomplete
there is a lot of things that humans are willing or might do if forced by circumstances that are voluntary... and yet distasteful
selling yourself or your children to slavery, for example, is voluntary, too
predatory contracts on parties that can't say no to them , for example, are voluntary, too
a world where humans are forced in two categories, the poor and powerless vs the rich and powerful... is ok for libertarianism in it's purest form
a company that literally owns it's employees, which have to buy at the company shops and live the company way... is voluntary, too, if there is no other option around
an ideology that is fine for the owner of a farm far, far away from all the messy human problems of more densely populated areas... can't be properly applied to the whole world
the ideology as such is fine... it's application on all aspects of humanity is not
again, your ideology is applied. not fully, but in part. you are part of the problem, and you don't own your shit
a form of the "tragedy of the commons" for itself, the main human problem you completely deny... to the glee of all kind of globalists
over and over again you keep talking about libertarianism. as i mentioned previously, i'm not a libertarian, and i believe it's a mistake for any state to exist, at all. i will therefore not speak on behalf of libertarians.
i would describe myself as a voluntaryist, i believe all human interaction should be voluntary. any interaction involving violence or threat of violence is aggression, and i will oppose it.
that includes the action of the state, which is nothing more than a gang with a monopoly on violence within a particular geographic area.
you seem to be saying above that my beliefs are invalid unless i can come up with a solution to all your problems. well, i'm not interested in trying to do that, even if i could. be a big boy, grow up, and sort out your own issues. be aware, be creative, and respect others, and you will be able to do it, without the need for a state.
and btw selling children into slavery is not voluntary as you claim, completely false, people are not property.
Back in the day, before cell phones, before even phone cards, back when a long distance call would take a couple bucks in change...
I got stranded in Chicago's Airport. (Whole bunch of stuff happened from the flight from Commiefornia to Flawed-duh.)
Got on a payphone in Chicago and dialed for the operator to make a collect call to my wife to let her know I'd be very late and she had no need to drive the hundred or so miles to Pensacola (through very dark woods). Her home town was very small. At the time I was active as a Volunteer EMT for the County all volunteer ambulance.
Chicago operator dials the hometown operator. The operator says 'Hello?', Chicago Operator "I have a collect call from Chicago.' Me: "Hey, Terri, could you tell Debbie that I'm not coming in until tomorrow?' Terri: "I think I saw her at her mother's house, I'll walk over on my break." Chicago Operator: "You two know each other?!!" Terri: "Yeah, that's [my name] He helped me pull a kid out of the wheels of a truck last week." Terri: "[My name], don't you worry, I'll let her know. What the hell are you doing in Chicago?!" Me: "Plane had a flat or something."
No charge was levied for the call.
Oh, Port St Joe, Florida, Gulf County Volunteer Ambulance Squad.
and those who screamed "capitalism" will have ALL the wealth.
The fools who made it happen will have nothing.
They will not realize it until they are in gulag for being revolutiionary.
Go watch Fox.
The .001% have the wealth that matters. That is the whole point.
The 1% are taxed and regulated into submission or "wealth stashing". The crusade vs. wealth stashers has been stepped up quite a bit. Not the worst problem in the world to have until they decide to "make an example of you".
The top 5% to .01% can create something, especially jobs. But GOVT has too many hands in their pockets. The .001% create nothing but strife.
Now the body of one soul I adore wants to die
You have always told me you'd not live past 25
I say stay long enough to repay all who cause strife
Capitalism main drive is greed? Desire of prosperity? So why the fuck oligarchy is something wrong? Buy judges, buy cops, buy government - DO ANYTHING!!! - if it lead you to profit! Growth! Greed make you grow! Eat weakened - became bigger or someone will eat them before you and ... maybe someday you became enough weak to be eated by another greedy animal... It's race that lead to oligarchy naturally.
When I sit on kitchen in 2008 and feed my daughter i start TV. Turn to our version of MTV. And there I see hip-hop singer "50 Cent" and there it was his album or maybe song - "get rich or die trying" . Hell, this spell is the spirit of those who win the race. No moral - it lead you to bottom! No fucking restrictions - remove them with bulldozer. Thats what you see. That's what was here in Russia.
Humanity evolve. From stone age to bronze then metal era. From slavery to medieval from medieval to capitalism.
From survival with wild nature to survival in hostile barbaric neighbors.
Oligarchy = evoluated capitalism of Golden fever days.
May be time to next evolution step came in our days???
Its is pretty obvious in the message. Equating capitalism with something evil aka "unbridled greed". In the entire message there is no lesser or benign form of capitalism, just one that makes our circumstances more dire over the long term.
Even though a lemonade stand is an example of capitalism, it is all to be scorned because capitalism is by its very nature EVIL.
The underlying, subliminal message is horseshit, although I can't disagree with how its worked out between Uncle Fraud and large corporate interests.
Apple started in somebodies garage if I'm not mistaken but according to this article that type of entreprenueurial spirit must be suppressed otherwise it becomes "unbridled greed".
The article doesn't mention how many startups go belly up, which is also part of the capitalist equation. There is a titanic amount of risk in starting a business. Of course that was never hinted at in the article.
A new era of Clinton Communism should take care of all the pesky little problems. Vote Hillery 2016.
Unadulterated Capitalism conducted on a strictly voluntary basis works, and has always worked, just fine......
true. crony/politico/capitalism, well we get this type od shit, er actions.
A Lunatic: Unadulterated Capitalism conducted on a strictly voluntary basis works, just fine.
Could you supply some examples? Dates? And why and how they were ‘voluntarily’ fine.
Farmers markets, flea markets, Craig’s List , E-bay, Overstock.com, even Amazon and others….
These are primarily examples of what economic theory terms market economies, which may be conducted without capital (e.g. via barter or trade); capitalism employs debt financing, inventory holding or long distance importation and financial interest. Most of what ZHers think of as capitalism is an earlier stage of economic development pre-imperial and pre-colonial-exploitation. It's important to distinguish the two, but rarely done. Economic "evils" begin and end with technical capitalism (vs market or barter or peasant or domestic modes of economy)--but there is no hope of turning back the clock to these purer economic forms without wading thru total collapse. This would be PCRs point (missed by many here) as well as a fond hope of some ZHers.
The obvious problem is that the law itself is a product being bought and sold. It's not "capitalism" or "libertarian" that is the cause - it is command-and-control, ever-expanding government that can do nothing well.
For what all that dirty actions? For "natural" needs - pursuit of greed, desire of prosperity. People desire to be rich. May be because they grow up in such society.
The difference between joules out and joules in is decreasing. That's what capitalism has to fax, if it can.
Sure, because there are fewer and fewer horses pulling the wagon. The ones that are still pulling are looking behind them and going, why the fuck should I pull when I could sit in the wagon with the rest of the horses. Pretty soon the wagon stops moving. Thats our eCONomy in a nutshell.
That's DEMOCRACY in a nutshell. Lazy, stupid people have the same vote as smart, hard-working people who can defer gratification to benefit themselves and society. All democracies end this way. It is inherent in the system of government.
So, the world isn't perfect. The world doesn't operate according to idealistic ideologies, which is why libertarianism, anarchism, communism don't work.
Instead of working to improve democracy with all its warts, it's better to chuck it and head straight into, what? Anarchy? Authoritarianism?
"Effective capitalism implies multiple mutual ergasms."
-Manthong
Why choose democracy to improve? Why not something else?
i don't really care how you think the world operates, anarchy works just fine for me, it's how i live my life.
if you prefer to lick the boots of your government masters and live your life as a slave rather than a free man, go for it, it's not my thing though.
Yes, it is better to chuck it and head straight BACK into a Constitutional Republic. To our Founding Fathers, "democracy" was a dirty word. In a democracy, a slovenly, intellectually lacking, low info majority can vote away the God given basic human rights of the minority. Not so in a Republic. The fact that you and so many others use that filthy word to describe this country shows how far we have fallen. But it's NOT TOO LATE! Watch this video, watch it again, watch all the other parts, spread it far and wide. Our only hope is to restore the Republic and the Constitution.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qszo8u1m9ZQ
Booyah!!! Tyler, please do a thread about democracy vs. Republic featuring Red Beckman. There is nothing more important.
"Democracy is the road to socialism." -Marx
"The goal of socialism is communism." -Lenin
Here is the next part:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=keH0AeszJyk&itct=CBwQpDAYACITCNOIwOWZhsoCF...
You mean Crony Capitalism, hand-in-hand with Central Banking and the Socio-Fascism of modern American politiks.
All hail the Kleptoligarchy! All hail the New Rome! Why do you think Republicrats lie down with Demicans?
Because they are all government worshippers. Its a religion now. Government before all else!!!
+10,000! Here is the winner. Not just he survival of GOVT at all costs, but it's continuing expansion under the guise of "serving the electorate" at all costs.
When the electorate no longer buys it, increasing the police state protects GOVT to continue it's practices.
Roberts is right on the money with this assessment.
Among the capitalist themselves and their shills among the libertarian ideologues
Paul Craig Roberts has a new meme. Libertarianism killed America. That's right. Neocon foreign policy? Libertarians. 2008 financial crisis. Courtesy of libertarians. Bank bailouts and TARP? You guessed it. Because we all know Bail Out All Large Corporations At Taxpayer Expense is the main commandment of libertarianism. Offshoring US jobs? That's right. Libertarians did that too. H-1B visas? You guessed it. Libertarian scheme.
Unbeknownst to the entire US electorate, the entire demican and republocrat party apparatuses controlling both houses of Congress, the entire federal judiciary and the US presidency since the last Whig saw office it's actually LIBERTARIANS who have secretly detonated the economy with their evil "no government" scheme via that evil bulwark of libertarianism, the Federal Reserve Bank.
Because, as we all know... government in the US has never neen smaller or less powerful than it is now. Why... the US is virtually in a state of complete anarchy thanks to the evil machinations of those sick twisted libertarians.
SMFH.
PCR... time to hang it up dad. You've lost the plot bigtime.
No, libertarianism didn't kill America. Crony capitalism cum oligarchy killed America. Libertariansim was the snake oil sold to millions of common citizens to support policy that was against their own self-interests, but that was in the interest of the pirate oligarchs.
When you cripple the ability of the gummint to reign in Wall St bankster pirates, you get bail outs, bubbles, ZIRP, etc, because you enable the Wall St bankster pirates to CONTROL the damn gummint.
If you want to reign in the criminal Wall St bankster pirates, how do you propose to do that? Chanting freemarketfreemarketfreemarketHayekHayekHayek over and over again not only isn't going to stop the Wall St bankster pirates...it empowers them.
Yeah, more power to the Wall St bankster pirates! Libertarianism is teh awesomest.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/power-principle/
The Power Principle
Civilization necessarily operates as organized crime, because the central controls are the murder systems. The best organized gangs of criminals publicly promote any "ism" that may serve their interests.
In that sense, I think two beers is correct:
Similarly so for fascism, communism, etc., and the War on Drugs, and the War on Terror, etc.!
What is most difficult, for anyone living INSIDE the currently established sociopolitical systems, is to recognize any coherent OVERVIEW that there must necessarily be some death control systems, with the murder systems as the most extreme forms of those, while natural selection pressures have driven artificial selection systems to become most socially successful by becoming as deceitful and treacherous as possible, which then became the foundation for political economy to become based upon vicious spirals of POLITICAL FUNDING ENFORCING FRAUDS.
In that context, Roberts, as is typically the case with almost all Zero Hedge content, provides superficially correct analysis. The reasons for how and why our political problems are so serious, and automatically getting worse at an exponential rate, are that human intelligence has internalized and applied natural selection pressures through artificial selection systems that became based on the history of successful warfare backing up deceits with destruction, morphing to become the history of successful finance based upon enforcing frauds.
All of that traces back to the basic facts that there are, and must be, some death control systems, which in turn back up the debt controls, so that everything else the ends up being thereby controlled in a cascade of consequences, such that governments become the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals. Therefore, any realistic resolutions of the real problems would require better organized crime operating better death control systems.
HOWEVER, FACTS DO NOT MATTER TO SYSTEMS BASED ON LEGALIZED LIES BACKED BY LEGALIZED VIOLENCE ... SINCE EVERYTHING THROUGHOUT THE POLITICAL ECONOMY IS OPERATED BY THE BEST AVAILABLE PROFESSIONAL HYPOCRITES, WHO OPERATE BY PROMOTING SYSTEMS BASED UPON BEING ABLE TO ENFORCE FRAUDS, CIVILIZATION BECAME TERMINALLY SICK AND INSANE.
Therefore, the main thing that happens when one learns more about any politics is the more one knows, the worse that gets. Furthermore, the "bigger picture" one looks at, and the longer term consequences one thinks about in that "bigger picture," the WORSE the overall "bigger picture" tends to look!
Tragically, the superficially correct content typically presented on Zero Hedge tends to reinforce that overall conclusion. Roberts expresses the problems in mostly psychological terms: "Unbridled greed, short-term in nature, will continue to drive America into the ground." However, all that psychology ought to be perceived as developing with the evolutionary ecology contexts.
What America, as well as the rest of the world, actually needs to do is develop better death control systems, with better murder systems as the central core to those. However, I am not aware of any publicly significant "isms," (and certainly NOT Libertarianism) that adequately do that, due to the degree to which the biggest bullies' bullshit world views have so totally dominated civilization so much, for so long, that none of the publicly recognized "isms" are not also aspects and facets of that overall bullshit.
@RadMar
aren't you a little pessimistic in your vision? if population would blindly followed the inevitability of the system demise the earth would get depopulated pretty soon (in geological sense) while i tend to believe there must be a better way to general earth survival than just elites eliminating the rest of us for the sake of any 100+ years old document.
maybe it is just the right time to start thinking about the new idea how to develop the world for the people - it would need to find a way of creating elites that would not use greed/fear as the most important tools.
happy new year to you and all zh-ers!
Woj - Rad is right about death control systems but why not have a goal like Operation Eternity? Transforming our consciessness or simply freeing it from natural ultimate death is a form of death control. Goal setting matters. None of us want to get old, shit our pants, lose our minds then die so its a goal we can all easily agree on. And we have all felt the pain of losing loved ones.
The Brain Inititiative by the US government is on the right track with this but it should be promoted, social media launched to connect a lot of thinkers so it becomes an inclusive process. Then every swinging dick of every race or class status has a huge incentive to set aside basic human nut gathering instincts.
I dont want to live here forvever either no matter how pleasant, I would get bored, to travel in between dimensions to other places it cant be done using space ships. Travel as an energy sentient being and if you want to explore a planet or be a human for a day so to speak you transform energy back into matter.
I really cant watch alien invastion movies anymore it is ridiculous. And for all we know advanced beings that are already doing this we call or used to call gods may just be playing what they consider funny games to amuse themselves, attempt to learn a very tiny fraction of something new by accelerating or decelerating rates of evolution in an endless continuum or perhaps to avoid boredom for a flash in existence.
Either way, the current struggle for monarchy is such a massive waste of time at this point so.close to the end of human evolution. I will say one thing, at least global leadership is pushing in funding quantum physics and other advanced sciences, we could really be just stuck with total intellectual retards. Just too much stick being used and no global goal as I suggested.
Amen to that "too much stick being used." The currently established ruling classes appear to have no goal other than attempting to exercise ever more control, through "too much stick being used," despite those sticks having become weapons of mass destruction.
I refer the ways that energy is conserved as being solutions to the "equation of continuation." In that context, the intense paradoxes have developed that surviving through the history of warfare became based on being as deceitful and treacherous as possible, which morphed to become the current systems based upon enforcing frauds, which never stop those frauds from still being false. Therefore, the artificial selection systems operated by human beings have ended up being driven by natural selection pressures to become based on the maximum possible lies, with the result that there is almost nothing but the core of organized crime (bankster controlled governments), surrounded by layers of controlled opposition, ALL OF WHICH ARE OPERATED BY THE BEST AVAILABLE PROFESSIONAL HYPOCRITES.
Meanwhile, the intense paradoxes, manifesting as set of consistent contradictions, continue to develop wider and WIDER Grand Canyon Chasms between progress in physical science, without progress in political science, due to the degree that ALL publicly significant institutions are operated by professional hypocrites, whose hypocrisies are automatically getting worse faster, in proportion to the degree that there is exponential progress in physical science, BUT, channeled through oxymoronic scientific dictatorships that deliberately ignore and misunderstand everything they are really doing, since the personal career successfulness of those doing that depended upon them having been the best available professional hypocrites.
Since all the dominate social systems are based upon ENFORCING FRAUDS, developing any better solutions to the "equation of continuation" are politically impossible, to the degree that almost everyone who is socially successful upon that basis will continue to deliberately deny and ignore those FACTS.
"American Capitalism" is ALREADY DEAD, because the public "money" supply being made out of nothing as debts was NEGATIVE CAPITAL which killed that. However, merely understanding those central social facts does almost nothing, since the lives of people continue to be controlled by that money. The best available professional hypocrites continue getting paid to become better hypocrites, and/or recruit the next crop of professional hypocrites to operate the established sociopolitical systems, which drives their global goals to become more and more psychotically INSANE!
I WISH that I could find enough good grounds to be more optimistic, WojtekSz, however, it seems to me that pessimists have all the rational evidence and logical arguments on their side. While I certainly AGREE that it would be better if the ruling classes would not use greed/fear as the most important tools of social control, at the present time, since the established systems are already almost totally based on POLITICAL FUNDING ENFORCING FRAUDS, and therefore are operated by the best available professional hypocrites, who continue being the most socially successful on that basis in every short to medium increment, I see no good grounds to expect that tragic trajectory not to continue to get worse, faster, for the foreseeable future in the longer term.
Of course, one can have some reasonable hope that for older, richer, people living inside of the established systems, they may well die before the accumulating consequences of strip-mining the planet hit home. However, for younger, poorer people, I do not see how they could have any reasonable hopes regarding their future whatsoever, and even more so for future generations that are not yet born. Of course, one can still maintain irrational hopes, based on transcendental hope. I have no doubt that there are plenty of creative alternatives, which could theoretically be assembled into better overall systems. However, in the real world, the established systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, ARE getting worse, faster, while INSIDE those entrenched systems, the best professional hypocrites continue to become more wealthy and politically powerful.
American Capitalism HAS ALREADY BEEN DESTROYED BY THE NEGATIVE CAPITAL OF "MONEY" MADE OUT OF NOTHING AS DEBTS ... WHILE THOSE BENEFITING FROM OPERATING INSIDE THOSE SYSTEMS CONTINUE TO GET EVEN MORE WEALTHY, AND THEREFORE, EVEN MORE ABLE TO DOMINATE POLITICAL FUNDING, WHICH IS DRIVING EVER WORSENING VICIOUS SPIRALS OF CRAZY CORRUPTION ...
Civilization necessarily operates as organized crime, because the central controls are the murder systems. The best organized gangs of criminals publicly promote any "ism" that may serve their interests.
"Gangland." A natural human trait that many default too. Makes you wonder why many hate MS13, Crips, Bloods, Jets or Sharks, they're just doing what comes natural, aren't they?
Yes, barroter. However, relatively speaking ALL of the other organized criminal gangs combined are TRIVIAL compared to the banksters that have captured control over governments, so that the public powers of those governments are effectively the goons that work for those banksters. The supreme achievement of organized crime was to legalize the privilege of counterfeiting the public "money" supplies out of nothing as debts for everyone else, while the taxation and legal tender laws forced everyone else to live inside of those triumphant runaway frauds, being thereby enforced by governments!
At the present time, there is no good language available, which is generally understood, to use to communicate the nature of the political problems that develop due to the best organized gangs of criminals, operating through Deep State Shadow Governments, gaining almost total control over the public government, while the schools and mass media operate to reinforce the ways that the vast majority of people not understanding that, but rather, continuing to not want to understand that.
"Gangland" IS a natural human trait that necessarily follows from the degree to which we perceive and define human beings as separate from their environment and each other. As soon as engaged in that SUBTRACTION, then human beings necessarily live as GANGS OF ROBBERS. The history of civilization becomes based on warfare, which is organized crime operating on larger and larger scales. The surviving War Kings create the powers of sovereign states, while the Fraud Kings, the banksters, capture control over the powers of those states by continuing to apply the methods of organized crime through the political processes ... Until ending up with the biggest banks becoming the new royalty, which are deemed too big to fail, and too big to jail, etc. ...
Everything ends up becoming more and more inverted and perverted by the public powers of governments serving the interests of a runaway fascist plutocracy juggernaut, where the main source of "wealth" of that oligarchy of plutocrats is the ability to create the public "money" supply out of nothing as debts, which situation automatically becomes WORSE AND WORSE VICIOUS SPIRALS OF POLITICAL FUNDING ENFORCING FRAUDS ... while it is politically impossible to do anything from inside those systems to stop that!
Civilization operates as fractal patterns of organized crime, within which context the lower level organized crime gangs are relatively insignificant compared to the higher level organized crime gangs. Indeed, the ways that those systems really work is that those lower level organized crime gangs would have almost no opportunities to operate without the higher level organized crime gangs creating the overall systems that provide those opportunities to the lower level crime gangs.
Two Beers - I pay taxes for the government to protect me not rob me. The snake oil sold was using the concept 'equality'. That had very little to do with the concept of liberty. Pledge of Allegiance: With liberty and justic for all. Didnt see equality mentioned in there. Equality can have its place but you will never get close to it without liberty and justice.
The Fed - exists because of libertarian conniving. Ya can't make this scheisse up. Agreed, PCR needs to at least lay off that holiday imbibing.
No, the Fed exists because it's in the bankster pirates interest to have control of a central bank.
Libertarianism exists because the banskter pirates need an ideology that acts as a smokescreen for their crimes, and gets the suckers to actually beg for a system that gives the bankster pirates even more power.
To be clear: the bankster pirates are not libertarians: They're crony capitalists and corporatists who use an authoritarian govt to enact and enfore their favored policies.
...but, the Wall St banksters give millions of dollars to thinktanks that promote and disseminate libertarianism.
Why? Because they can get people like you who should be a natural enemy of the Wall St banskter pirates to instead oppose the enemies of Wall St and support policy that actually furthers Wall St's ends. They've got you fighting for them and against your own self-interests.
"Thank God we ended Glass-Steagall! It was a gummint regulation and gummint regulation is bad!"
To wit: libertarianism cannot fail; it can only be failed.
Another correct clarification, two beers!
wrong again, two beers.
take away government backing of those wall st bankster pirates that you speak of, and they become powerless. where do you think the power of the banks comes from? is it because they gained wealth by producing goods and services in the free market that people needed? no, of course not! it's because the government has handed them control over the nation's currency and they basically have unlimited power to counterfeit. not to metion huge sums of money in outright handouts and bailouts.
government is a force for empowering evil and evildoers; if you think government is something that limits evildoers rather than empowers them, you are delusional and live in fairytale make-believe land. regardless whether we're talking about bankers, ISIS, the drug war, or many other problems that government imposed violence creates.
Two Beers - So let me get this straight. So if one argues for a limited government, for the concept or liberty one is a pawn of the BIS, the private central bankers?
I agree with the Founders, currency should be public not private. The founder of central banking family heir even boldly stated that those that control the currency decide the rule (laws).
Changing the rules at whim has nothing to do with the concepts of liberty and justice, in fact they are the opposite. The political system has been bought, your not going to get much argument at the dinner table about lobbying from anybody with half a brain or is interested.
Bankers make loans. There is a place for that, its called the marginal utility of debt. They captured the globe with the central bank model. But you dont want them running it, they are not particularly good at it. Shit even Bernanke stated repeatedly Congress had to step up with fiscal policy. Look at the disaster of the EU where monetary policy led the way operating AS the government. If the people have no stake or say they will eventually walk off.
What I want is a set of rules and we all live by them and if not, my government uses the license in violence I pay them for to enforce it. Thats called justice. When Princeton calls our nation an oligarchy you know we have wandered very far away from the concepts of liberty and justice. But right, blame the people that know cartels are horrible for a nation those wascally libertarians!
Dr. Bonzo - I love a lot of PCR's stuff but on your point about blaming libertarians I have to agree.
The arguments for libertarianism is not about no government. It is about smaller government and free will. It has to always be put in check because it is always attempted to be bought by business. That is what corruption is. Checks and balances will fail. Attemptimg better brakes for the bus is mainly all that can be done.
You could describe the economic and political situation in America over the last 100 years in many ways (I prefer "fascist oligarchy"), but capitalism isn't one of them - at least not the free market capitalism the founders bequeathed to us.
When the Fed is price-fixing interest rates and manipulating every asset class in existence while the USG is bailing out bankers (and not prosecuting them) and waging war on brown people everywhere, it's safe to say we don't have anything resembling free markets.
After the government is sufficiently corrupted to give away the power to make the public "money" supply to private banks, then that MAD Money As Debt is actually NEGATIVE CAPITAL, which thereby annihilates "capitalism" and destroys "free markets." After private banks have the power to rig interest rates, or the price of the public "money" supply, because they control issuing the public "money" supply as debts, then they automatically can rig every other market.
On a deeper level, the problem with "capitalism" was that was usually considered in superficial ways, which did not include the history of warfare actually being a "free market in murder." Furthermore, the earlier theories of a democratic republic operating through the rule of law did not have sufficient checks and balances to prevent the best organized gangs of criminals being able to capture control over the public powers of governments, through applying the methods of organized crime to the political processes, such as by bribery and intimidation, as well as assassination of those who could otherwise not be bribed or intimidated.
The original American Money was supposed to be backed by gold and silver, whose value was set by Congress, which could apply the death penalty for those who debased that public money supply. However, what actually happened, step by step, was that the international bankers, as the best organized gangsters, or the banksters, eventually recaptured control over the American Money. The currently established taxation and monetary systems amount to governments enforcing frauds by privately controlled banks, which continues to automatically get worse faster, in every possible way, through the continuing vicious spirals of political funding, which "will continue to drive America into the ground!"
HOWEVER, as I already indicated in my previous reply above, it does no good to then promote bogus "solutions" that would require the political miracles of somehow going backwards to any old-fashioned religions or ideologies. Rather, what we should do is think through the deeper reasons for how and why civilization operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime, in order to then promote more realistic resolutions of those real problems.
"Another serious mistake was the repeal of financial regulation that had made capitalism functional. The New York Banks were behind this egregious error, and they used their bought-and-paid-for Texas US Senator, whom they rewarded with a 7-figure salary and bank vice chairmanship to open the floodgates to amazing debt leverage and financial fraud with the repeal of Glass-Steagall. "
BRIBERY & CORRUPTION are not manifestations of Capitalism.
BRIBERY & CORRUPTION do not serve society.
Bribery and corruption are the inevitable consequence of failing to reign in criminal bankster pirates.
Here's an unorthodox, perhaps even libertarian, thought: use bankruptcy rather than bailouts to impose discipline. Past experience has shown it makes bankers jump out windows and swallow firing shotguns. No .guv required, bankers self-destruct automatically.
Bailouts are the antithesis of "discipline."
Of course failing businesses should be subject to BK. But when the banks run the govt, they set the rules. They don't have to face BK.
And BK can only be implemented in a fair and impartial legal system, subject to laws, ie rules and regulations. And there needs to be a mechanism to enforce it.
As a libertarian, you depise rules and regulations, but human society is impossible without them, complicated interactions like BK moreso
Or, I give you, Somalia.
"As a libertarian, you depise rules and regulations,"
you really dont know what libertarians believe in, do you?
libertarians believe in small government and a system of laws, such as the constitution, that are followed, a rule of law. they do not despise it, they support it.
personally, i think that's a mistake, wishing for a small government is like wishing for a little bit of cancer, the cancer spreads eventually to destroy the host, as we see in the usa.
as an anarchist, i don't despise rules and regulations, either. what i despise is people imposing rules and regulations on others through violence or threat of violence. if a group of people get together and decide volutarily they want to engage in a socialist wealth redistribution scheme amongst themselves, i have no problem with that. but when they try to impose their schemes on people that want nothing to do with it, then they become aggressors who must be stopped from aggressing.
and how do you cope to someone that claims to belong to your voluntaryst group but does not follow the voluntary rules and regulations?
on the other side, what is the correct way to handle someone that does live in the territory of your voluntaryst group but does not want to belong to it?
it sounds very good, what you write. is it... practical, too? or just a fantasy well adapted for not owning up on anything?
"and how do you cope to someone that claims to belong to your voluntaryst group but does not follow the voluntary rules and regulations?"
a reasonable question. when you say "voluntary rules and regulations", what are you referring to? there really only is the non-aggression principle, that's the only rule. don't commit acts of violence against others.
and not sure what you mean by voluntaryist group. you are thinking about the situation in a collective-type way. try thinking of people as individuals. as a voluntaryist, i prefer to engage and do business with others who are similarly voluntaryists and anarchists. people that are honest, respectful, and don't support violence are those who i will support and do business with.
those who are dishonest, disrespectful, and do support violence including the state, are those that i will tend to shun.
"on the other side, what is the correct way to handle someone that does live in the territory of your voluntaryst group but does not want to belong to it?"
if the land is privately owned, then the owner gets to decide who lives there.
if there is some sort of collective ownership agreement, then that agreement should specify what happens in the event of disagreements and how they should be resolved.
"it sounds very good, what you write. is it... practical, too? or just a fantasy well adapted for not owning up on anything?"
not sure what you are asking me to "own up to"? i'm happy to live my life, not impose my will on others, and not have others impose their will on me.
is it practical? i believe it is extremely practical, yes. i believe that there is a huge amount of waste/fraud created by the systems of the state, and that people are much better off putting their wealth into their own communities instead of sending it off to washington for bureaucrats to manage. we will all be much, much, better off in every way once everyone takes ownership of their own lives.
"Bailouts are the antithesis of "discipline."'
"Margin call gentlemen...All accounts to be settled at the end of the day's trading, without exception." - Trading Places
Then what's so damned difficult? Bankruptcy is nothing that fifty State AGs nor myriads more DAs can't handle. But the centralized system you're justifying boils it all down to one corruptible phone call. Garchs love the practical advantages bestowed by central government, but then so do statists, as those advantages also apply to them and their regulations.
"Or, I give you, Somalia."
Perhaps you don't realize how prescient that comment is. Keep up the line of argument for state action (masquerading as an appeal for a fair and impartial legal system), and that's just what we'll end up with. History, not ideology, indicates there won't be an alternative.
Paul Craig Roberts. So I guess moar government is the answer. Yucky capitalism is the problem I guess. Those icky libertarians. What a load of fucking crap. Collectivism then? Is that the prescription you fucking asshat? There are a lot of problems but I can guarantee you that the source is found mostly in more government and the answer in less.
Yes, there are only two possible alternatives: absolute Wall St bankster pirate control of govt, or collectivism, that's it!
You present a very sophisticated and compelling argument.
Well newbie progressive government plant. I can guarantee you that my rant does not imply those two alternatives. Less government does not imply absolute Wall St bankster pirate control of government. In fact quite the opposite. Do you think Goldman has been patiently putting its people forward into government all these years because they thought less government was how thye would come to exert greater influence and extort greater lucre therby? No fucknut, Wall St banksterism and the collectivist build a village meme go together.
You're a size queen, tommy.
It's not the size of the friggin gummint that matters, it's who controls it.
If you take the power out of the people's hands and give it to the oligarchs, they will grow the gummint to their own ends, and they will f%ck you to the ends of the earth. The one thing the Wall St bankster pirates don't want is a functioning democracy, because an educated and politically-engaged populace will perceive that the objectives of the Wall St bankster pirates is antithetical to those who don't suck at the Fed Reserve teat.
De-fang a functioning and responsive gummint - cripple its ability to reign in the Wall St bankster pirates -- and you put the gummint directly in the hands of the Wall St bankster pirates.
Gummint is inherently neutral. All that matters is who controls it.
You don't want the majority of the citizens to control gummint, so you therefore support the oligarchs. You might say you don't support the oligarchs, but your steadfast refusal to oppose them means YOU"RE WITH THEM. Or, more likely, in their employ to publish pro-Wall St posts.
Greenspan suckled at Ayn Rand's teat, and groveled at her feet...what else do you need to know?
Right again, two beers!
Several QUESTIONS:
Who controls the public money supply?
AND, furthermore, HOW, AND WHY?
Rad - Your question is irrelevant. There is no public money supply. It is created and circulated by central banks which are private.
You act as though gov is a tractor and they'll let any ole' sod buster climb on and play with the levers. All evidence to the contrary. If one gets by the many electoral gate keepers and gets elected, they quickly find out that there is a internal machine/clutch that will not allow for any wheely popping. That it's much easier to get in line at the trough to engorge yourself at the Corruption Cafeteria. If we could just get the right people in to gov.....sure.
Government does only one thing and that's accumulate more power over it's citizens. It's very existence is predicated on this simple fact. One thing it is not is neutral. Focusing on the size of gov alone is a narrow view for sure but it's a illogical to imply a large gov is responsive and smaller-unresponsive. Some people conflate laissez-faire capitalism and libertarians. Why I don't know as there are stark differences. laissez-faire was NO gov rules and regulation just local custom.
You suffer from cognitive dissonance.
Wall Street controls government (actually it's International Bankers that control most governments of the world, wish it was just Wall Street) and are considered one and the same. Yet you somehow think a "responsive" gov can regulate that which controls it. Ounce upon a time these International Cosmopolitan Bankers found it more profitable to loan the money for international trade coming and going than simply engaging in trade. These Bankers now wield power through the IBS, World Bank, IMF etc., then to the central banks, then to gov/military and then to Corporations. Each, beginning with the IBS, having power over the next just like gov over the citizens. Each controlling the next with various inverse and converse monetary and human relationships. This general structure is a bit dated but accurate (Prof. C. Quigley).
If you are a reflection of a politically engaged populace, a functioning democracy; then I'd much rather you go back to sleep for your lack of understanding is dangerous.
Two Beers - Your accusing someone of a set of binary choices and no scale but seem to have no problem stating libertarians are all for no governement? That they are led by central bankers? And five people upvoted you? Mixing a truth about reigning in bankers while blaming libertarians seems rather ignorant or misleading.
To Ghordius. Once agreed to a set of laws you use violence to those that break the rules, most often that is simply jail and a time out for reflection and segregation from sociopathic tendencies. The population gets little input in these set of rules from the get go. So when leadership gets corrupt and breaks there own rules imposing violence in changing them at whim that is hypocricy as well as corruption. Do you like hypocrits that dont look in the mirror and because mainly a vagina lottery can change the rules ar whim? I dont, I cant plan a life in such an emviornment.
PCR nails it: libertarians only worry about govt abuse; they are oblivious to private abuse.
Crippling the regulations on private abuse (eg Glass-Steagal) that held Wall St bankster pirates in check for six decades (coinciding with the longest and greatest period of prosperity we've know...hmmm, could there be a connection?) enabled the Wall St bankster pirates to take contol of the govt (once again).
Govt is inherently neither good nor bad. What matters is who controls and enforces the policy. Liberarians are fearful -- no, terrified -- of the common man ("the people") so they relinquish the right to have a functioning govt that is responisive to the people, and gleefully pass political power to their overlord Wall St bankster pirates who are the ones actually controlling the freaky libertarian puppetshow.
Alan Greenspan was a fanatically devout disciple, acolyte, and personal footservant of Ayn Rand. What else do you need to know that your libertarian ideology is little more than a smokescreen for Wall St bankster pirates?
Ah there is the newbie progressive government plant once again promoting the collectivist pro-government screed. Alan Greenspan, though early in his career was an actual student of Rand, came to represent all that is wrong in the world, central control of policy and government influence over the private eceonomy. He became a Big Government man. Government is in fact inherently bad. It does a few good things but in the end it only serves to grab more and more authority to itself. And your knowledge of libertarians looks about as deep as your membership here at Zero Hedge is long. Go back to the New Republic boards or somewhere else where thinking people are absent
Government is an entity comprised of people.
If this government is grabbing "more and more authority to itself" (and there I agree with you), it is the people who control the govt who are grabbing that authority.
I despise the current government: both parties, all three branches of goverment. I despise them because they are almost all pawns of Wall St.
Why you think I'm a plant for people I despise is a bizarre statement I attribute to the inherent internal inconistency of your ideology. Your heart's in the right place: you know the Wall St bankster pirates are raping this country blind, but you've bought into the snakeoil smokescreen that gets people like you to divert the blame away from where blame should go.
So, go ahead and blame the postman, or the vehicle registration clerk, or the food inspector, for the big bad giant government that's stealing your future.
Whatever you do, please don't blame the Wall St bankster pirate goons who pull all the levers of this government. They're your friends.
By defending the goons on Wall St, you're defending their goverment power. If anyone here is a govt plant, it looks like it could be you: you're the one defending the Wall St status quo.
Right again, two beers!
However, the deeper questions address the issues regarding civilization operating according to the principles and methods of organized crime, that have resulted in the currently existing social facts that the best organized gangs of criminals control governments that became the biggest forms of organized crime:
I quote from historian Carroll Quigley:
"... powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching goal, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole ..."
There is NO DOUBT that is what has happened to America, & the world as a whole, increasingly so, for more than a Century. However, the issues then arise about what could be done differently, when it is necessarily the case that money is measurement backed by murder ???
Rad - Currency is a form of energy. Since you discuss energy systems at times I think you also know this. The license I give for violence is to government. Buying the government is a very old tale. We have national policies and use violence for energy. So why in Gods name should we allow a private group to continue to make the rules involving a critical function of energy, especially when it has demonstrated maelovence and beings out the worst in human behavior?
Fine. Be a banker. Make loans to people that can pay it back. Other than that, the entitity I pay for violence to protect me should not be able to be bought by private interests. Private interests are just that. Private. And they are supposed to be regulated especially when the privaledge gets massively abused. But the opposite happened.
Two Beers - Did Greenspan ultimately practiced what he preached? Some priests rape children. Did the bible tell them to do that? Couldnt they have resigned instead of raping them? Did Aristotle tell Greenspan to deregulate the financial industry?
Is this the same capitalism that produced smart phones, stem cell therapy, AI, travel to Asia for $1000 (2015)?
Yeah, there are downsides, but this my be the stupidest article in the history of ZH. Roberts needs to be put out to pasture.
(PS. Capitalism doesn't guarantee anything. Expecially in the short term.)
The government trolls are out in force here in the waning days and hours of the year. How else could there be 3 down votes of such a sensible statement
Considering that Wall St controls the govt, you're really suggesting that there are government employees of Wall St trolling here.
I believe you might be right at that: so many posts here defend the Wall St bankster pirate staus quo, and attack any suggestion that the Wall St bankster pirates and their Fed piggy bank need to be reigned in.
Mr or Ms Beers. You infer a great deal about what I think from things you imagine and that I have not stated. In no way do I support Wall St. Reinstating a Glass Steagal type of law is about the only sensible thing stated in Roberts whiny little bitch of an article. In fact I think what the banks pulled off, and continue to pull off (IOER or billions in free profits to be handed out as bonuses like candy on the back of the country for one thing) is an utter outrage, onbe which no one seems to understand or care about. And I would like to see the Fed ended or at least cut way way back to ONLY being a liquidity provider in crisis, the rest can be done elsewhere. The government suborns the banks power. In my view only by reigning in government can you reign in the banks. The government is supposed to be the rpresentative of the people. But that time has long passed. Only revolution will change that now. You wait. Queen Hillary will be elected. She will not allow the plebs to touch her, only to fawn at her magnificence. She sneers at the idea of being beholden to the people, yet there will be a solid half of us who do not care. The gov is beyond hope at this point.
Tommy - Dont let the argument degrade into ad homenim please. Your general arguments are sound. And I want to hear from government personell on this topic as well as private sector. I want to hear from law enforcement on this topic of currency and the justice system. We are never all going to agree but ideas can be useful.
Unfortunately, very few in the general population have any understanding of what is happening; therefore it will probably have to get much worse before there is any chance for a revolt.
Sad when the best I can hope for is that the shit hits the fan ASAP. Stock market crash....Bond market crash... Hyperinflation.
At the time of our nations founding there were far less people who had sense God gave a grapefruit.
The main advantage they held over people now is that they were not part of some goliath system that was all pervasive, ie they could tell someone to fuck off and still have dinner that night.
If you work FOR the .gov, if you get a signifigant portion of your income from the .gov or if you customers get a signifigant portion of their income from the .gov or if you are highly regulated by the .gov then exactly what the fuck are you going to do about it?
In terms of people knowing what's up I would say far more now than back in the day know what's up it's never been that high of a percentage.
What's got to happen to shake this loose is there have to be more losers who've lost it all only they are free enough to say what's what.
The poor have been bought off with fiat money showering if you removed that then nature would take it's course a lot faster.
The middle class clinging for dear life to the rapidly vanishing remaining life boats is what's holding this bitch above water.
Indeed so, MoMo,
Too bad, so sad!
Wow, that includes about every emotion-dripping, flimsy fallacy statists rely upon to try to justify their beloved institution of violent rule, including:
- That jobs are some kind of good that just magically exists in fixed, limited supply so must be squabbled over with "foreigners" who will try to take them away from "us."
- That self-interest and desire for profit ("greed") is fundamentally wrong and pernicious.
- That government regulations (violently imposed opinions) are necessary and proper to override the peaceful, voluntary transactions of entrepreneurs and customers.
- That such a thing as "private power" can arise and endure consequence-free, shrugging off the dollar-votes of customers, immune from the need for resources, able to persist despite free market competitors better serving customers.
- That there is such a thing as "society’s resources" apart from any person who created them and owns them and "serving society" is some intangible good above the rights of men.
How ironic these very same fallacies are used to directly justify the wars, the money printing, the entitlements, and the cronyism he decries in the same article. The level of contradiction in this is right up there with the pro-state propaganda found on any mainstream site.
This article is not worthy to grace the pages of ZH.
We don't have capitalism we have corpratism.
Take the corporate veil and toss it into the Fukushima pit from hell where it belongs.
Your business fails?
Well so do you.
It is essentially this way now for most small businesses only executives of large corporations have the ability to loot their corporations on the way down.
That goes for all businesses including banks.
You fail a bank?
Fine we take all your money and you file BK too.
You want FDIC protection on your deposits?
Fine if you touch a stock, junk bond or derivative we will put you in jail.
Government regulations that we still feel are necessary apply EQUALLY to both foreign and domestic goods IE no regulatory manufacturing arbitrage allowed whatever your calculated advantage you get tarrifed to match goods made here and if by some chance your process is cleaner than here then fine no tariff.
We need to stop worshiping ONLY at the alter of efficiency and start a more balanced approach to consuming. That means truth in labeling and some measureable metrics to that allow consumers to judge your product fairly comparitively to others.
No need to regulate the sale, put right on the label that this companies American content for this product is X.
Consumers can judge if they care.
If we bail you out we own you and we sell you off piece by piece and you go BK.
Oh and yeah put the power to coin money into the hands of the people.
That all would be a great start to start using capitalism.
I don't know what economic system you're thinking of, or what you think the definition of "capitalism" is, but corporatism is definitely a flavor of capitalism. One of the least desirable varieties, but it is inescapably a capitalist variant
Conrad - Amen. Bankruptcy is a very forgiving process on its own. I personally went bankrupt. Part of that faikure was being too naive, too much a dreamer. Part of that was health conditions which I did not pay attention to. Staying with a bad woman to try and save the kids didnt help, it got in the way of my success which hurt there chances for me to fund further education kick start them into property ownership. I learned the hard way but that doesnt give leadership a pass for misdirection and robbery.
So I say amen because BK works. Same set of rules works. And I want my government to back that up and if violently if necessary. Government is a protection racket but who it protects and why are plain to most here.
Wow, that is one badly-written piece of shit poast. "The fresh Amerian machine gun and barbed wire fodder weakened the German position, and an armistance was agreed."
I can forgive a typo, but armistance? Fire that intern, Ty. That girl is poisin!
What we have here is a perverted form of capitalism. Nottrue capitalism not seen in roughly 100 years.
Dr. Roberts is at wits end just as we are all at wits end with this whole FED fiasco.
I'm calling the end of the FED, and the obvious systemic disparity of Fractional Reserve banking that has obviously run out of reserves.
Note: 11:42pm 30/12/2015
Signed,......MASTER OF UNIVERSE
Capitalism cannot serve society because there is no society anymore; there is only individual and government. Government dissolved all civil society by passing and enforcing anti-discrimination laws. What's the point of having any sort of club if you can't decide who to allow in?
To be fair, it was Maggie Thatcher who said, "there is no such thing as society, there are only individuals."
Droogs,
A good friend of mine sent this link.
Here is another version of the Fed rant (with hard facts to quote):
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/truly-big-shorts-john-m-cunningham?trk=pr...
I like Paul Craig Roberts, especially for his views on US foreign policy, but neither capitalism nor libertarianism exist as politico/economic policy in the US. True liberty, or freedom, does not mean freedom for government employees or agencies or contractors or a few politically-connected companies like GS. True liberty means freedom for everyone - except government which can only do what it is permitted to do as it has a monopoly on the legal initiation of force. We certainly do not have true freedom nor will we as long as we have a central bank.
PCR cites the 'repeal' of Glass-Steagal, specifically referring to the removal of separation between commercial and investment banks. This allows banks to risk FDIC-guaranteed deposits and privatize their gains while socializing (burdening taxpayers with) any losses. But in a true free market system, there would be no FDIC (which was created by Glass-Steagal).
When 1 person/corporation has a monopoly on money creation (counterfeiting) the inevitable outcome is that all assets of the country are slowly and methodically transfered to that corporation/entity.
You dont even own your house, the Fed does.
Govt in - debt to Fed, Govt holds allodial title to all the land (you just get a "certificate" of ownership but never see the actual deed) and as such you have to pay real-estate "taxes" (rent) to use your land.
If the fed called in the loans, the govt would be forced to put your house up as collateral for more loans from the fed.
So in the end nothing belongs to you, you just pay and labor to keep the right to use what you have accumulated.
The hitch is, those who print money out of thin air are not in the same boat as you, they have infinite access to the wealth society generates for not only their life time but the life times of 1000 generations of their off-spring.
Thats the Illuminati, thats what humanity should be fighting.
A man who can not own land is never free, if the govt has the power to strip you of your land you essentially have no property rights and no property rights essentially amounts to no rights at all.
Agree, now please extend some links to educate other ZHrs on robo signing titles, straw men and the legal shroud we find ourselves entombed in.
" Clearly, American capitalism no longer serves society, and the worsening distribution of income and wealth prove it."
Wrong. First of all who ever said capitalism is some sort of "wealth distribution" system?
Secondly America is not capitalist at all. It is fascist where there is government partership with private industry and a HUGE socialist welfare state.
If anything PCR is complaining that our welfare system of wealth distribution is broken.
" Clearly, American capitalism no longer serves society, and the worsening distribution of income and wealth prove it."
Wrong. First of all who ever said capitalism is some sort of "wealth distribution" system?
Secondly America is not capitalist at all. It is fascist where there is government partership with private industry and a HUGE socialist welfare state.
If anything PCR is complaining that our welfare system of wealth distribution is broken.
The Great Benefits of Being a Weirdo in today's world... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzC8pn5-MIM
Bullshit .... this asshole misses the forest for the trees .... over reach and hubris .... are Islam's defining moments .... in 1400 years .... they have murdered and raped their way .... to control 1/4 of the world's "subjects" .... and they did it with knives and sticks and stones .... and borrowed airplanes .... and they are now poised for a major expansion .... paid for by the liberal dupe victims .... so, Paul Craig Roberts .... you blithering idiot .... wake up and smell the Arabica beans .... in your stupid coffee .... and quit fighting the cold and hot wars .... of the last century ?
What happened? Is your coke dealer out of town for the holidays.
I'm the coke dealer .... and business is snorting .... like a bull market ?
Unregulated capitalism has seeds of its own destruction. In this wonderful analysis, Dr. Roberts fails to mention how Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved capitalism (his own words) when he signed the New Deal.
The benefits capitalism brings to a society are dependent on three things (1) Resources to convert to wealth (2) Technology to convert resources to wealth and (3) Expanding money supply to increase the commerce to allow for the continued creation of wealth.
If resources and technology exist, but money supply is constant or expands but is available only for investment, all the money would quickly find its way to the few owners of the capital goods and wealth generation comes to a halt. This is what Marx predicted, but was proven wrong, when social welfare programmes were introduced in the post World War II West and funded through increasing government debt i.e. a part of the expanding money supply made it into the hands of consumers without the laws of the market operating. This is exactly what kept capitalism from collapsing as everyone in the West, workers and business owners, those at the top and those at the bottom, got richer and it was hailed as the success of capitalism, while in fact it was the success of regulated capitalism with a social welfare state.
But when the limits to growth was first realised in the 1970s when the US crude oil production hit peak as predicted, the Western elite realised the world will soon enter a period of zero-sum game, where some will have to get less and less for som others to get more and more, something for which everyone got accustomed. In a true capitalist fashion, they decided to pursue their interests ahead of the interests of the collective. This required consolidation of power over global finance, destruction of the Communist Bloc to draw the resources of the Communist Bloc, especially Russia, into global commerce conducted in Western currencies, removing the peg of US$ to gold to allow for unlimited expnasion of US$ supply, control of Middle East oil supply by controlling the regimes in Middle East and moving manufacturing out to politically stable, but low per capita income, countries without sufficient energy reources for growth thus making them dependent on steady flow of energy imports and the currency needed to import them in order to maintain a steady domestic economic growth. They also sought to substitute the loss of jobs in the West from the loss of manufacturing by creating service sector jobs and easy credit to ensure the markets for the export-led growth being foisted on the countries to which manufacturing was being moved and at an appropriate time freeze the credit supply to collapse the Western economies while retaining the control over the economies of the other countries through the control of the currencies in which international payments are conducted. The euro was created to serve as a ready alternative to the US$ in global payments, should it ever become necessary to dump the US$.
The plan worked admirably well and as expected until Vladimir Putin came on stage. When Putin realised what was afoot, he decided to set his foot down and refused to surrender to the West. That Russia was a net exporter of energy and had the weapons to wipe the West out meant it is not easy to blackmail Russia into surrendering since Russia neither needs the Middle East oil available only in Western currencies nor the Western investments since as a net exporter Russia has enough accumulated Western currencies to ignore the Western dictates. China saw an opportnity to get away from dependence on the Western currencies as did other large non-Western countries like Brazil and India. By roping in South Africa in a partnership of equal weight to all founding participants regardless of their size and economic weight, they have formed a true alternative to Western financial hegemony. When the BRICS bank issues its own gold backed currency and Middle East oil exporting nations, with Russia's assurance to defend them in the event of a Western aggression, too switch to exporting their oil for this new currency, it will be a zero-sum game between the Western elite and the rest of the Westerners.
Unregulated capitalism has seeds of its own destruction. In this wonderful analysis, Dr. Roberts fails to mention how Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved capitalism (his own words) when he signed the New Deal.
And you're dumb enough to believe that bullshit. Roosevelt did what politicians always do. They capitalize on their failures by shifting blame away from themselves. That tyrant gave us the worst depression in US history, conned the American public into two wars and saved communism. He left a legacy of government expansion that is destroying the last remnants of capitalism you believe he saved.
Unlike you, I am smart enough to analyse things myself and decide whether they are true or not. I mentioned those were his own words, because he said so before I could, not because I believe it because he said it.
Roosevelt didn't cause the depression. It was caused by capitalism and Roosevelt's policies alone pulled the US out of depression. Without the changes introduced by the New Deal and the public spending (including on wars) financed by government borrowings, capitalism would have been dead.
Unlike you, I am smart enough to analyse things myself and decide whether they are true or not.
If you think so.
It was caused by capitalism and Roosevelt's policies alone pulled the US out of depression.
That's a hoot. The seeds of the depression began during the Progressive era with the creation of the Federal Reserve, the income tax and WWI.
Roosevelt devalued the dollar, doubled the size of government and increased taxes and regulations. In your wild imagination, Roosevelt saved capitalism by crippling it.
No government in existence is equiped to manage a market economy; it's too complex. The best they can do is keep the peace. Once they start picking winners and losers, the end result is always chaos and disorder. The economic collapse we are living through is a symptom of too much government. Without a healthy market economy to pay the bills, It's only a matter of time when this government collapses.
My advice to you is to never trust popular accounts of government actions. If you have the initiative, look up "The Roosevelt Myth" by John T. Flynn. Or "New Deal, Raw Deal" by Burton W. Folsom. Or "FDR's Folly" by Jim Powell.
People forget, that is one of our Great Failures... If you want to Credit a Roosevelt for saving capitalism, drop back a generation or two and credit Theodore. He fought the good fight against the Trusts (oligarchy) and actually put them at bay for a while. Much of today's merger & acquisition activity simply couldn't happen if the old anti-trust laws were actually enforced. (Come on, 5 big banks represent over 1/2 the banking system and "nobody" sees any potential anti-trust violations?). He was too much a man of his times for most progressives today, but a lot of what he did/said passed the common sense test...
"The worst lesson that can be taught a man is to rely upon others and to whine over his sufferings."
or
"To permit every lawless capitalist, every law-defying corporation, to take any action, no matter how iniquitous, in the effort to secure an improper profit and to build up privilege, would be ruinous to the Republic and would mark the abandonment of the effort to secure in the industrial world the spirit of democratic fair dealing."
That last quote shows the general "dumbing down" of America, When was the last time you heard a politican make a speech on that thought level, with the expectation that the Public would follow along and agree with him...
Capitalism is one thing, we have the Trusts back, only we call them oligarchies to avoid the shadows of the old anti-trust laws, God forbid that we should call a thing what it actually is...
He fought the good fight against the Trusts (oligarchy) and actually put them at bay for a while.
Another government myth. It was Rockefeller's competitors who initiated the complaint against him, not his customers. Rockefeller beat them all on price, innovation and service. Score +1 for Rockefeller's competitors and -1 for consumers.
Businessess have a long history of using government for competitive gain. No matter how they moralize their cause, it's always about control over the consumer market.
There's a lesson to be learned here. Anytime you read or hear how great government is, it's almost always a lie. These people are stupiid and corrupt because those are the kind of people attracted to politics. They have to lie.
If monopolies are bad and should be broken up, then why is the government monopoly still existant?
You'll find an honest account about Roosevelt in "Theodore and Woodrow" by Andrew Napolitano.
So, FDR saved capitalism by converting the USA to socialism. I didn't know that he actually tried to peddle that. Wow, this is why people are idiots and we are doomed. +1 for the comment but -1 for the needless insult.... that was uncalled for.
spirit of 42-
what science fiction alternate reality do you live in?
you seem interested in history, however, it's not the history of planet earth.
Islam is the new Communism/Fascism bundle .... it is a resourceful, aggressive, opportunistic cancer .... and it is as politically correct as HIV and AIDS and Rachel Carson and the Global Warming Hoax .... another gift (poison in German) from the left ?
Poor babies, that mean old man called out you soul dead Libertarians. Maybe you can unfriend him on that big intelligence community associated social site.
Russia, China, Europe, Japan, all Anglonia, all civilized societies will unite against Islam .... Capitalism has clearly demonstrated it's superiority .... so, let it lay .... while we concentrate on neutering the Islamic menace .... wiping it out .... so new systems will emerge .... that are more people friendly ?
Blaming today's woes on capitalism is like blaming violence on guns. I don't know who the Craig guy is, but he seems a bit simplistic and ignorant of the underlying truth of the matter. Today in the U.S. there exists a corporate fascism, nothing like a free market economy.
People as individuals are not to be trusted. We need to change the nature of our representative government. I saw the other day that people were complaining that Senators wanted to increase their salary to about $175,000. Know what I say? Raise that fucking salary to $500,000 and eliminate lobbying, We will save billions right away. Then, change the election process so that everything is paid by us citizens. Budget it at 10 billion per election cycle. We will save trillions.
We the people need to fund 100% of all activities of our republic and getting the third party actors out of our system. Corporations are not people, FFS, but we can tax them.
By distrusting government regulators of private misbehavior, libertarians provided the cover for the repeal of the financial regulation that made American capitalism functional.
Nice try Roberts. The laws against fraud and theft are still on the books.
Today dysfunctional capitalism rules, thanks to greed and libertarian ideology.
No matter how critical Roberts is of government, he can't shake his faith in political rule. This asshole would have you believe that the likes of Rubin, Clinton, Corzine and Greenspan subscribe to a libertarian ideology.
I stopped reading him because of his shrill tone. Now I've come to see him as one of the enemy.
Greenspan was Ayn Rand's biggest fanboy - a diehard true believer. What else do you need to know?
And no, Rubin and Clinton and the rest of the neo-liberals want YOU to be libertarian, because libertarian don't want to control or regulate Wall St. You say you want to reign in the bankster pirates, but at the same time you want to drown govt in a bathtub. If you drown govt in a bathtub, who is left to reign in Wall St? Batman? The ghost of Hayek? Your ideology is well-intentioned, but it is fundamentally inconsistent, and the neo-liberal Wall St bankster pirates get YOU to use your own fantasy ideology againt your own self-interests.
Excellent article but it would've be nice if the author touched on how the college loan scandal is affecting the middle class. When universities discovered the ease in which the government was offering student loans to families, they jacked up their tuition fees to exorbitant levels. Students and the parents of those students are now saddled with so much debt, the parents will be working well into their so-called retirement yeras and the students will likely be waiting tables as jobs continue to disappear through outsourcing and automation. We've seen the articles regarding the fall of the American middle class (and the rise in lower, upper class) yet those studies likely fail to take into account wealth net of debt. More than likely, a significant portion of the middle class have negative wealth as many families struggle with unstable jobs, high student debt loans and negative equity on their house. America's evolution into an oligarchical society was noted by Princeton and Northwestern Universities in a study that concluded the U.S. government represents not the interests of the majority of citizens but those of the rich and powerful.
Excellent article but it would've be nice if the author touched on how the college loan scandal is affecting the middle class. When universities discovered the ease in which the government was offering student loans to families, they jacked up their tuition fees to exorbitant levels. Students and the parents of those students are now saddled with so much debt, the parents will be working well into their so-called retirement yeras and the students will likely be waiting tables as jobs continue to disappear through outsourcing and automation. We've seen the articles regarding the fall of the American middle class (and the rise in lower, upper class) yet those studies likely fail to take into account wealth net of debt. More than likely, a significant portion of the middle class have negative wealth as many families struggle with unstable jobs, high student debt loans and negative equity on their house. America's evolution into an oligarchical society was noted by Princeton and Northwestern Universities in a study that concluded the U.S. government represents not the interests of the majority of citizens but those of the rich and powerful.