Michael Moore: 'Capitalism is anti-Jesus'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well... you can kind of control the government, because after all, they are us.

That's sounds great. But what can you actually get the government to do? Maybe if you had the time and money to sit in the mall and collect signatures then you could get a petition on the ballot. But even then the courts might just throw it out.

"They are us." --Do you work for the government? I suppose this is true in a more idealistic sense that we have a government of the people. But in reality, the government is a large organization with millions of employees (or a conglomerate of smaller organizations, probably more accurately). But even if you are part of this organization (work for them) it doesn't really give you decision making influence.

You have more power to control the government than you do private corporations.

The problem is that most people are lazy, and the powers that be are well aware of this.

It allows for the creation of a privileged political class who are also tied to some of the richest people in the land.

[SMR 368]

Well... you can kind of control the government, because after all, they are us.

That's sounds great. But what can you actually get the government to do? Maybe if you had the time and money to sit in the mall and collect signatures then you could get a petition on the ballot. But even then the courts might just throw it out.

"They are us." --Do you work for the government? I suppose this is true in a more idealistic sense that we have a government of the people. But in reality, the government is a large organization with millions of employees (or a conglomerate of smaller organizations, probably more accurately). But even if you are part of this organization (work for them) it doesn't really give you decision making influence.

You have more power to control the government than you do private corporations.

The problem is that most people are lazy, and the powers that be are well aware of this.

It allows for the creation of a privileged political class who are also tied to some of the richest people in the land.

It's true that the average person has theoretically more power to control the government than large corporations. But in practice, you probably have more or at least equal power over corporations. Your actual vote has essentially no effect on the political system. If you want to have an effect on the political process, you have to protest, lobby, and convince others to join your point of view.

These strategies all have an effect on corporations, too. It’s true that if you call a large corporation, you’ll probably end up in recorded message hell. But if you stage a protest or get a couple hundred thousand other people to sign a petition and threaten to not patronize the business, you will probably get them to listen, probably more readily than the government would listen to a similar effort.

I would say that the average citizen has comparable or greater influence over corporations than the government. But all of that aside, the major difference is that you don’t have to give a corporation a dime or a minute of your time if you don’t want to. Your property and freedom will be violently taken from you if you try to do the same to the government.

[Heracles 417]

I did notice that corporations are starting to push their way into politics again. There was some sort of law against them advertising but this has been overruled by the supreme court. When did something being constitutional or not replace common sense or what is right for the country. That is what I don't get about the US.

The failure of capitalism here is that a small number of people now control the majority of the wealth. It's basically a legalized version of the century old elitist king and queen system that you guys died escaping. America's largest boom happened after WWII, where a large portion of the population was able to equitably claim their share of the growth, of the economic pie. After the 60's the system heavily skewed to every man for themselves and has only gotten worse since. This is why the rich are now mega rich while the poor are becoming poorer.

In other developed countries, the governments have managed to put 'checks and balances' in place on capitalism to ensure no one person amasses a large amount of wealth while everyone else is left fighting for scraps. They have achieved this by means of higher taxes for the wealthy, mandated working conditions and higher minimum wage requirements for their workers. As a result, it forcefully ensures that people get their fair share. Some here call this socialism and spreading the wealth but this is simply not true. I don't know about anyone else but I sure as heck do not want a system where one person gets to keep 9 pieces of a 10 piece pie, and the rest are left fight for scraps from the last remaining piece.

[Heracles 417]

Well... you can kind of control the government, because after all, they are us.

That's sounds great. But what can you actually get the government to do? Maybe if you had the time and money to sit in the mall and collect signatures then you could get a petition on the ballot. But even then the courts might just throw it out.

"They are us." --Do you work for the government? I suppose this is true in a more idealistic sense that we have a government of the people. But in reality, the government is a large organization with millions of employees (or a conglomerate of smaller organizations, probably more accurately). But even if you are part of this organization (work for them) it doesn't really give you decision making influence.

Justshooter said it best in another thread, you are a republic not a democracy; something I have never thought about but it's true. If the system of government was switched to a federal parliamentary democracy, things would be a lot different in America and for Americans. I bet you would have much less crime, much lower poverty, more things would get done and people would have a better chance of succeeding and living the dream.

As it stands, the American dream is a fantasy, an illusion, for most. Anyone seriously think someone from the Ghetto, a trailer, the Appalachians, thousands of has been towns, or an American Indian can actually live the dream? I probably have a better chance of winning the powerball.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Booyah!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Anyone seriously think someone from the Ghetto, or a trailer or the Appalachians or an American Indian can actually live the dream?

Yes. If immigrants who barely speak any English with a high school education can come here, start a small business and end up doing very well for themselves and their families... yes. The American dream is very much alive. Each of my closest friends parents fit that description, without exception. As do many others in the local Indian community.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't see how the Parliamentary system would facilitate an egalitarian society and in democratic terms there's actually very little difference between the two.

The Constitutional Republic distinction is semantic guff to be honest. There's no such thing as a "pure" democracy and the US is a democracy in the sense that we hold democratic elections to choose our representatives.

[Heracles 417]

Yes. If immigrants who barely speak any English with a high school education can come here, start a small business and end up doing very well for themselves and their families... yes. The American dream is very much alive. Each of my closest friends parents fit that description, without exception. As do many others in the local Indian community.

That is a whole different kettle of fish. Same deal with illegal aliens coming here and working for nothing. You could say they're living the dream. Bullcrap. They're just being underpaid and taking jobs from Americans. Once again, one person is benefiting from this; that is, the owner of the business. One again, Americans are left to fight for a small piece of the pie left.

[SMR 368]

I did notice that corporations are starting to push their way into politics again. There was some sort of law against them advertising but this has been overruled by the supreme court. When did something being constitutional or not replace common sense or what is right for the country. That is what I don't get about the US.

The failure of capitalism here is that a small number of people now control the majority of the wealth. It's basically a legalized version of the century old elitist king and queen system that you guys died escaping. America's largest boom happened after WWII, where a large portion of the population was able to equitably claim their share of the growth, of the economic pie. After the 60's the system heavily skewed to every man for themselves and has only gotten worse since. This is why the rich are now mega rich while the poor are becoming poorer.

In other developed countries, the governments have managed to put 'checks and balances' in place on capitalism to ensure no one person amasses a large amount of wealth while everyone else is left fighting for scraps. They have achieved this by means of higher taxes for the wealthy, mandated working conditions and higher minimum wage requirements for their workers. As a result, it forcefully ensures that people get their fair share. Some here call this socialism and spreading the wealth but this is simply not true. I don't know about anyone else but I sure as heck do not want a system where one person gets to keep 9 pieces of a 10 piece pie, and the rest are left fight for scraps from the last remaining piece.

The point I have been trying to make with my posts in this thread that I think needs to be considered is that turning to the government to regulate big business is very much jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

It's true that sometimes wealth gets very highly concentrated. However, every rich person I have known, and I have known enough, although I am not rich myself, got rich by hard work and exceptional skills and abilities. I'm not saying that there aren't exceptional people that aren't rich, but all of the rich people I know got their for a reason. Of course, rich people have children and there's no telling what they'll be, but you can't stop someone from giving what they earned to their children. That's allowed by common law that is older than any existing government.

I asked in another thread but my post kind of got buried. What do you see as the meaningful non-semantic differences between the parliamentary system and the American system? I realize there are lots of problems in the American system and would be interested in supporting some reasonable changes if you could lay out some reasonable suggestions.

[Heracles 417]

I don't see how the Parliamentary system would facilitate an egalitarian society and in democratic terms there's actually very little difference between the two.

The Constitutional Republic distinction is semantic guff to be honest. There's no such thing as a "pure" democracy and the US is a democracy in the sense that we hold democratic elections to choose our representatives.

Well it does facilitate it by various means. One thing that is for sure is that the courts don't get to call the shots, the people do. The two systems have very noticeable differences. On face value under the presidential system, everything falls on the president. Yet in reality, the president yields much less power than people believe he has. A prime minster actually has more power than a president. You also have a system here where a president that is voted in by members of congress has a 4 year, two term limit; while senators that are appointed for 6 years, get to stay in office indefinitely. There is the first problem as it clearly allows for the potential of corruption. The presidential system also promotes a winner takes all approach rather than allowing an opposition to be present. Unlike the parliamentary system, the president is also separated from the senators.

At the end of the day, most first world countries use the parliamentary system, which speaks for itself. Whereas you will find the majority of countries left using the presidential system are 2nd world and 3rd world countries. Furthermore, excluding the US, most of the countries that have implemented the presidential system have had their government collapse one time or another (source:wiki). Which to me shows there is a flaw in the system.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Booyah!

[SMR 368]

Yes. If immigrants who barely speak any English with a high school education can come here, start a small business and end up doing very well for themselves and their families... yes. The American dream is very much alive. Each of my closest friends parents fit that description, without exception. As do many others in the local Indian community.

That is a whole different kettle of fish. Same deal with illegal aliens coming here and working for nothing. You could say they're living the dream. Bullcrap. They're just being underpaid and taking jobs from Americans. Once again, one person is benefiting from this; that is, the owner of the business. One again, Americans are left to fight for a small piece of the pie left.

Unless I understood, win9 was talking about people immigrating and starting their own business. Yes, the owner of the business is benefiting. Point is, if some person who doesn't speak English and doesn't know the culture can come and do well for themselves by starting a business, it's hard to say the American dream is dead. And he didn't take a job from Americans. He started a business which in the end almost certainly created jobs.

That's one of the good things about capitalism. Provided people have the ingenuity, know-how, guts, and perserverance (and someone always will although of course not everyone will), there will always be enough jobs to keep unemployment low (it won't be zero because unemployment is necessary for economic growth, ie. there has to be someone to hire so you can start a business).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I've heard that before, but I don't really buy the idea that stability in those countries is because the political system itself is infallible.

There are no term limits in the UK, there is also no formal written constitution and laws that amount to a constitution can be changed on an ad-hoc basis. Nor are the branches of government subject to any real checks and balances.

The only real thing it has going for it are that we don't have an election process that takes an entire year, at a cost of staggering amounts of money; and with phoney political debates that amount to little more than scattershot sloganising.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Gene Hunt

[Heracles 417]

The point I have been trying to make with my posts in this thread that I think needs to be considered is that turning to the government to regulate big business is very much jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

I don't know how this rug has been pulled over people here. The government is exactly who should regulate them since it’s their job is to manage the country. The constitution clearly states 'we the people'; certainly not we the shareholders, we the executives, we the select rich, or we the corporation.

It's true that sometimes wealth gets very highly concentrated. However, every rich person I have known, and I have known enough, although I am not rich myself, got rich by hard work and exceptional skills and abilities. I'm not saying that there aren't exceptional people that aren't rich, but all of the rich people I know got their for a reason. Of course, rich people have children and there's no telling what they'll be, but you can't stop someone from giving what they earned to their children. That's allowed by common law that is older than any existing government.

The system (the approach) used overseas does not punish people who work hard or want to be build wealth. That is a huge misconception about the other developed world; similar to the one of government is bad and that government should not regulate employment and business practices. People are still rich in countries like Aus, Canada or the UK; actually richer than many here. The only difference is that these people are not as rich and the system ensures that everyone benefits. What this means is that I cannot start a business and earn $500 million, while paying my employees minimum wage. I will earn $400 million (more than enough) but pay my employees a fair wage, as well as contribute to the community by means of taxes or my own projects; which I will get tax cuts for.

The wealthy here simply get a free ride and everyone is made to believe they work hard for it. Yes, apparently unlike the guy at walmart or a social worker pulling 40 hours a week. They must be slackers compared to Donald Trump. After all, it’s really stressful to cut deals. They work as hard as our executives who spend their time planning which city they are going to fly to this weekend, to play golf. The wealthy hire cheap labor, like illegal immigrants, to make them even more money, while screwing the average American. This is where people need to stand up and say you know what, #### you too. And demand their government regulate and protect them from this. Demand companies and businesses do not exploit cheap labor for their own personal gain, while screwing the rest of America. Once upon a time, obviously before the 60's, that would have been considered un-American; now it’s just business.

I'm a right wing conservative, well not the American type, but right is right and wrong is wrong. Seeing your country being screwed by the few is not acceptable. Due to this private industry crisis, people have lost their life savings, their homes, any even their lives. Yet some are still supporting this unchecked and unbalanced system that screwed this country in the first place. This is what kills me the most about Americans, in particular republicans. You guys unwaveringly support smaller government, distrust the government, have no faith in the same government you vote in, and strongly believe in checks and balances appropriate for the government. Yet, you absolutely have no issues with the private industry, with the mega rich, doing whatever they want. You don’t believe in checks and balances for the private sector as they can regulate themselves. To be honest I cannot even get the words out to rebut that. It's the dumbest ideology I have ever heard in my life. That the government is the enemy and needs to be watched; however, these private companies that have literally given it to Americans in the buttocks, are somehow the good guys in all of this.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Booyah!

[Heracles 417]

Unless I understood, win9 was talking about people immigrating and starting their own business. Yes, the owner of the business is benefiting. Point is, if some person who doesn't speak English and doesn't know the culture can come and do well for themselves by starting a business, it's hard to say the American dream is dead. And he didn't take a job from Americans. He started a business which in the end almost certainly created jobs.

That's one of the good things about capitalism. Provided people have the ingenuity, know-how, guts, and perserverance (and someone always will although of course not everyone will), there will always be enough jobs to keep unemployment low (it won't be zero because unemployment is necessary for economic growth, ie. there has to be someone to hire so you can start a business).

When looking around the country, it is quite evident that a large portion of Americans are clearly not living the American dream. Actually in comparison to their Aussies distant cousins they are dirt poor. The country has allowed the rich to get mega rich, while the poor have remained dirt poor. Something that is quite common in its neighboring 2nd world South American countries. Minimum wage is about $12K here. Is that what you call the dream? How does this person pay for rent? Pay for their health care cost. You jump on google maps and find you average middle class American Joe street and house and compare this to the Aussie equivalent. A country which has actively ensured everyone gets their fair share of the pie. Then come tel me which works. Yeah the status quo works great for the small portion of people that are mega rich. What about everyone else here?

The dream of staring a business is slowing fading here. How can anyone compete with mega corporations? Store after store is now closed due to this private sector induced crisis. The country is becoming one big azz walmart and that is who will be left.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Booyah!

[alienlovechild 75]

Yes. If immigrants who barely speak any English with a high school education can come here, start a small business and end up doing very well for themselves and their families... yes. The American dream is very much alive. Each of my closest friends parents fit that description, without exception. As do many others in the local Indian community.

That is a whole different kettle of fish. Same deal with illegal aliens coming here and working for nothing. You could say they're living the dream. Bullcrap. They're just being underpaid and taking jobs from Americans. Once again, one person is benefiting from this; that is, the owner of the business. One again, Americans are left to fight for a small piece of the pie left.

Zero sum thinking on your part, Booyah. The idea that AJ's relatives got jobs that took jobs from native Americans is nonsense. One way to have economic growth is by creating new jobs through entrepeneurship. In fact most economic job growth comes from small business rather than the megacorporations so you should support more Mom & Pop type businesses with your espoused philosophy. Re-dividing the pie is just socialism and we should be working toward enlarging the economic pie.

The shame comes in when people from other countries come here and do well while some Americans sit on their butts saying certain jobs are beneath them so they'll collect unemployment, phony disability or welfare checks. Some Americans are taught from birth that the system is stacked against them so why bother working hard? Then there's the get-rich-quick schemes that for suckers.

[Pooky 3,781]

If I was an entrepreneur and lived near Michael Moore, I'd go into the pie-making business. The very model of a get-rich-quick scheme.