Quote:
Originally Posted by Marrk
Some here make a distinction between "government" and "corporation." As in the statement, "The problem is not Wall Street, it's the government." The Occupy Movement would probably respond to this by saying that the problem is that the government is now only serving the interests of corporations, that you cannot get into elected office without corporate donations and backing, and that, in short, the government equals the corporations. You will note that many people in the U.S. believe that what we need in the White House is a business man, someone who knows business, like Herman Cain. Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann boast of having run businesses, as well. Does this make sense? Does an M.B.A. prepare anyone to be a statesman? Do we want someone who has spent his or her life as a partisan of business to look after our interests? Deregulation in the name of profit? Doing away with the EPA in the name of profit? Destroying the land, the water, the planet in the name of profit? Furthermore, it was the deregulation of banking (by both the Democrats and the Republicans) that led to crisis in mortgage-backed securities, etc.
Some have also gone down the road of "If these people had a job . . ." or "These people should stop whining and get a job . . . ." Indeed, if jobs — decent jobs, good jobs, any jobs — could be had, there would likely be no protest of this kind. Wealth inequality, the decimation of the middle class, and the concentration of capital and access to capital are parts of the problem.
There has also been some pseudo-demagogery about "socialism," a word that is used incorrectly and used for the purpose of inflaming emotions. There is no socialism in the U.S. If there were, you would know it. Having a conscience and recognizing our responsibility to help other human beings is not socialism. That is not to say that every "entitlement program" (another inflammatory term) is perfect.
Just thinkin' out loud here. :happy0180:
|
And a lot of people are misinterpreting the movement as anti capitalism. Some participating in the movement are actually mixing capitalism and corporation. Capitalism is great but there doesnt seem to be much of a distinction between corporation and government. It seems like our governments best interest is to profit from its tax payers and bail out those big banks that have us by the balls. And I completely agree that we do not need a businessman/ woman
to run our country. I remember when Meg Whitman running for CA Governer and thats when it dawned on me that our government has a business mentality. We went from a government ran by God to a government ran by profits and numbers.
I kind of agree with you on the whole job thing. But it seems like we really depend on others to create jobs for us. But in capitalism we can go out and create our own jobs. I say lose the dependency on others to create our jobs and lets create our own. Lets be innovative and push forward and not rely on Steve Jobs to have a factory here creating thousands of jobs for us because "they" simply wont. Because its cheaper to produce over seas and our demand of wanting cheap products is whats driving our economy and the way things are done. And dont tell me we dont want cheap products when people are complaining about the price or the FRS/BRZ :P
I am also really torn on this subject of helping others. My family received food stamps when my parents got divorce and my mom raised 4 of us alone. It helped a lot especially when they aided us on living expenses like our apartment. But at the same time the amount of abuse with things like Medi-cal, Food Stamps aka EBT, and hand outs given to those with no health insurance (I work for a hospital in LA and man do people abuse our system) is ridiculous!! We need a way to take care of those who need it or set up a system where you can feel okay to retire at 65 years old and not be worried about your 401k crashing and burning or this scam called Social Security. The real question is though who do we feel are the ones who can receive our aid and is it really fair to those who work hard? I dont know if you meant it or not but you kind of imply that only people with good moral values believe in helping other human beings :p. Is it really my responsibility for me to pay for your childrens food because you cant keep your legs close and decided to screw around during high school? Then theres the opposite side of the spectrum where a girl gets raped and keeps the child at 16. So do both receive our aid? or just one?
Thinking out loud :P