Capitalism needs to focus on the greater good

Corporatism focuses on the greater good of a few elite. This is the ruling philosophy in America today.

There are many types of capitalism. We must reestablish the one we want.

 

These protests are a mix of fragmented groups. They may cause the downfall of the present Govts but to replace them with what ? Anarchy - - yuk I hope NOT !!

Revolutions usually allow the scumbags to get to the top and take-over from the well meaning moderates e.g. Russia 1917.

 

Barry Riholtz is on the right track:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-must-occupy-congress-ag-offices/

Occupy Wall Street Must Occupy Congress, AG offices
By Barry Ritholtz - October 17th, 2011, 7:00AM

There is an unfocused financial rage in the United States.

It was born in the late 1990s on an unholy trinity of accounting swindles, the dotcom collapse and analyst scandals. It grew on a housing boom and bust that created 5 million (and counting) foreclosures, leaving more than a quarter of bank financed homes worth less than their mortgages. It matured on a growing wealth disparity that eviscerated the middle class, and brought back the plutocracy of the 1920s. It reached its peak with the bailout of reckless bankers, who were rewarded for their irresponsibility with the greatest wealth transfer in human history.

And now, it seems to be finding a new voice with the movement known as Occupy Wall Street (OWS).

Like the Tea Party, OWS began as a loose collection of people who knew they were getting a raw economic deal — but were unsure as to precisely why. They both started with a surge of grassroots politics. Both tapped into the national zeitgeist, feeding on an unfocused economic angst. When the Tea Party first burst onto the national stage, I had high hopes they might address some of the persistent economic problems our two-party political system was ignoring. But the Tea Party tilted to the right, shifting from the economic to the partisan. Obamacare and taxes – neither of which were responsible for a laundry list of economic woes facing the nation – became their focus.

That move created a vacuum. Since then, we have been waiting for a group of angry Americans to fill the void. It did not look like OWS was going to be the ones to do so. Especially with the way the Media was either ignoring them, or portraying them as a group of slacker hippies, fringe dwellers and kooks.

Credit the Daily Show with changing all that. Jon Stewart’s team surfaced a video of a senior NYPD officer pepper-spraying some young girls for no apparent reason. NYC may not be Libya, but that clip of abusive police behavior – and the young women collapsing in obvious agony – ramped up the mainstream coverage. What Rick Santelli’s infamous rant on CNBC did for the Tea Party, the NYPD pepper spray video did for the Wall Street protesters.

Now, the founders of OWS must consider what to do next. They surely do not want to let the momentum and energy dissipate. They see the Tea Party as hugely influential, but highly partisan, and up until now the Tea Party has been far less willing to criticize corporate interests than OWS.

The founders of OWS are aware of how the Tea Party was Jiu Jitsued by the existing GOP political establishment. OWS want to avoid a similar fate. Such an end could occur of the leaders of MoveOn.org, a partisan Democratic group, gets their way. They have bulled their way into the media, pretending to speak for OWS. (The media are suckers for a simple narrative, and MoveOn.org provides that).

Hence, OWS needs to demonstrate a few things: A clear leadership. A consistent message. But most importantly of all, some specific policy objectives.

To become as focused and influential as the Tea Party, what Occupy Wall Street needs a simple set of goals. Not a top 10 list — that’s too unwieldy, and too unfocused. Instead, a simple 3 part agenda, that responds to some very basic problems regardless of political party. It must address the key issues, have a specific legislative agenda, and finally, effect lasting change. By keeping it focused on the foibles of Wall Street, and on issues that actually matter, it can become a rallying cry for an angry nation.

I suggest the following three as achievable goals that will have a lasting impact:

1. No more bailouts: Bring back real capitalism
2. End TBTF banks
3. Get Wall Street Money out of legislative process

Let’s look at each of these in turn:

1. No more bailouts/Bring Back Real Capitalism!
The United States was once a capitalist system. Companies lived and died on their own successes. “Corporate Welfare” – the term coined by Wisconsin senator William Proxmire – came into being in 1971 with the bailout of Lockheed Aircraft. Thus began a run of corporatism and bailouts of connected companies, not capitalism. Some firms, less than successful in a competitive marketplace, chose instead to suckle at the teat of the public trough. Innovation, execution and hard work were replaced with lobbying, crony capitalism and bailouts of failure. Of course, all paid for by taxpayers.

“Socialism for bankers, wrenching capitalism for the working stiff” is not a slogan you are likely to see on a bumper sticker anytime soon. But that’s wht the US had morphed into.

America needs to end this system of spoils. There should be no more bailouts, no more crony capitalism, no more government determined winners and losers. We simply cannot live in a society of privatized gains and socialized losses.

2. End Too Big To Fail /Restore Competition
As George Shultz once said, “”If they’re too big to fail, make them smaller.”

The current economic approach of “Too Big to Fail” is itself a failure. It reduces economic competition, concentrates risk, and raises costs for consumers.

I agree with University of Missouri–Kansas City (UMKC) professor of Economics and Law William Black, who notes that the TBTF moniker is misleading. We should start calling these firms by the more accurate phrase “Systemically Dangerous Institutions” (SDIs). TBTF makes it sound like the size is the problem – in reality, the systemically, regardless of size, is what we should be focused on. SDI is an accurate phrase, and appropriately pejorative.

The TBTF size has brought a different set of problems: The bailouts have made the top 10 SDI an even bigger, less competitive oligarchy. We need to bring back competition by limiting the size of these firms. We can do that by capping their deposits, in terms of total percentage or a specific dollar amounts. There are many ways to accomplish this, including an FDIC caps on deposit insurance. And if the OWS people were smart, they would bring in former FDIC chair Sheila Bair (now private citizen) into the discussion.

3. Take Congress back from Wall Street
Whatever changes come, they will only be temporary if the current system of spoils is allowed to continue.

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly on campaign finance reform, finding against voters and in favor of corporate interests. The only way to take the government back is a Constitutional Amendment.

The United States has become a “corporatocracy.” Campaign finance and lobbying money has so utterly corrupted Congress that we might as well put elected officials up for bid on eBay – that is how corrupted the system has become. We have even seen the State Attorneys Generals become targets of aggressive lobbying, most recently in Florida. We must become a democracy again, where one man one vote matters. To do that, Wall Street money must be taken out of the process.

The only way to accomplish that goal and have it withstand Supreme Court review is a Constitutional Amendment, mandating public financing of Congressional elections and criminalizing the purchases of politicians. We need to marginalize lobbyists, and make voters the most important people in the nation (again).

A national campaign to get that amendment on every ballot in every state should be the objective.

~~~

You will note that these three goals are issues that both the Left and the Right — Libertarians and Liberals — should be able to agree upon. These are all doable measurable goals, that can have a real impact on legislation, the economy and taxes.

But amending the Constitution to eliminate dirty money from politics is an essential task. Failing to do that means backsliding from whatever gains are made. Whatever is accomplished will be temporary without campaign finance reform . . .

 

Capitalism can't be changed. It is what it is. Like the laws of physics are what they are.

Saying we need to CHANGE capitalism to make it better, is like saying we need to change the laws of gravity to make apples fall further from the tree. It can't be done.

 

that's pretty well said. I like it. It's got the good oldtime belief that in the end the good guy wins. Sometimes I think that is what religion is all about. Constantly reminding and encourageing people to do good, even though it looks right now like the bad guys are winning, in the end good will prevail. So just as soon as Henry Ford replaces all the earths resources as he consumed it will all be good again.

 

Agree that there is a danger. Steve Keen talks about this among other things-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7F2FKxxN_IE#t=769s

Problem is electorally things are progressively getting worse. "Middle America" has less and less voice. The election of Obama provided a temporary band aid, but proved he was bought and paid for by big business. The Republicans are equally to blame.

People are slowly starting to figure this out. The longer it goes on, the greater the risk for radicals to take advantage of things. I am optimistic though those risks are small b/c better information access (internet) will make it hard for radicals to take over.

 

Hmmm. Capitalism at its root is just an economic system where capital and the means of production are in private hands. But I think what Jueco was referring to was the various manifestations of capitalism. Two examples would be capitalism in spite of free markets and capitalism in the absence of free markets. (Capitalists don't like free markets, though they usually deny that, but government can, if it will, act as a deterrent to formation of cartels and monopolies and abusive labor practices.) As another example, the U.S., it seems, has perfected a form of capitalism where capitalists have gained control of government policy via financial influence and have been quite successful in getting government to do their bidding.

So can one manifestation of capitalism morph into another? I think it actually has in the case of the U.S.

 

Yes. Capitalism is asking permission for capital (capital in private hands).


So... how to allow access to capital without going through the permissions process?


Promise Language. All transactions are promises to deliver value. What value? Anything. Time, gold, silver, USD, Euros, etc. Simple transactional protocol for banking.

 

This isn't capitalism. Capitalism doesn't have a reset button. Real capitalism punishes losers and wrong (evil) doers.

 

I trust everyone realizes that if this were actually implemented, Fannie and Freddie will instantly fail, virtually eliminating the secondary market in mortgages, and knocking 75% off the price/value of homes pretty much overnight...?

I could be convinced that's the right path to take, but it would be an incredibly severe dislocation of the US economy.