an interesting article.
i wonder how many people actually read it with a critical eye, or simply read the points that they agreed with and glossed the rest.
he brings up some good points:
--what people earn through hard work should be kept by them, and to redistribute that is unfair
--opposition to corporate greed should be focused and targeted
--government bailouts are wrong
--not all corporations are greedy (but there are plenty that are)
but he also fails to reconcile that:
--corporations don't really believe in capitalism like he does. one of the foundations of capitalism is the idea that competition is a key ingredient in its success. frankly, corporations thrive on monopoly and consolidation that prevents competition. if they could eliminate all competitors, they would, because competition affects their profitability, their bottom line.
--corporations cannot be trusted to make all of the decisions for society, because they don't have the best interests of all, at heart. they answer to shareholders.
--pure capitalism cannot be trusted to care for all members of society, a fact that is reflected in the existence of government regulation and controls, and varied levels of social welfare.
--claiming that his problems are not the fault of corporations ignores the depth and breadth of influence that corporate practices have, and the footprint that they leave on both physical and human resources around this planet. it's incredibly myopic to think that his life is unaffected by the actions of corporations and that they have had no impact on the 'problems' in his life.
--corporations don't always earn their profits through 'hard work'--quite often it is through exploitation, corruption, etc. i guess if we can turn a blind eye to the impact that we in the developed world have on those in the developing world, and can ignore the payoffs and paid political influence that drive their interests ahead of the interests of society, then we can accept the cruelties of unfettered corporatism.
