We need a system of checks and balances against rampant capitalism.

[Fire Walk With Me]

Especially disaster capitalism, turned upon the US itself. I heard recently that the Koch brothers will be "investing" in five universities...

[leftstreet]

1. When has capitalism ever been anything BUT a disaster?

:shrug:

[frebrd]

4. +1

[StarburstClock]

5. When it was regulated, had a free press and a vibrant middle class

Basically before 1980 and the election of an actor as POTUS. Of course before then we still had BS wars, rampant discrimination and corruption but there were a lot more people will to fight it instead of just giving up and selling their souls to some failed political ideology.

[socialist_n_TN]

14. And that only happened because we were competing

with the Reds. It's no accident that as soon as the USSR fell, the capitalists started showing their true colors. It those colors aren't pretty.

Regulating capitalism is like riding a tiger. It's not easy to do and you're always in danger of being eaten. The only way to be safe from capitalism is a worker's government.

[jwirr]

9. But it is now practicing a new brand of capitalism that is even worse.

Corporate capitalism that employs a shock doctrine model of shock and awe here in the USA against our own people. They have been doing it in other countries since 1953. It started here under saint ronnie and has culminated under boooosh. This is not the capitalism we grew up with.

[jpak]

2. I believe that was an FDR thingy called "the New Deal" and that Teddy Roosevelt thingy too

:shrug:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. We have checks and balances against rampant capitalism:

It's called government- that is, when it works like it's supposed to and isn't "privatized" in the name of "cutting spending" or "bought off in a wave of money" by businesses. Plus, it helps to have people in charge of government whom actually, you know, believe in government instead of people whom (without any trace of irony) run for elected office on an anti-government platform. :crazy:

[Fire Walk With Me]

6. That makes my head spin as well...this is why repubs want "small government"

so they can live without rules and regulations.

[Somawas]

7. Used to be a really good check and balance.

Unions. One worker in 3 belonged to one.

[jwirr]

8. Just like the University of Chicago economics department did in

Chili, Argentina, Brazil. Take over the country by instilling their own brand of economics. They are dangerous.

[Wounded Bear]

10. I think civilized countries call that a "government"...

Just sayin' :shrug:

[moondust]

12. Yep. Government makes the rules.

The question is always whom they make those rules to benefit and to what extent those rules are enforced.

[RainDog]

11. I agree

it's about a balance of powers between various groups or classes.

one very, very, very small group has far, far too much influence on how taxes are collected and allocated.

that's bad for democracy. whether they like it or not.

one consequence for the wealthy - living in this nation - those who never ask their sons or daughters to fight in wars from which the rich benefit, those who buy their way out of the law, those who use their money to remove rights from others - is that they are simply expected to pay taxes to make it possible for others who fight those wars, who obey those laws or suffer the consequences and who assume they have rights even if they don't have wealth - to be able to survive with decency and dignity.


They shouldn't be allowed to forgo contributing to the common good - that's why we have the deficits that we do. The wealthy are too freaking greedy to accept that they have a stake in the common good. That's sort of sociopathic.

[BOG PERSON]

13. i'm not sure what rampant capitalism really means

are you saying you want enough capitalism but not too much?

[BOG PERSON]

15. on second thought, there already is a system of checks and balances on capitalism

it's called supply + demand :evilgrin:

[Spike89]

16. As others have said, that is what government is

But it isn't an on/off switch, or even a bank of legal switches that can be voted on. The only true way to avoid bad government is to have an informed democracy with real power. Although I tend to lean well into the socialist philosophy, I also strongly feel that any effective true world economic system must combine elements of individual reward and social benefits. The US has never truly been a full-blown capitalist society, just as the world has never seen a "pure" socialist society.

The trick is to balance the two impulses - to spur efficiency and innovation (economic progress) you need reward/punishment, but to maintain the infrasctructure and social agreement (consent of the governed) you need to provide for the social good. Fire fighting is a good example of both principles at work. For instance, fire fighting equipment has gotten better, more effective, and safer over the years, at least in part because of competition and rewards. However, it is very difficult to find any local government that hasn't at least subsidized the local fire department. The vast majority of Americans enjoy socialized fire protection. In short, competition for better fire engines/pumps has been good, but we judge the service of fire-fighting too important to not socialize it. (not to mention that most non-idiots, i.e., non-Randians/libertarians, understand that letting their neighbor's house burn puts their own at risk or at least damages their property value).

[socialist_n_TN]

17. The only serious check and balance on rampant

capitailsm is a SERIOUS and STRONG socialist movement.

[Fire Walk With Me]

18. Kick.

Kick the Koch brothers out..