The Cannibalism Of The One Percent

The Article: The View From The 1 Percent by Tom Ehrich in the Washington Post.

The Text: Now that the financial industry and major corporations have successfully lobbied Congress to make more people poor and to keep them that way, they are discovering the downside of unbridled greed: people are too broke to buy their products.

Heavy discounts were necessary to stimulate sales on Black Friday — a stimulus that lost steam as the big shopping weekend proceeded. Now further discounts will be required. That bodes ill for retailers, as well as for their suppliers.

It’s one thing to own Congress, but it’s something else when consumers refuse to buy. They’re staying home, maybe shopping online; they’re not investing, not saving, not selling their houses, not feeling confident about their own jobs.

In a freer free-market economy, competitors would emerge to resolve these problems. But corporate giants do everything possible to stifle competition. Consider Verizon’s bid to buy $3.6 billion of unused wireless spectrum to prevent anyone else from having it.

Thus we see the demise of modern capitalism, brought down not by socialists or fringe elements, but by the capitalists themselves.

Their self-defeating behavior — like that of any addict — has led them into the delusional belief that they can have it all. They can kill prosperity, stifle competition, rig capital creation into an insider game, undermine countervailing forces — and yet somehow the great market will continue to shower wealth on them.

The problem is, when the only ones who have money are the ultra-wealthy, those who actually make the economy work — small business, merchants, job-creating employers, innovators, government agencies — are starved. Despite the relentless right-wing drumbeat on tax policy and government spending, the villain in that starvation drama is the greedy 1 percent.

GOP strategists have concluded that the way to defame Occupy Wall Street is to brand them as “anti-capitalist.” In fact, they’re mostly job seekers who would be thrilled to see our free-market economy succeed and put them to work. Their protest isn’t against capitalism; their protest is proof that capitalism isn’t working, a victim of delusions in high places.

The problem, you see, isn’t the economic system as such. It’s the shortsighted, avaricious people who are running the system.

It began years ago when they decided to pad profits by squeezing labor costs, thus shrinking the middle class. Then they padded their own salaries by juicing stock prices at the expense of long-range thinking, thus discouraging innovation and capital investment. Next they crippled regulators, thus undermining confidence and inviting corruption; and finally demanded tax laws that benefit only them, thus diverting spendable money into their bank accounts.

What did they think would happen? If no one wins except a very few, the economy stalls. With all the incremental wealth in a few pockets, who is left to buy $200,000 houses or $20,000 Chevrolets or even $200 lawn mowers?

How did these leaders make it out of business school, law school and glossy colleges without any understanding of the fundamentals? The system has to work for everyone, or it won’t work at all. The enemy of democracy is an entrenched elite, and the enemy of a free-market economy is greed.

Where is God in this? Where God has always been: telling the rich to share, exposing delusions like bigger and better barns and Mammon-worship, standing with the poor and hungry, and demanding justice.

Email

0
From The PBH NetworkHot On The Web
  1. Alan says:

    This article and website is straight garbage. Anyone who brands the occupy movement as capitalists looking for employment is delusional to say the least.
    I’ve been to these tent cities and they are full of people with dreads, tats, and gauges in their ears holding up signs saying such things as taxes=jobs. Even if these dirtbags are qualified for employment who the hell would hire circus shows like this.

    And the reason capitalism isn’t working now is because we are far from true capitalism. We currently have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world and since 2008 we have fallen from the #1 most competitive economy to #5. So any argument that capitalism is failing is an invalid one.

    • Anonymous says:

      True but…
      http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/focus-0

      You want to know why America is not competitive? Simply you shipped your industry to China for profit and China instead of manufacturing the stupid shit you want them to manufacture started making their own brands. (see Asus, Acer, Fujitsu, GE & Fanuc etc).

      http://hbr.org/hbr-main/resources/pdfs/comm/fmglobal/restoring-american-competitiveness.pdf

      Dont make plastics in America, or jeans, or TVs, computers, not because the tax rate is high but because no one in America want to make these things. As Steve Jobs told Obama, “Apple had 700,000 factory workers employed in China, he said, and that was because it needed 30,000 engineers on-site to support those workers. ‘You can’t find that many in America to hire,’ he said. These factory engineers did not have to be PhDs or geniuses; they simply needed to have basic engineering skills for manufacturing. Tech schools, community colleges, or trade schools could train them. ‘If you could educate those engineers,’ he said, ‘we could move more manufacturing plants here.” You raised a society of entitled children that want everything, now. Educated to become lawyers, doctors, financiers (oh yes I am generalizing).

  2. freeportguy says:

    It’s all about: short term vs long term.

    Corporations are run by people who know their window of opportunity is limited, hence the “future is now for them”: maximize the profit for the corporations asap in order to maximize theirs while they can. As for the whatever next follows, they leave it to the the next managing team.

    That is how GM ended up on the brink of bankruptcy: profits were higher on big vehicles and trucks, AND the Japanese had the upper hand on the smaller car segment, thus GM focused on the former. As soon as gas prices went up, GM found itself in a bind, not able to sell gas guzzlers, while not being to compete on the small car market.

Hot On The Web