The future of capitalism will not look like its past

Last December, the Pew Research Center released a poll in which it attempted to gauge American perceptions of capitalism and socialism. Here’s what it found, broken down by age group:

cap:soc1
cap:soc2

The generational differences reflected in those numbers are stark. Americans aged 18-29 are deeply ambivalent about capitalism, while a slight plurality is supportive of socialism. Their grandparents, on the other hand, offer a mirror-image reversal, reporting an overwhelmingly negative view of socialism and a generally positive attitude toward capitalism.

There are many ways to interpret numbers like that, the most obvious being the Churchillian observation that people tend to grow more conservative as they get older. There’s no doubt some truth to that, in part because as people get older, they acquire more wealth and want to protect it. Like older Russians who mourned the collapse of the Soviet Union, older Americans also become emotionally invested in the system in which they’ve lived all their lives.

However, I suspect there’s also something deeper at work in those poll numbers, something that reflects the different historical experience of the age groups in question. And that difference will influence public policy debates in this country in profound ways over the next three decades.

Today, younger Americans have no cultural memory of the Cold War, an era in which American capitalism was in existential conflict with Soviet communism and its softer, more rational cousin, socialism. Unlike older Americans, they were not raised in a world that divided itself along that particular fault line. Framed in a more conservative way, younger Americans have little direct, first-hand experience with socialism. They are, you might say, naive about its drawbacks.

The dividing line between those worlds would of course be 1989, when the Berlin Wall collapsed. Today, Americans who are 40 or younger have lived all of their adult lives in a world in which communism was no longer a grave threat to capitalism. And that’s important, because the basic insight of capitalism — competition is good because it drives people and organizations to do better — applies to political ideologies just as well as it applies to football teams or individuals.

In this case, as long as communism existed as a realistic alternative, capitalism and its defenders had to mute its harsher aspects to make it more appealing. They had to “deliver the goods” of a broad middle class, with a division of the economic pie that would be judged by both insiders and outsiders as fair and just. Otherwise, they would be handing ammunition to their ideological enemies, who depicted capitalism as a brutish, winner-take-all system.

But after 1989, with its competitor vanquished, capitalism in effect began to exert its monopoly power. It became rougher, less paternal and more aggressive. If income for the already wealthy soared while the pay of working class Americans stagnated or even declined, well, too bad. It was justified as Darwinian justice, a form of justice much different from the concept of economic justice that had been in effect prior to 1989.

Today, when younger Americans think of capitalism, this is the system that comes to mind. Their parents and grandparents experienced it as a system that produces great prosperity; in their own lives, they have seen capitalism produce something much less appealing. The fact that the collapse of 2008 was driven largely by Wall Street excess, and that most of those who engaged in that excess have escaped serious consequence, only compounds the image problem.

I’m not trying to argue that we’re now entering some kind of post-capitalist era, because whatever its disadvantages, capitalism still beats every other system known to man. But it will have to be a form of capitalism that fits the needs of its time, and it will be molded by generations that have different expectations and understandings. Capitalism is not a static concept; it must live by its own rules, which means that it will adapt or it will fall.

– Jay Bookman

527 comments Add your comment

josef

November 19th, 2012
3:57 pm

Charts, graphs, tables, economics…our boy’s back home….

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:04 pm

JAY

I would agree with most of what you say, speaking more from the sociological. I would add the corollary that we are also in the post industrial revolution. In the older days, capitalism produced goods, something tangible for the benefit of all. These days is is more a paper chase without a tangible end product which is of benefit to society as a whole.

Stevie Ray

November 19th, 2012
4:07 pm

JAY

I think the student debt, job market, economic meltdown and the like has our already softened underbelly looking for more help from Gov’t…example is OWS..

My other comment is whether you have read up on what is happening in France (our current trajectory, in many ways, may get us there) as “French companies have shrunk almost 40 percent over the past decade, while those of companies in Germany—where painful labor-market reforms were carried out—have risen about 40 percent.” Check out the link that discusses the letter from CEO’s of top French enterprises…

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-11-14/french-ceos-help

Finn de Siècle (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

November 19th, 2012
4:07 pm

barter is better!

Joe Hussein Mama

November 19th, 2012
4:10 pm

All your progeny are belong to us.

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:10 pm

FINN

The Land of the Luddites spokesman, ‘ere ye! :-)

Paul

November 19th, 2012
4:11 pm

Yup. The younger generation bases its opinion on what it has seen, not on what it’s been taught as an academic construct. And what it has seen in the lives of their parents and grandparents isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement. So if capitalists view this as another market to win, the power brokers will attempt to deliver the goods. So far, with an immediate example the current deficit talks with Republicans holding onto ‘let the rich keep more, let the less affluent bear the burden,’ they aren’t winning any market share.

Paul

November 19th, 2012
4:12 pm

One can even go further than that. Look at the ultimate insults of the right on this blog: ‘you’re all socialists on the Left!!!”

To which the younger generation thinks “really? I’ll have to look a bit closer at those the Right vilifies, ’cause it sounds okay to me.”

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

November 19th, 2012
4:13 pm

Well, this is kinda suprizing. I thought we brought our young people up better than that. I mean, if you want to be a millionaire. you got to have capitalism. I know I’m in my 60s and I still hope to be a millionaire. I only got about $989,000 to go and I’ll be there. And the worst part, these young people are going to be the majority one day. We’re headed to Socialism! I’m just glad I won’t be around to see it. Heck, if they get their way I’ll probly have to share a grave with somebody. Maybe even one of Those People or a Mexican.

It’s all the fault of Obamacare and this Kenyan Socialist Marxist President! One day everybody will have guvmint health care and no one will be hungry or in poverty and then where will we be? I’ll tell you where. Nobody will want to work at low wage jobs and everybody will get guvmint freebies. This is awful! Working your way up to a good job will be useless as the teats on a boar hog. If you can’t look down on somebody and call them deadbeats and people that made Bad Choices and won’t take Personal Responsibilty then what’s the use of living?

This is bad, bad, bad. We need to send every young person in America—except members of Young Republicans—to reeducation camps.And they need to stay there till they beleive capitalism is the only way to go. It needs to happen pronto. Right now. It’s alot worse than I thought.

Thanks, Bookman, for making my day grayer than the skies.

Brosephus™

November 19th, 2012
4:13 pm

Jay

Interesting idea. I don’t see much to argue with there. Only time will tell whether capitalism becomes a victim of itself or if it adapts and survives.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

November 19th, 2012
4:14 pm

JAY

Per WinstonChurchhill.com:

These quotes make for good story-telling but popular myth has falsely attributed them to Churchill.

“Conservative by the time you’re 35″

“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.” There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this. Paul Addison of Edinburgh University makes this comment: “Surely Churchill can’t have used the words attributed to him. He’d been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?”

AND

http://www.livescience.com/2360-busting-myth-people-turn-liberal-age.html

“By comparing surveys of various age groups taken over a span of more than 30 years, sociologists found that in general, Americans’ opinions veer toward the liberal as they grow older.

“All the evidence we have found refutes the idea that as people age their attitudes become more conservative or more rigid,” said Nicholas Danigelis, a sociologist at the University of Vermont. “It’s just not true. More people are changing in a liberal direction than in a conservative direction.”

Just so ya’ know.

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:14 pm

PAUL
@ 4:12

That is a valid point and one I hear being made by a lot of our young people. The Right and the capitalist don’t seem to grasp that old maxim that you catch more flies with honey than with vinagre…

Jay

November 19th, 2012
4:15 pm

Stevie Ray, I’d agree that the comparison of France to Germany is instructive, particularly to the French! But compare German productivity and economic equity to American productivity and economic equity, and what do you find?

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:16 pm

Why did the graph stop at 18-29 age bracket?

The trend would most likely trend toward socialism to the 14-17, 10-13, etc. brackets.

CJ

November 19th, 2012
4:17 pm

Capitalism and Socialism are not mutually exclusive. The United States has demonstrated and continues to demonstrate that.

For the purposes of discussion, it might be worthwhile for Jay to provide an operational definition of these two terms. I’m not sure that most people really understand what they mean.

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:17 pm

BROSEPHUS

Gibbon, anyone?

JamVet

November 19th, 2012
4:19 pm

We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both. ~Louis Brandeis, 1941

Jay

November 19th, 2012
4:19 pm

CJ, that’s kind of the point of the column. The meaning of those words is not fixed; it means one thing to younger Americans, and another thing to their grandparents.

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:19 pm

CJ

“Capitalism and Socialism are not mutually exclusive.”

And in those societies where the two have reached an entente, life is pretty good…

Harwell

November 19th, 2012
4:19 pm

I wonder how much of the disagreement is due to differing opinions and how much is due to differing definitions. For the older people, “socialism” was a different word for “communism.” For the younger people, the word “socialism” may remind them more of social media, social services, and people helping each other. Before you can draw any real conclusions about differing opinions, you’ve got to make sure that people at different ages are answering the same question. I don’t think they are.

Common Sense

November 19th, 2012
4:20 pm

The schools are fulfilling their destiny as described in the Communist Manifesto.

Stonethrower

November 19th, 2012
4:21 pm

Then that’s got shall get, them that’s not shall lose……..

Brosephus™

November 19th, 2012
4:21 pm

Gibbon, anyone?

Rolling forward in the chariots at full speed!!!!

:)

Jay

November 19th, 2012
4:22 pm

Thanks, Granny G, I stand corrected on the Churchill thing. Didn’t know that.

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:25 pm

IMAM

Wow! Red letter date. You admit you were wrong and stand corrected! Has Granny now been elevated to MAJOR historian? :-)

Citizen of the World

November 19th, 2012
4:26 pm

I don’t see capitalism and socialism as mutually exclusive constructs. You let capitalism do what capitalism does best and you let socialism do what socialism does best. How do you know the difference? Well, for example, with health care, the capitalist model is not working for millions of people, so we have a socialist option in the works. And that should be OK, except many people can’t get beyond the whole “dirty word” concept of socialism, any more than they can quit thinking that “liberal” is a dirty word, despite the fact that many of the freedoms and conditions we now take for granted were once considered both socialist agendas and liberal ideals.

JamVet

November 19th, 2012
4:27 pm

Good info, Granny.

And here I always thought that I was some sort of special outlier only to find out that I’m just a regular schmoe.

Such is life!

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:29 pm

So why don’t the dems just admit they are for socialism in the United States instead of hiding behind what the meaning of “is” is?

Paul

November 19th, 2012
4:30 pm

Hey CJ

” it might be worthwhile for Jay to provide an operational definition of these two terms. I’m not sure that most people really understand what they mean.”

I’m in the mood for some cheap entertainment, so when Ben Shockley shows up, would you please ask him that?

Seriously, though, to many of the New Republican Fold, ’socialism’ is a ‘you are lost forever to eternal damnation” label, given how they use the label ‘moderate’ to try and knock someone out of a primary contest.

Curious Observer

November 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

Gibbon, anyone?

Or as one of Dickens’s characters put it in Our Mutual Friend, “The Decline and Fall Off the Rooshian Empire.”

My own view is that capitalism carries the seeds of its own destruction. It permits crushing poverty for many, and those who live through such poverty never forget it. Our conservative friends need to keep that in mind when they disparage government-administered social programs and education..

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

CITIZEN

CITIZEN

On Obamacare…the problem there is that we’re trying to mix the two and that’s a recipe for disaster. The medical/insurance/pharmaceutical interests are happy as a pig in sh*t, of course, being good capitalists, but the average Joe Shmo will wind up paying for it and thus the whole megillah ends up full of sound and fury and signifying very little, the way I see it. This is a half assed measure sure to produce half assed results.

ByteMe - Got ilk?

November 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

CJ, that’s kind of the point of the column.

Oooops. That’s like having to explain the punch line.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

November 19th, 2012
4:31 pm

josef

Major Historian? Flattery will get you everywhere….

JamVet my sweet,

You are an IRregular schmoe and it looks good on you.

hewhoasks

November 19th, 2012
4:34 pm

Could it be that the great prosperity came despite the capitalists, because of the conviction and power of the labor unions? I fall in that 65+ category but I am aware that I and all of my age grew up in a society that was prosperous and accepted that as the norm. It just was. My parents (now gone) however grew up in an age in which prosperity increased, simultaneously with the growth in numbers and strength of labor unions. Today’s young surely perceive the decline of prosperity. They also appear to have some notion of causes and cures.

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:35 pm

Buy a diamond for your honey from Tom Shane and get a FREE rifle!

Is this country great or what?

ByteMe - Got ilk?

November 19th, 2012
4:35 pm

I just got called by someone “on behalf of oil and gas producers”.

So much for donotcall.gov. :(

Poor Boy from Alabama

November 19th, 2012
4:35 pm

Capitalism has withstood the test of time and is far from dead. While some folks in the developed regions of the world may have reservations about capitalism, folks in the developing regions of the world seem to like the innovation, economic growth and rising standards of living that come with it Young Americans will figure this out or they’ll watch others eat their lunch. My guess is that they’ll embrace capitalism as they form families and try to make a go of it.

Brosephus™

November 19th, 2012
4:36 pm

The fact that the collapse of 2008 was driven largely by Wall Street excess, and that most of those who engaged in that excess have escaped serious consequence, only compounds the image problem.

Had the government bothered to privatize the failures in 2008 as opposed to socializing them, maybe the collapse of 2008 wouldn’t be such the image issue that it is.

The way the system currently looks is that it’s completely rigged for mass failure unless you’re highly connected or born into the “right” circles. There are a few success stories of the small business startup that makes it to become a huge success, but those tales are the exeption as opposed to being the norm.

barking frog

November 19th, 2012
4:37 pm

I think we have social capitalism
but the Republicans of late have
adopted politically pure capitalism
as an ideal and I think Romney’s
defeat has ended that trend.

JamVet

November 19th, 2012
4:38 pm

hewhoasks,

To your excellent point…

Strong, responsible unions are essential to industrial fair play. Without them the labor bargain is wholly one-sided. The parties to the labor contract must be nearly equal in strength if justice is to be worked out, and this means that the workers must be organized and that their organizations must be recognized by employers as a condition precedent to industrial peace. ~Louis Brandeis, The Curse of Bigness, 1965

Logical Dude

November 19th, 2012
4:41 pm

to some, “Socialism” has become the “OMG, that’s the WORST THING IN THE WORLD!”

but think back. . .just a couple of years ago. (*twirling spirals in front of you*). (you know, the 20’s).

When robber barons, you know, robbed.
When labor was used like slave labor
When children were forced to work

Ahhh, the good ol’ days of Capitalism at its peak.

So, a few controls were put in place, “regulations” if you will. Because some capitalists just have no self control.

(spirals)

Today, the middle class in shrinking, expanding the lower class.
Companies that could pay a fair wage for full time folks complain about taxes, and make people part-time.
The current theme is profits and profits NOW, OR ELSE.
Regulations are repealed, or rather ignored if not repealed. It’s “cheaper” to get caught and pay a minor fine than actually follow the rules.

Ah well. . my mind is all over the map on this one.

Gonna go hunt some liberals. . . .”SOCIALIZED MEDICINE! SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!”

josef

November 19th, 2012
4:43 pm

LOGICAL

.”SOCIALIZED MEDICINE! SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!”

You rang, sir? :-)

Soothsayer

November 19th, 2012
4:45 pm

As more and more youth are disenfranchised of their participation in the capitalist system (witness 50% of college grads without a job) and become disaffected, why wouldn’t they naturally look elsewhere. They see a world without opportunity controlled by giant corporations intent on sending every job in America to a foreign country.

As an aside, I would like to see the United States government open and fund hospitals for the poor and the elderly not as a socialist move, but rather as a cost-saving (to the taxpayers) move. I would also like to see the United States government fund education for Doctors who can be identified as lacking the resources to fund their own education.

It’s time medical care left the “old boy” school behind. Maybe then, at long last, we might see a decline in astronomical medical care expenses.

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:45 pm

Cracker Jack needs to eliminate the free prize.

too little time

November 19th, 2012
4:45 pm

When you have little (and little to lose) socialism looks great. Gimme the freebies!

When you have worked your azz off and have managed, through life, to gain some things, socialism looks like theft.

Thus, I suspect that Jay’s chart has looked like it has since at least the 1960’s. Nothing new here.

St Simons

November 19th, 2012
4:47 pm

host, this is agent ‘Con-on-Fire Water-er’…

is it time to signal the Proletariats embedded in the System?

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:48 pm

St. Simons Is. would be a great place to set up several hundred housing projects.

Paul

November 19th, 2012
4:51 pm

too little time

“When you have little (and little to lose) socialism looks great. Gimme the freebies!”

You consider being taxed at 12% for starters just for health care (UK) to be a freebie?!!?

Logical Dude

November 19th, 2012
4:51 pm

A virtual dollar for anyone who can get the reference for hunting liberals :D

Progress

November 19th, 2012
4:52 pm

We haven’t been a purely capitalist country in nearly 80 years, since the advent of social security. There are no capitalist countries left in the industrialized world. None. All modern countries are a mixture of capitalism and socialism, and that includes the UK, Canada, Germany, Japan, Brazil, Israel, India, Russia, China, and the good ole USA. We already have major components of socialism. The demagoguery of the right over the issue will backfire on them. They keep crying “wolf!” and complaining that the sky is falling because we’re spiraling into socialism, and as younger folks realize that it’s all fear mongering and empty rhetoric they will ignore the tantrums of the right, and we just saw that 2 weeks ago on election day. The GOP needs to come with some serious ideas, and the hysterics about socialism do not qualify.

fedup

November 19th, 2012
4:53 pm

If you want pure capitalism look at the 18 hundreds. Rockfeller, JP Morgan, Carnegie were pure bred capitalist. In early 1900s we started the feds. Teddy, FDR, Truman, Eisenhower and Johnson brought small doses of socialism and mixed them with capitalism. That is when the US grew by leap and bounds. Reagan started to reverse that experiment. Guess what. Greed took precedence and we started having huge pendulum swings in the economy. The young folks have noticed that and want to go back to their parent and grand parent’s days.

barking frog

November 19th, 2012
4:53 pm

moonbat betty
that would depend on what the
meaning of the word Is. is..

St Simons

November 19th, 2012
4:54 pm

heyyy betty dam glad you’re back,
you have de island sense of humor,

Joe Hussein Mama

November 19th, 2012
4:54 pm

M. Betty — “Cracker Jack needs to eliminate the free prize.”

Give them time. We found out only last week that they were rolling out chocolate-covered, caffeine-infused Cracker Jacks. With that kind of product, hoodahell needs a whistle ring or a little book or stickers?

Abdur-Raheem

November 19th, 2012
4:55 pm

“…in part because as people get older, they acquire more wealth and want to protect it.”

True, there’s that. But one big reason we older folk have to be more serious about earning and holding on to $ is so that the younger demographic, including our adult offspring who we’re still supporting, can enjoy the luxury of their counterculture world view (which they usually outgrow).

Banderson

November 19th, 2012
4:58 pm

It would be interesting to see a chart showing the favorability of capitalism vs. the amount of capital controled by the person being polled, rather than the person’s age. I’m going to bet that those who control the most capital have the most favorable view of capitalism.

skipper

November 19th, 2012
4:58 pm

No problem with folks who may need a littlle help, but what got this administration back in was (yeah, I know, besides the terrible Repub soundbytes that they tripped over) was the threat that the free stuff might quit flowing! Unions that started off as a good thing are now running business out of business………….the Dodd Frank bill has screwed up banking more than Matt Millen screwed up the Detroit Lions, and whether it is Obamacare or whatever will not matter before long….nobody (even those who PRODUCE) will be able to afford it. We are being forced towards Socialism…..
@ hewhoasks: I’m glad your folks did well, but the unions back then were alot different than these 364 days-off/55-sick-day/ can’t fire a slacker rectum-heads we have now!

Tom Middleton

November 19th, 2012
4:58 pm

Somewhere between the total selfishism of lazzie faire and the total government control of most socialist thought, lies the spiritual path we can all travel on while staying out of each other’s way.

Happy Birthday, baby Jesus, or it will be soon. And may they come to understand the real God you represent. :)

Dunwoody Granny

November 19th, 2012
4:58 pm

The cultural environment the younger generation has been exposed to may also make a difference in their outlook. This may be Republican marketing gone awry. No one in America these days seems to know what socialism actually is. The 18-29 group is a strong demographic for Obama. Since you can hardly see his name anymore without the word “socialist” in the same sentence, it’s possible the Rs have convinced the younger generation that he really is a socialist. So in their minds, a socialist is a good guy, a guy who’s on our side.

While older folk like me think, “Goodness, for a socialist, this guy sure does seem to go for the capitalist solution to everything. He didn’t start a WPA or a CCC; he bailed out the auto industry. He didn’t try to nationalize health care; he mandated that everyone buy health insurance.”

moonbat betty

November 19th, 2012
4:59 pm

St. Simons,

I have friends down there and am looking forward to go down for a visit in the Spring.

JHM,

I will miss the tattoos and secret decoder rings though…

Orange12

November 19th, 2012
5:03 pm

JamVet

November 19th, 2012
5:03 pm

skipper, love those Limbaughesque, fact-free talking points.

And given your great results of this past election, keep up the good work!

(We’re counting on you…)

Doggone/GA

November 19th, 2012
5:04 pm

“My own view is that capitalism carries the seeds of its own destruction”

ALL social and economic systems carry the seeds of their own destruction. The trick it to keep those seeds from sprouting.

Banderson

November 19th, 2012
5:06 pm

Looks like the Hostess management group blinked. Going into mediation with the union. Folks trying to sell their Twinkies on ebay are going to have a fit.

skipper

November 19th, 2012
5:07 pm

Thanks, JamVet,
Just doin’ what I can…………

Skip

November 19th, 2012
5:07 pm

If capitalism worked we would be at full employment. How many years of tax breaks for the job providers does it take for jobs to appear?

skipper

November 19th, 2012
5:08 pm

p.s. Jamvet, I cannot stand Limbaugh…really!

DannyX

November 19th, 2012
5:08 pm

Have you seen the Cracker Jack prize lately? How about their peanut to popcorn ratio? Or the dwindling amount of product per box, if you can still find it in a box.

Not your childhood Cracker Jack that’s for sure. More like the modern capitalist Cracker Jack where they squeeze all the good out of it to prop up the bottom line.

Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional

November 19th, 2012
5:08 pm

@Redneck Convert (R–and proud of it)

November 19th, 2012
4:13 pm

These young people are going to be the majority one day. We’re headed to Socialism! I’m just glad I won’t be around to see it.

Heck, if they get their way I’ll probly have to share a grave with somebody. Maybe even one of Those People or a Mexican.

=================================================

You can’t hide your TRUE COLORS as you approach the autumn of your life.

skipper

November 19th, 2012
5:10 pm

p.ss. JamVet….the unions (whether you are repub/Leftie, Independant, etc.) are the most usless pieces of crap left in America….as a matter of fact, they are WORSE than crap….you CAN use crap for fertilizer…..unions, on the other hand……….

Brosephus™

November 19th, 2012
5:10 pm

Banderson @ 4:58

I don’t think that one requires a chart. Seems as though that would be about as obvious as water is wet.

—————

skipper

In 2011, the union membership rate–the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union–was 11.8 percent, essentially unchanged from 11.9 percent in 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.8 million, also showed little movement over the year. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union workers.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

That means that, since 1983, union membership has dropped 3 million members, but as a percentage of the work force, unions have lost half their percentage of the workforce in almost 30 years. Why are you attempting to lay blame for our economic issues on 10% of the workforce? Do you not realize that 90% have more effect than 10% does?

Joe Hussein Mama

November 19th, 2012
5:12 pm

Brosephus — “Why are you attempting to lay blame for our economic issues on 10% of the workforce? Do you not realize that 90% have more effect than 10% does?”

Republican math. It just doesn’t add up.

Welcome to the Occupation

November 19th, 2012
5:13 pm

The generational differences reflected in those numbers are stark. Americans aged 18-29 are deeply ambivalent about capitalism, while a slight plurality is supportive of socialism. Their grandparents, on the other hand, offer a mirror-image reversal, reporting an overwhelmingly negative view of socialism and a generally positive attitude toward capitalism.

One word: Roosevelt.

They had Roosevelt, a product of the aristocracy who was the American leader who came along at just the right moment to save capitalism from itself.

Who did we get? Barack Obama. A deeply insecure product of the immigrant class who carefully worked his way up the establishment by learning to play its game, and by carefully learning how to flatter it and not step on its toes.

He’s the ultimate servant of that establishment.

They BOTH suck

November 19th, 2012
5:14 pm

Do you not realize that 90% have more effect than 10% does?

_________________________________________

Realizing something and admitting something that doesn’t fit the talking points is not always something that is possible………………………

:-)

josef

November 19th, 2012
5:14 pm

GROWING OLD

Oh, the Du-k-sha-nee doesn’t hide his true colors…a capitalist running dog of Yankee imperialism, he. And an elitist, classist snob…imeoiauo….

Welcome to the Occupation

November 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

Our grandparents’ generation had Roosevelt, who saved capitalism from itself at its earlier moment of greatest crisis.

We have Barack Obama, the ultimate of appeaser of capitalism and enabler of some of its absolute worst tendencies.

And that is our tragedy.

Jay

November 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

Welcome, I seldom agree with you, but that last post had a lot of truth in it.

detritusUSA

November 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

The problem that conservatives have is that they don’t have a direct connection through their parents or grandparents to the Great Depression, or their parents or grandparents were not affected by the Great Depression. Their attitude is that socialism is evil and capitalism is the only way.

Conservatives should do some research and think about the conditions that ordinary people endured during that period of time. No work, no health care, no hope and, if no family to help or able to help, you were left to make it or steal or die. Is that the society we want to return to?

The U.S. economy is a hybrid of capitalism and socialism. This curbs the excesses of both and allows for a stable and peaceful society which benefits all of us.

JamVet

November 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

Rush? The king of sluts, prostitutes and FemiNazi lovers everywhere?

That guy is a real work of art.

Skip, go tell that to the men and women at Lockheed Martin. Boeing, Northrup Grumman, General Dynamics, etc.

Union-busitng is anti-American, it reeks of fascism and is part and parcel of why you neocons just got your heads kicked in on November 6.

Keep up the good work…

Paul

November 19th, 2012
5:16 pm

Unless it’s the top 10% that controls 90% of the wealth -

Darwin

November 19th, 2012
5:17 pm

Jay – aren’t you mixing apples with oranges? I consider socialism a political system and capitalism an ecomomic one. I was taught many years ago in school that the U.S. was basically a social democracy. This was due to the inclusion of social programs like Social Security and Medicare. Maybe there is a mixture here of as opposed of true government centered Socialism or Communism. But our democratic style of government maintains our current economic capitalistic system.

Banderson

November 19th, 2012
5:17 pm

Brosephus – I suspect there’s a high correlation between capital controlled and age. Of course, it could very well be that the connotation of the words “capitalism” and “socialism” have very different meanings to different age groups. People who grew up in the Red-scare age may just have a more negative reaction to certain words, even though they’re happy to get their Social Security, etc. without ever making the connection.

Banderson

November 19th, 2012
5:18 pm

One of the first things Hitler did was get rid of all the unions. Historical fact.

josef

November 19th, 2012
5:18 pm

WELCOME

While I’m not as strident as you are, I would agree pretty much with that summation. It’s the suck up mentality of the wannabe…but, well, it’s as American as Mom, apple pie and the grand old flag….

Peter

November 19th, 2012
5:19 pm

Capitalism got the raw deal when current society got so greedy it forgot about the human being.

CEOs want more than their fair share and will sell out their employes for more money……Follow the career of Romney.

Congress will sell out their principals so they can get inside information, and benefit as the rest of the country suffers….but hey at least most have doubled their net worth in the last 4 years…… well heck they know who is getting the next contracts…..good to be on all those committees.

Social security, that all put into has been stolen from, and that is because we need wars for oil, or pork to get a deal done in Washington.

And of course there are the few who know how to work the system, and get paid to have kids and rip off the working American’s…… It is an ugly place the current America….. where hating your neighbor is the real trend.

Jeffrey

November 19th, 2012
5:20 pm

The front page of the wsj said businesses are shutting down investments. I am pretty sure that is because they are protecting themselves and not worrying about others. That’s fine they have every right to do that. In my career I had the opportunity to get to know a company that within a week of 9/11 gathered their employees together to announce not layoffs but a new spec project to boot. It’s not socialism but it’s definitely my kind of capitalism. Forward. No fear.

josef

November 19th, 2012
5:21 pm

WELCOME

Me and Big Daddy BOTH agreeing with you? Damn! What’s next?

indigo

November 19th, 2012
5:22 pm

I’d guess many of our younger people are seeing, thanks to Big Business and their toady Republican stooges, just how ugly and mean predatory capitalism truly is. They will gradually come to realize that predatory capitalism favors only the very rich and their paid for political hacks.

We’ll probably wind up with a European type of Socialism.

The sooner, the better.

They BOTH suck

November 19th, 2012
5:22 pm

Jam

Earlier you mentioned the “war on Christmas”, one Pat Robertson coming up. He never disappointments.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/19/pat-robertson-miserable-atheists-trying-to-steal-christmas_n_2159844.html?utm_hp_ref=religion

Welcome to the Occupation

November 19th, 2012
5:24 pm

Thanks, Jay, josef.

“’s the suck up mentality of the wannabe…but, well, it’s as American as Mom, apple pie and the grand old flag….”

Not sure about that entirely. After all, Reagan was pretty American and he was not a suck-up, having sent scores of bankers to jail for their role in the S&L crisis. Then again, maybe what we think of as American has always been changing and is about to change further. Maybe it’s yet to be revealed.

harvey

November 19th, 2012
5:24 pm

Maybe it is as simple as this generation of young people have been provided for all of their lives, have been cushioned by indulgent parents, and we know they continue to live at home long after previous generations. I can understand their liking socialism. They have never had to contribute to the lives of others, and have never even supported themselves.

Mary Elizabeth

November 19th, 2012
5:25 pm

A column of depth and insight.

In my view, balance is essential, as consciousness continues to grow toward the humane, rather than toward personal greed. “More people are changing in a liberal direction than in a conservative direction.”

A growing consciousness toward greater egalitarianism . . .

“His (Thomas Jefferson’s) conclusion in the matter of laws and institutions was that they perpetually subject to change for the benefit of humanity. ‘Nothing then,’ he told Major John Cartwright in 1824, ‘is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.’ (From “Jefferson,” by Saul K. Padover, p. 379)

Perhaps, we should begin to consider what degree of competition versus what degree of cooperation we wish to perpetuate within society. Perhaps it is time to question whether the more ‘muscular’ concepts of power, dominance, winning, and wealth are the values most to be sought into the future, as opposed to the values of collaboration, cooperation, egalitarianism, and intellectual and spiritual development.

My only disagreement with the column is a matter of its perceived timeline. As far back as the 1930s, FDR’s social programs were implemented to modulate capitalism’s rough edges with a more humane vision. FDR’s vision and social programs have been fervently fought by ideological capitalists for more than 70 years, and their ideological and mercenary fervor against Roosevelt’s more humane vision led directly to the well-financed, well-organized and deliberately stealthy ideological agenda of powerful rightwing capitalists in the mid-1970s. These libertarian capitalists wished to counter the social programs and vision of FDR which lasted through John Kennedy’s vision regarding the Peace Corps and through LBJ’s vision of the Great Society. However, the more limited vision of these wealthy, powerful capitalists will not prevail as dominant as the world evolves, because their vision lacks the overriding consciousness of love for all humankind equally. Their vision lacks the spirit of egalitarianism upon which America was created

In terms of visions changing from youth to old age, I have had the same vision of humanity all of my life – from the time I first became a conscious human being, as a child, until the present day, when I am a senior citizen. I believe the change we are witnessing throughout America and the world is evolutionary in nature and it represents a evolutionary need toward seeking the Godhead, of us all.

Joe Hussein Mama

November 19th, 2012
5:25 pm

TBS — “Earlier you mentioned the “war on Christmas”, one Pat Robertson coming up. He never disappointments.”

When Mr. Robertson stops talking about atheists, I’ll stop talking about pigf***ers and Pat Robertson. But I repeat myself.

skipper

November 19th, 2012
5:26 pm

Yep….and that small union % so effeciently described by many has even out the Twinkie folks out……(much to Governor Christie’s chagrin….lol!) One dow not have to be a Repub or conservative either one to recognize entitlement hunters…..

Common Sense isn't very Common

November 19th, 2012
5:26 pm

Bro

quit trying to confuse us with facts.

:-)

Jeffrey

November 19th, 2012
5:26 pm

I like unions. I probably wouldn’t join one because of the Groucho Marx rule. I think the Marx brothers are more socialist than unions, and I’m not talking about Karl

Welcome to the Occupation

November 19th, 2012
5:27 pm

Well I think you used to agree with me more, Jay, did you not, that is before I became a bit more shall we say “radicalized”? :)

Logical Dude

November 19th, 2012
5:27 pm

The U.S. Trustee, an agent of the U.S. Department of Justice who oversees bankruptcy cases, said in court documents it is opposed to the wind-down plan because Hostess plans improper bonuses to company insiders.

Uh huh, The UNIONS are making the company fail? Hostess wants to make payoffs and bonuses to people. How can they if they are so broke?

I knew there was more to this story. . .

randy

November 19th, 2012
5:27 pm

Human success relies entirely on communities. No human on his isolated self-sufficient farm could build a computer or a satellite – despite the idiotic belief of many that they alone earned their income. The very concepts of “income” and “money” rely on a community called “modern civilization”.

I think we need an explicit theory of this economic network, a theory that explains how achievement within this network owes a share to civilization itself. Isaac Newton acknowledged that his accomplishments built on other people’s work, but many contemporary Americans fail to recognize that their entire careers couldn’t even exist without a complex civilization. They honestly believe that “they own every penny” they make, and that any attempt by the organization that creates civilization on top of lawless gangs (aka “Government”) to tax some of their income is “theft at the point of a gun”. Ah, if only they could be truly dumped into a gangster society in which that were literally true!!

In other words, civilization has a marketing problem. It should be immediately clear to everyone that such sentiments are absurd, but we don’t have a widely accepted theory that proves it. Such a theory will include pithy phrases exposing such “self made men” as the ignorant moochers they actually are.

dbm

November 19th, 2012
5:28 pm

We have NEVER had pure capitalism.

When you have a mix of capitalism and statism, you have to analyze what caused what before you can know what to blame.