Capitalism is the ultimate democracy.
Read that again.
No where else do we exercise our free agency more independently that how we choose to spend our pay cheques.
Think about the decision-making process of a consumer.
You deposit your pay cheque and then you make a decision, completely independent of any Wall Street clowns, about what you are going to do with it.
You decide you are going to buy some groceries.
Where do you go to get them - democratic decision number 1. Safeway, WallMart, the local farmer's market, the corner store.. it's completely up to you.
Once you arrive, now the democratic process really takes over. What do you buy? Doritos? If so, what flavor? Nacho Cheese, Buffalo Wing, Ranch, Onion Rings and Ketchup.. the choices abound. And not so much as a soft hand on your shoulder as you vote for your favorite.
And so it goes. Do you buy Kraft dinner, or do you go with the generic brand of mac n' cheese. Or do you make it from scratch yourself, and buy a bag of elbow macaroni, a block of cheddar, some milk and floor?
Note, again, no one telling you what choice you have to make.
By the end of the shopping experience, you've made, perhaps, a hundred choices - all by your big boy self - with nary a government employee or evil corporate magnate compelling you to make any of them..
Oh sure - they market and advertise and, to some extent, brainwash you into thinking that this brand or that brand will make you happier, sexier, more fulfilled - but at the end of the day, you are a complete free agent in how you choose to spend your dollar.
And so goes virtually all of our decisions on spending our dollars - the sole exception being income tax. That is the least democratic expenditure you make.. no control there. The government tells you to hand over your money - and only in the most oblique way, do you have any impact on how they spend it.
How ironic, then, that the call from the "Occupiers" is for higher tax.
Because what they conveniently forget, is that massive gap between the wealthy and the not-so-wealthy, is a product, for the most part, of the democratic process inherent in capitalism.
No one forced any of us to purchase the new iPhone.
And yet we did. And Apple suddenly earns billions of dollars - and becomes part of the hated "1%".
Likewise with almost all major corporate giants - from Microsoft, to Coca-Cola, to Time-Warner, to Anheiser Busch.
They earn billions of dollars, not because they are able to force you to buy their products, but because you CHOOSE to buy their products.
This is the great failing of the anti-corporate anarchist types.
Because while they may capture the angst and, yes, envy, of the masses that they don't have what the wealthy have - what they can't do, in any meaningful way, is convince the marchers at OWS to throw away their iPhones.
To NOT shop at WallMart.
To NOT go see the latest piece of garbage from Michael Moore, or Sandra Bullock.
To NOT, effectively, hand over their hard-earned money to Michael Vick and Ben Roethlesberger.
To NOT invest their savings in marginal return, but very safe, GIC's, and Term Deposits.
We want what we want. And while many of us may feel a certain sense of unfairness in the wealth of corporate giants - we're not prepared to vote against them en mass with our pocket books.
And maybe we should.
And THAT is the message that these Occupy clowns aren't getting out. Because that would require work and sacrifice.
If you really want to benefit the small guy, if you really want to turn the tables - stop shopping at WalMart. Go to your local grocer, to your local produce market. Stop going out for dinner at Wendy's or McDonald's, and go to your local burger joint, or your local restaurant instead of Chili's and Tony Roma's and Olive Garden.
If you are tired of unheard of profits going to greed-heads at Goldman-Sachs - well, put your money in savings. Make lump-sum payments on your mortgage. Or invest in a local business that you can see and touch.
Will it happen?
Don't hold your breath.
Because while the "99%" like to talk the talk, they aren't ever going to walk the walk.
Certainly, some people can't afford to make those capitalist distinctions. The difference between buying $100 worth of groceries which would cost $125.00 locally may be too painful for those at the low end of the income scale.
But WallMart isn't making their billions from low-income families. They are making the vast majority of their money from the burgeoning middle class - who could choose to spend a little more to help the little guy - but don't.
So.
Want to change the gap between the 99% and the 1%?
Who's stopping you?
9 comments:
Great post. We were just talking tonight about how many people interviewed on these shows had a cell phone, ipad, etc with them. I saw some laying on a table where the people were handing out info on their Occupy protest. They belonged to the people manning the table. I could see two iPhones clearly and just rolled my eyes.
I don't have an iPhone because I CHOSE not to purchase one. I have a plain old boring cell phone I bought at walmart (another CHOICE) as a pre-paid package. I do not pay for the internet on it (Choice), I only pay for a cheap text package (choice), and my phone costs me a grand total of $10 a month (choice). When I bought it, it was $69 but came with $50 airtime credits (so basically the phone cost me 19 bucks). I can keep in touch with my friends, boyfriend, oldest son, as many times a day as I want for 10 bucks (choice).
But I don't hate Apple for their contraptions. I think they are cool. I would like one one day - but I decided (ooo another choice!) that I did not want a big honking bill to come with it every month so I chose to go cheaper.
Everyone has a lot of choices to make. I have been a single mother of two living in community housing (I had to pay 30% of my net earnings for rent, so it's not like I got off easy), and I struggled. I had to choose what to buy for food so that I could stretch my dollars. But I always had that choice. I also chose to go to my local food bank twice to help out in a tougher period and they graciously gave me lots of lunch snacks to pack for my kids.
I chose not to go back because I decided I could be better at balancing my money and being more careful where and when I shopped (hitting safeway on the first tues of the month for an extra 10% off groceries, for example). I read flyers to find out where good deals on food were and took an hour to plan my shopping trips, etc. These decisions and plans saved me a lot of money each month. Too many people don't do that anymore.
They want what they want and they want it NOW. They want it even if they cannot afford it. Of course I wanted nice furniture, big fancy tv, flat computer screen, etc - but I couldn't do that without sacrificing more important things so I reminded myself that these were just 'things' and not necessary to my life and health and I have survived just fine without those things.
I spend far more money on food each month than my friends who earn a heck of a lot more than we do. They don't know how I've done it - but I did it by making CHOICES. I choose to have more money for food than to make payments on new couches or beds.
Sorry so long lol. It has just consistently driven me crazy to watch interviews with some of the people at these protests who have no idea why they are there or what they are talking about. They hate corporations while wearing Nike trainers? Um okay. I have never owned an expensive pair of runners in my life and neither have my kids lol. Last time I checked, we could walk just fine!
Stop buying the d*mn stuff from these corporations and then maybe I will listen to a few of them. Stop going to the store and purchasing things that only arrived there via big trucking companies and I might listen. Stop trying to force us all to hate the rich people while being employed by them, directly or indirectly, and I might listen. Stop clapping for the sickeningly rich celebs that show up at Occupy protests to show their 'support' before jumping in their hundred thousand dollar vehicles to drive back to their private jet and return to their multi-million dollar homes, and I might listen.
But that's just not going to happen, is it?
Thanks for the response.. not only does the "occupy" movement ignore the reality that the really wealthy are wealthy because of OUR choices - but, in ignoring that reality we also ignore the reality of our own power.
If truly 99% of the population says, "we aren't going to do business with big brokerage firms", we would accomplish much more than a bunch of clowns polluting city parks.
But that would take rational and effective discussion to speak to the true 99%.
Not gonna happen.
Great Post, excellent comments. ... especially "They want what they want and they want it NOW" . (Bravo!) It's partly my generation's fault , but more so the direction, I feel, of this society. The issue is not capitalism. but Consumerism "the THEORY that an increasing consumption of goods is economically desirable" (Merriam Webster) We have embraced this theory; not only at the corporate level, but the political level... trying to achieve some miraculous balance between inflation and stagnation of the economies, first in the Western world, and now in "emerging economies" like China & India.... scary with the populace there! This is not sustainable, nor (in my mind) desirable. Meanwhile impoverished nations struggle simply for survival. We have lost sight of more credible values, for the sake of economic gains. But still, corporations are only trying to appease the greed of their own investors. I used to agree with the disdain of the evil Oil companies, jockeying their prices, or the big banks (which I still disdain); but are they not simply responding to the demands of our consuming public who want the greatest return on their investments? So the problem is us! IF gas wont' do it for me; I'll sell my stocks and switch to a Telco or then to ___ (fill in the blank). We all do want it all now. It has become self defeating. No easy answers in this ever-more complicated economy that someone has created. ... BUT at least some people are speaking out. "Occupy This" But This is not an new issue... but one that has simply never been effectively resolved. "Consumerism" has been around since 1941 .. to stimulate economic growth. It is an outdated theory, and ineffective solution. More education and awareness, and soul searching is needed. Answers.. that's tough! but at least people are speaking out.
I have to say - your concept of "choice" strikes me as a little bit naive. The amount of choice you have is ultimately limited by a number of things that are at least partly beyond your control: the amount of money you have to spend (we know not everyone has the same life chances), the access you have to particular stores and prices (rural and northern areas pay much more for food; many urban and sub-urban people do not have fresh food within walking or public transit distance); your knowledge about what's healthy / wise / high quality (not everyone's intelligent - let's admit that).
Second, I recognize that there are some blatantly anti-corporation folks involved with Occupy, but many others just want reform - so that corporations pay more taxes, so they can't form mega-corporations with exclusivity agreements (i.e., so I can CHOOSE to buy Pepsi instead of Coke at an arena), etc.). In my view, Occupy's message is about liberating people from corporate control, which means raising taxes on the people who already have access to any choice they desire, so that everyone can enjoy at least a minimum of choices.
KF.. I don't think I'm naive at all.
There is no reason that people HAVE TO shop at WalMart.
And beyond that - there is no reason that anyone, ever, has to buy Coca-Cola, or an Apple Ipod, or attend an NFL football game, or attend a movie.
The amount of money that companies generate is a direct result of personal choice.
Why do Wall Street brokers make so much money - because there are a LOT of people (including government pension fund holders) who give them money to maximize their return that results from "corporate greed".
There are choices that can be made every day to even out the field - but, in a purely democratic way, people choose not to.
Hence ignorant talking heads like James Cameron and Michael Moore making hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Robert: Thanks for your reply. I guess I need clarification on who you're writing about. If you're writing about middle-class people who continue to, say, buy bottled water and discount groceries from suburban Superstores while their local shops are screaming for customers, we're in agreement. But there are other people who, for various reasons, many of them systemic and not personal/individual, lack the capacity to 'choose' differently.
I suppose this also comes down to what each of us believes we owe one another as humans.
For some, we simply owe one another independence - I'll take care of myself so no one else has to, and you do the same. The ultimate value is individual freedom.
Others would argue that we are interdependent whether we want to be or not, so we might as well acknowledge it and imagine ways to collectively steer the ship in the right direction. The sticking point seems to be around the relationship we think an individual ought to have with society. Is that way off?
"Certainly, some people can't afford to make those capitalist distinctions. The difference between buying $100 worth of groceries which would cost $125.00 locally may be too painful for those at the low end of the income scale."
(From my original post)
The billions of dollars being made by Wall Street, by Apple Corp., by most massive corporate structures - are not being made on the backs of the poor. They are being made on the backs of the middle-class.
Biggest corporation in the world? WalMart. Followed by a bunch of oil companies. Followed by Toyota, Volkswagon.. then some financial corporations.
How many Prius's were purchased by the lower-middle class last year?
I was driving on a freeway in San Francisco a couple weeks ago - those people are no the "poor and downtrodden" by and large - they are middle and upper middle class that could commute, but choose not to.
The percentage of the population that is constrained by economic circumstance to very few choices are not fueling Wall Street greed.
It's the big middle.
The "99%" if you will.
And they, by and large, don't feel any need to alter their choices for the benefit of their neighbor.
But then, that's democracy, I guess.
Ah: that's the part - the last part, about democracy - that gets me. If "making the world a better place" is all about our individual choices, but we can't interfere in other peoples' business, and yet 'other people' are consistently making choices that screw the rest of us... what opportunities are there for actually achieving a better, more just, more equal(ish - some level of inequality of income is totally justifiable), more tolerant society full of happier, healthier, 'freer' people?
You can disengage from this any time, by the way - I don't mean to hijack your blog comments - I stumbled upon it Googling 'the ultimate irony' to ensure I didn't use a phrase that had some terrible connotations (like a friend's colleague who insisted on repeatedly calling something 'the final solution' in a presentation). But I am genuinely looking for a dialogue on this. As someone who shops locally on very little money, sold her car in order to use public transit, walk and cycle to work, and generally reflects on the impact of my decisions on others, I still take a very different view of the problems and solutions before us... and I find that fascinating.
Yes, indeed; some very good dialogue in this blog; and this type of dialgoue serves great purpose in showing a great deal of "civility" while expressing diverse opinions. That in itself is refreshing... the media (my industry) does tend to put forth hot headlines to draw in the reader/viewer... audience; and the more disparate the views the greater the push it seems. What we need here is more direction, and focus on action/solutions. The media has lost interest, the 1% have safely sat it out. Extremism tends to draw the headlines whether locally, nationally or abroad; sells more, I guess!
Post a Comment