- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Your 'morality' is morally reprehensible

Posted by: Stoller on November 21, 1999 at 23:52:53:

In Reply to: You quit! posted by Stuart Gort on November 21, 1999 at 19:22:59:

: Tell me what is compassionate about disregarding a method of creating financial independance through prudent investments that is time tested and has, bar none, the greatest track record in history of doing so.

Because YOU have been privileged to earn enough to invest in America's bubble economy, you presume that anyone can.

Fact: '71% of households own no shares at all or hold less than $2,000 worth in any form, including mutual funds, 401(k)s, and traditional pensions.' (Business Week, 1 Setember 1997, p. 67.)

Fact: Market returns only 'fatten the wallets of the top quarter of households, which own 82% of all stock.' (Ibid.)

Fact: 'The right defining statistic for the last two years is the negative savings rate [for average Americans] first recorded in September 1998. Negative savings rates hadn't been seen since 1933.' (New York Times, 18 January 1999, sec. A, p. 17.)

Fact: Total household debt is 98% of total disposable annual income. (Business Week, 1 November 1999, p. 40.)

: I'm saying if you went hungry for a while you'd learn to appreciate what is good about a job - any job. You'd be happier to have that job and less inclined to bite the hand that feeds you.

So said the prętorian guard to the slaves of the Roman Empire!

: Tell me what is compassinate about creating an ever growing dependancy class - as is all we have ever seen of socialism.

That statement is a CRASS DISTORTION.

Sure, Stalinism created a bureaucratic elite. But it's income was inconsequential compared to the wealth usurped by the capitalist elite.

For example, Stalinist bureaucrats received only 4 times as much as rank and file Soviet workers. In America, bosses earn up to 200 times that of average American workers.

You attempt to paint socialism as some sort of welfare state. That is PATENTLY UNTRUE.

Socialism is predicated upon EVERY ABLE-BODIED INDIVIDUAL WORKING. Even the darkest of Stalinist regimes adhered to that principle.

On the contrary, it is HERE that there are TWO parasitic segments of the population: 1) the reserve army of the proletariat thrown a few table scraps every now and then to purchase their docility; and 2) the capitalist class which monopolizes the means of production but doesn't actually WORK it.

: Tell me what is compassionate about convincing people that work which sustains them is not good enough for them.

Do you have ANY idea how 18th century that statement sounds?

Your aristocratic morality is a disgrace.

If this country was as'great' and as 'wealthy' as you claim it is, then EVERYONE would do some interesting work once in a while---instead of laboring like farm animals.

Enjoy your cavier and moet while you can.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup