Capitalism // Current

Naomi Klein on the Bailout Profiteers and the Multi-Trillion-Dollar Crime Scene

Video from http://www.youtube.com/user/IWantDemocracyNow Democracy Now! Nov. 17, 2008 Naomi Klein on the Bailout Profiteers... more

DandelionSalad
added this

G-20: USA and UK want the world save them | Cherada.com

USA and UK wan to apply the inverse mode of the Sanson Syndrome, something like: if you don't want to fall with us, then,... more

felipeivsv1
added this

Poverty Measurement in the US is Fatally Flawed

Poverty measurement in the United States is fatally flawed. By adjusting how we measure poverty, millions of Americans could... more

nelsonjs
added this

Crisis Summit: Bush and USA asks, what kind of capitalism refoundation

The financial crisis collapses credit, and credit collapses sales, which at the same time creates massive layoffs with widespread... more

felipeivsv1
added this

The Next Economic Stimulus Should Help Those Who Need it Most

First the banks were bailed out. Then the insurance companies. The big three automakers will be next. When will the working people... more

nelsonjs
added this

The Link between Poverty and Unplanned Pregnancy

A child’s chance of growing up in poverty is nine times greater if the mother gave birth as a teen, if the parents were... more

nelsonjs
added this

Stonewall was a RIOT

Stonewall's decision to nominate transphobic Julie Bindel of The Guardian for the Journalist of the Year award sparked an... more

QueerYouth
added this

Open Society Institute Awards $450,000 in Fellowships for Baltimore Communities in Need

Projects Include Promoting Native American Awareness, a Women’s Empowerment Center, Advocacy for Transgender People, Fitness... more

nelsonjs
added this

Make Way for Millions of New Community Organizers

Bob Giloth: "I hope that Obama puts together a Green Corp that works as a kind of energy independence and sustainable economy... more

nelsonjs
added this

Obama is the Candidate to Address Poverty in America

President Obama will be first President to genuinely address poverty in over 40 years. On behalf of the 35+ million Americans... more

nelsonjs
added this

Where do you stand on Cuba?

In Havana they have a different kind of advertising. Instead of billboards selling fast food, designer jewelry and beer there is... more

jubal
added this

44% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck

Our next government is facing a poverty crisis. It is an issue critical to the well-being of not only millions of individual... more

nelsonjs
added this

If Obama is a Socialist, So Are These Former Presidents

Any form of progressive taxation is wealth redistribution.

nelsonjs
added this

“Keep What’s Yours”

John McCain stated in his latest ad that he supports the basic economic philosophy of "Keep What's Yours." This fundamental principle echoes truths realized by the Pilgrims. This concept is universal and resonates with truth at a fundamental level in the individual. As “Tito the builder” would say, “give me opportunity.” Give me the opportunity to create and to keep what I create; give me the opportunity to keep what is mine. The only entitlement that an American needs is opportunity. But, is opportunity not inherent in Liberty? Did the Constitution not already establish this for us? John McCain stands for keeping what is yours, not unlike the Pilgrims, who stood for “keep what you make.” My question is what does Barack Obama stand for, “give me more”?

I ask because Barack Obama does appear to support including certain positive liberties or entitlements in the Constitution that do not already exist. He speaks of "economic justice", and then claims to be the highest source of "reason" for determining what "economic justice" is. Obama, in a 2001 interview with Chicago Public Radio (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck), stated that the Constitution is generally a charter of negative liberties - that is it lays out what the Government cannot do to you, but it does not lay out what the Government must do on your behalf. What must the Government do on your behalf other than provide opportunity? And, does the Government accomplish this by redistributing wealth? I think not. Rather, the antithesis is true. By giving an individual an economic entitlement, beyond opportunity, the Government is actually decreasing said individual's incentive to create or incentive to work. As, such, Barack Obama's philosophies on "economic justice", while they may contain a positive intent, are not realistic and actually would damage this great Country.

The Pilgrims (a puritanical group of English Separatists), when they were in England, were a religious minority. The Church of England made up the religious majority and for various reasons, the Pilgrims did not enjoy the Liberty they felt they deserved – they did not enjoy the Liberty that they were entitled. So, they moved to Holland and bought land, etc. There, the Pilgrims had trouble finding work, so they decided to go back to England. Once returning to England, the Pilgrims again found Liberty lacking and decided to depart for America.

The Mayflower Compact was the initial agreement of the Plymouth Rock Pilgrims, before they embarked onto this land. The Pilgrims were seeking to establish a utopian society, so, “To each according to his need, from each according to his ability” was actually a fundamental tenet that the Pilgrims initially attempted to adhere to. What the Pilgrims found was that some people are willing to work all the time, some don’t want to work at all and some only work under certain circumstances, such as threat of starvation.
To make things worse, William Bradford, one of the leaders of the English Puritan Separatists who we now call "The Pilgrims," noticed many younger men were lollygagging around while many middle aged men were working their butts off – obviously an inherently unfair circumstance.

So, William Bradford proposed a law stating, in essence: “keep what you make”. Here is the concept in the words of William Bradford himself:

more @ link...“Keep What’s Yours” John McCain stated in his latest ad that he supports the basic economic philosophy of... more

walesjames
added this

24 responses

20 days ago

The Virtue of Self-Sufficiency

During a speech today in Sarasota, FL, Barack Obama said that we don’t want to “make a virtue out of selfishness.” This statement is priceless as it provides us a glimpse into Obama’s view of a government’s role in society. It also happens to be a counter-argument in a dialogue that appears to be taking place in the undercurrent of this Presidential campaign. I say this because one of John McCain’s recent campaign ads includes the quote “keep what is yours.” This is one of McCain’s core views regarding government’s role in society and is priceless as well.

So, Obama’s counter-argument to “keep what is yours” is that it is selfish – and we don’t want to make a virtue out of selfishness. Now, on the surface that appears 100% true. However, there are two problems with Obama’s counter-argument.

The first problem is that Obama is engaging in this dialogue from a Statist point of view. Obama believes it is the government’s job to make sure we all share our peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. John McCain believes that you can share what is yours with whomever you please. The point, that Obama seems to miss, is that it should be your decision, not the government’s.

McCain, he gets it. He wants to motivate you to make more peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. This may sound trivial, but don’t be mistaken, it is fundamental. Whether you agree with “keep what is yours” or not, it is a fact that when the Pilgrims applied that concept the harvests were larger and the people lived better.

Now, why is that? The truth is that applying the concept of “keep what is yours” encourages self-sufficiency. To truly help someone you teach them to help themselves, do you not? I know it sounds selfish, but it is actually tough Love. There are, however, obvious limitations – but they play out on an individual level. The Golden Rule of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” leads to at least one obvious conclusion: “be generous”. We have a right to keep what is ours, but we have an obligation to Love our neighbors as we would have them Love us, which would imply sharing. This is an individual issue though; it is not the government’s place to meddle here.

Furthermore, the Golden Rule transcends religion, let alone government, and as such is an individual responsibility. An individual’s success at applying the Golden Rule provides a window into the soul – it is a fundamental gauge of kindness, to be sure. But, it is not the government’s job to ensure we all follow the Golden Rule, for if it were, free will, at its most basic level, would be infringed upon.

I believe the government’s job is to make this Nation as strong as possible. As we all know, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Is a Nation not a chain of individuals? Is America not a chain of Americans? A government should encourage every one of its citizens to be as strong as possible, thus strengthening the Nation as a whole – from a truly fundamental level.

The best way to do this is to encourage self-sufficiency. A government should encourage each one of us to strive for greatness, not accept mediocrity. If you Love your children do you not want them to be self-sufficient? When you wish to encourage self-sufficiency in your children do you give them just enough to survive or do you teach them to be industrious? Do you hand out fish to the hungry, or do you teach them how to fish? The choice is clear, the truth is clear, in this debate and this election.

More @ link…
During a speech today in Sarasota, FL, Barack Obama said that we don’t want to “make a virtue out of... more