Is capitalism leading to a breakdown of our morals
Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:34 PM Edited by canttakemyid, 29 November 2012 - 08:40 PM.
Capitalism has it's flaws as with any economic system created by a cognitively flawed species(humans). However, the much needed reform to these flaws will likely be marred by blind activism. These are emotionally charged people who are entirely against the establishments (such as Wall Street) without being totally aware of their role in society. "Wall Street" is really just an often rhetorically-charged metonym for the financial services sector. Though at the upper levels of this sector we have seen some serious misconduct , the industry as a whole is very important and one of the largest in the world. We have to be very careful in regulating this industry this time around because we are really playing with fire here as we've seen the effects of failed politically-charged regulations. Implications of regulations to large industries are far more consequential than smaller ones. This unhealthy disparity in financial knowledge is what has led to this unhealthy disparity in financial circumstances. Don't believe me? Take a beginning level finance course and here the ignorant sh*t your fellow students say.
This anti-1% sentiment is clever and revolutionary yes; but at the same time very naive. Realistically, what percent of those Occupy Wall Street protesters really know what the hell they're talking about on regulatory matters and much less financial matters? The simple fact that someone has enough to be in the "1%" is irrelevant to the rest of society. A top 1% will always exist (even in communism) due to the existence intangible assets and a number of other principles. The disparity of wealth is the problem, not the existence of it. We also have two very false assumptions that the majority of the 1% were born with wealth and are hundred millionaires. The differences between the bottom of that 1% and top of that 1% are vast. The disparity doesn't stop at 1%. I guess that's just where the activists just stop caring . First off, we have the billionaires (.000018% of the global population or 1226 people according to Forbes) who are actually quite philanthropic as it becomes more beneficial for them to do so at that point which then makes their greed irrelevant to our interest. Then we have the lower 1%, who in the US are worth around $9 million. So now we're talking about this grey area within the 1% who really have the far more potential to "contribute" (get taxed) more through their businesses and entities than their personal assets. We also have the problem of what 1% is actually referring to since it could apply to net worth, income, corporations, etc.. In America's case the income 1% are households who see incomes of at least $500,000; and if someone where coming from the baby boomer age, that's not terribly difficult to obtain with a really good career, a well-off spouse, and sound investment knowledge.
Quality over Quantity
The problem isn't the lack of regulations by volume. It's incompetence of the regulators (often politicians). We have plenty of regulations that fail to regulate the true threats to our economy. When we generalize all wealth building entities as greedy, we shoot ourselves in the foot because guess who's actually doing the producing and hiring in society? Businesses. The last thing the world needs right now is more regulations that the large powerful firms can dodge while the small "mom and pop" firms suffer. I'm talking about firms in general too. Everything from food franchises and dance studios to CPA offices.
*Most of the world dangerously puts a lack of emphasis on finance or economics in their core educational subjects; often leaving the average person to make decisions in the dark.
Posted 02 June 2014 - 08:57 AM Edited by mysteriousamg, 02 June 2014 - 09:20 AM.
Posted 02 June 2014 - 10:29 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users