Replies

I'm always suspicious of people who make several highly debatable statements that "we all know are true."

Was the late 19th Century a period when robber barons "raped the land, exploited the American people and created hellish slums?" Why then did millions uproot themselves from their homelands to come to such a disaster?

Was America "a nation that was poor a lot longer than it's been rich?" European visitors were making the comment as early as colonial times that the American yeoman farmer was much better off than his equivalent, the European peasant. Relative prosperity from the outset was the fundamental reason Americans saw themselves as independent beings not to be trifled with.

How do you argue with someone who says that we shouldn't be treated "as economic cogs?" But when that is followed up by statements that capitalism isn't good at redistributing wealth, that corporate profits are "excessive," that globalization boils down to "the takeover of the world's resources by multinational corporations," what is the implied solution? Fascism? Corporations in private hands in name only but actually under governmental control? It seems to me that that's where Reese's argument leads.

Once upon a time I remember reading that the term capitalism was coined by non other than Karl Marx - if that is in not correct than it well should be since it is actually a derisive term. Capitol - meaning money and ism = doctrine or belief system i.e. a world view that revolves around money. This is a very derogatory look at the free market but it is not political advantageous to rail against freedom therefore the communist types focus on the evils of money worshipping and most unfortunately the term has been fully popularized.

Regarding the evils of the 19th century robber barons it should be noted that it was the government that helped them become all they were. Lincoln and the Republican party established corporate welfare as policy i.e. government funds "helping" private businesses for the general public good. Part two of that is that the close relationship of government and these corporations once established bloomed into government favoring special interests over the general welfare. Governors - bought and paid for used the power of the state - police and national guard to come down on the side of large business in labor disputes for example. One further point is that the large influx of immigration floaded the labor pool so business could dictate harsh working terms and low wages to workers - if you don't like it there are plenty of others who need the work. No question that human nature is corrupt but government is not a fair arbitor - it is run by people who like everyone else are corrupt by nature. Government is force and nothing else. That force has been allowed to be harnessed by corporate interests and that is why the founders knew the answer is more freedom and less government in all things. Things are a mess because we discarded the wisdom of the founders.