Night Strike wrote:If you didn't have private individuals investing their money, you wouldn't have an economy. People who invest their money risk their money on whether or not that company will succeed. That's why they deserve to earn a share of the profits: they float some of the money needed to either start or to sustain the company. There are more ways to contribute to the success of a company than manual labor.
A share, sure, but their "share" has grown while the benefits the working folks recieve has shrunk. This has been masked, in part because a fair number of average people own stocks and/or recieve some assistance from family.
The real basis for economy is purchases. Cut people's ability to buy and the economy will fail, as it is now. It is delayed somewhat by credit purchases, but not halted.
You, Nightstrike, criticize "government regulations" and subisidies. Yet, who is the number one employer today? It is Walmart. Walmart, a company notorious for offering very poor wages to most of its workers, poor healthcare coverage to the few who even qualify and for bargaining for lower local tax rates in exchange for the "priviliage" of out-competing local businesses who seem "inefficient" , except that they return more money to their communities than Walmart. Walmart exists because people can depend on subsidies for healthcare coverage, childcare, housing or just partial support from family, particular spouses or other incomes sources such as social security.
You cannot feed the top and pretend the bottom can just live off the dregs. It does not work. What works is to ensure that we protect and support folks who actually work, and then let those who want to play the money game play with what is left after that.
Most people could really care less if the overriding economic system is a socialism, capitalism, monarchy or a dictatorship. They want food on the table, education for their kids and the ability to laugh and play a bit. (music, art, sports, etc.) The rest is political gamesmanship.
There has arisen a mindset that this is somehow wrong. That these people who want to decide that they will risk THEIR futures and THEIR incomes on THEIR dreams somehow are justified in criticizing people who want security, a fair paycheck for fair work. This garbage about people "being lazy", etc is just excuse. Its easy to blame someone who has failed.. no one, after all is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. The point is if making a mistake in choosing the wrong career, trusting the wrong person, etc should really mean they deserve nothing better than to starve, here in the US when we have the ability to continue to be the wealthiest nation on Earth.
Nightstrike, you want to paint some fiction of a dream world that never existed where entrepreneurs and the like could do as they wish and suddenly everything worked out OK, except maybe for a few modern tweaks to allow for things like pollution. When I suggest that the fact that a contaminent persists for 200 years means we need to ensure it is safe for 200 years before sending it out.. you act as if I am insane. Well, that is exactly why we have not a single uncontaminated stream or moutaintop in this country and very likely on Earth. And.. make no mistake, it matters. It may not spell our death tommorrow, but we know enough to know that many of these cause serious and direct harm. The rest is resting on ignorance. Perhaps you are comfortable feeding your kids unkown substances on the assurance that they are proven safe in a 6 month or year long test. Most people are not.
What we need is to first protect our overall base.. the environment that allows us to live and survive. Then we need to protect our production base, prmoting sustainability and safety for long-term production, along with worker supports and protections.