The Forum > Article Comments > Why the Occupy Wall Street movement hates business > Comments
Why the Occupy Wall Street movement hates business : Comments
By Peter Shergold, published 17/10/2011Something serious is going on. It was the Harvard Business Review, no less, that earlier this year published an article premised on the prescient view that the 'capitalist system is under siege'.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by freddington, Monday, 17 October 2011 10:04:25 AM
| |
Come on Diver, you're going a bit over the top mate.
The only morality I have ever been able to find in religion would have bee in the dying last gasps of the christian church. Just possibly that is what killed it. Religion can not be benign, & survive as any mullah could tell you. The thousands of years of people being ruled by the fear of god, as proscribed by prophets & priesthoods have been far from benign or moral. Church leaders appear to be on a par with business leaders to me, in their lack of efforts to enhance their subjects lives. Religious organisations in particular being very likely to demand complete obedience & even the sacrifice of their subjects lives in the glory of whatever was the god of the moment. Capitalists on the other hand seem to be quite happy with simply taking peoples wealth, & even give some product in exchange for that wealth. If morality is the question, I can not find religion anywhere in the answer. Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 17 October 2011 10:40:20 AM
| |
I think Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi has the right idea:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/my-advice-to-the-occupy-wall-street-protesters-20111012 The larger any organisation is, the more tiers there are and the greater the difference between those at the bottom and those at the top. This only benefits those at the top, so naturally they would like to be 'too big to fail'. This problem isn't only corporate; witness the amalgamation of councils in Qld and resultant pay rises for Mayors and councilors, already the envy of NSW councilors. What is needed is simply to apply the same rules we accept in society to the marketplace. It's ridiculous that the very behaviour we despise most in society, -bullying, ganging up and egregiously predatory practices- we accept and even applaud in the market. Stop treating corporations as if they were living individual entities. Stop corporations from owning other corporations, and bring in some genuine anti competition laws. It's high time we realised Economic diversity is every bit as important -to humans- as Bio diversity. Posted by Grim, Monday, 17 October 2011 10:49:01 AM
| |
Pericles:
# (let's not be lazy, and call it "capitalism", shall we folks?) # ...The misnomer “unregulated greed has destroyed the Capitalist system” is designed to capture sympathy by the lie it is, you have fallen into the trap. ...You criticise the subordinate, Adam Smith, as deficient in outlook by acknowledging his reference to balance, but a balance there is; with no social conscience when morals are removed, as they are now in the west, equilibrium rests in a void of the moral-less morass of increasing social incohesion; you surely make yourself a target of scorn to be ignored by the same posturing, but then try to redeem your position by imagining his outrage to capitalist greed by lamenting the immorality of executive salaries; but the real point is, capitalism is the antithesis to morals. How can supporters of capitalism stand steadily in two camps, one a boundless horizon of atheism excluding morals (as society has become), and the other with expectations of capitalism conforming to a social conscience built on morality? You simply cannot have it both ways! ...My comment lamenting the decline of religious influence in the West with its steadfast moral direction, so dismantled with unrelenting persistence by the apocalyptical black horse of atheism, and so fearful of a moral renaissance from the pockets of ancient religions still practicing is she, a war machine of unprecedented fury is unleashed from the gunnels of wall street (euphemism for capitalism) against all such, now branded with the mark of the beast as terrorists (God help them). Posted by diver dan, Monday, 17 October 2011 12:05:00 PM
| |
(Cont).,
...Little wonder then, now smoke and gunfire in the streets pitted against capitalist “might”, (the edifice Wall Street has come to symbolise), as Government largess grossly exaggerates their need for salvation, a largess affectively plundered from the lives of little people with unconscionable crushing arrogance of greed and inconsideration, clawing back the very freedoms it masqueraded as reward. …But alas I must confess, and based upon comparisons to the theory of evolution, grudgingly accept the inevitability of capitalism to remain standing upon the “FIXED” twin cornerstones of greed and market-forces, to the polynomial end of humanity itself. What must be fought for is the return of the moral compass to a society on the verge of cataclysmic change, before the looming attack on social welfare, a moral vestage still remaining, the loss of which will leave us to dwell in a purer capitalist world of “kill or be killed”. Posted by diver dan, Monday, 17 October 2011 12:05:18 PM
| |
We have a $1.8 trillion economy.Our average growth + in flation of 6% increases our money supply by $108 billion pa.We used to have Govt banks that created some of this debt as debt free infrastructure.Now nearly all this money is created as debt.Who should own our increases in productivity? A private group of banks or all those who produced it? Our own RBA can create new money for increases in productivity and reduce our foreign debt.This is the crux of the matter.Kevin Rudd did not have to borrow $40 billion from China for the NBN or stimulus,the RBA could have simply created it in their computers just like the Chinese Govt does.
The more growth we have in the West,the more debt we incur.Our total debt in 1976 was just 3% of GDP,now it is 53% of GDP.Our Govt debt is far less than the USA or most European countries but the Carbon Tax will soon see our economy get much worse since the CO2 tax is designed to destroy production.Hence there will be less tax and Govts will have to borrow more. Posted by Arjay, Monday, 17 October 2011 12:10:06 PM
|
Rudd, Gillard and Swan have discovered that the people of Australia have a rightful interest in the nation's mineral assets, but Australians as a whole haven't also woken to the fact there's $370 billion in our land rent, of which we capture only $32 billion, and the big rent-seekers receive most of the remaining $338 billion.
Michael Porter should just about be waking up to this by now, too.