Have you done the 10-foot-radius capitalism test?
By Neal Larson
Within 10 feet of me, the dual-screen computer I’m typing on, with my cold diet soda sitting next to my smartphone near a bookshelf filled with affordable books in my climate controlled office illuminated by fluorescent bulbs casting light on my salt and pepper shaker I use to season pre-packaged food purchased at a local climate-controlled, fluorescent-illuminated grocery store should be evidence enough that our daily existence is enhanced incalculably by others competing for my dollar. Do your own 10-foot-radius test, then combine what you know about economics, human nature, quality control, math and manufacturing to grasp how and why it all got there.
It is impossible to overstate the favorable influence of capitalism in our lives.
While nobody argues for unfettered capitalism without controls on monopolies or absent regard for consumer interest, and excessive materialism poses some very real personal challenges — all we hear is whining about the “greedy millionaires and billionaires” — many of whom make these standard-of-living creature comforts possible on a wide scale.
In a recent YouGov poll, millennials were shown to prefer socialism to capitalism. More than four in 10 Americans under the age of 30 have a favorable view of the collectivist ideology. Compare that substantial number to capitalism, which attracted a favorable view from less than a third of the same group.
Propaganda works, and over the past 15 to 20 years the steady drumbeat of mainstream bias connecting capitalism with a host of human frailties — like greed, cronyism, fraud, and corruption — has significantly tarnished the reputation of an economic philosophy that has indisputably elevated the global standard of living to a degree unparalleled in human history. Capitalism and its global reverberations feed far more mouths than any collectivist system ever will.
This particular demographic set, filled with entitlement and delusions of superior intellect, appear poised to demand from current and future taxpayers free education and free health care by implementing a system that could never produce their cherished offspring of innovation: the iPhones they use to post on Facebook pictures of their new Prius bearing the bumper sticker of the latest candidate peddling… socialism. Yet the iPhone, the Facebook, the Prius, and even the bumper sticker are all products of capitalism — that economic philosophy they hate. It never occurs to them that socialism produces no innovative pressure in society. It only redistributes resources according to some bureaucrat’s definition of “fairness” and it’s always a zero-sum game.
The origins of this generation’s entitlement are not difficult to identify. These are the emerging adults from a generation raised with trophies for all and no scoreboards anywhere. Of course they were embedded with a script that everyone should win regardless of effort or talent or circumstance. Equality of outcome, regardless of input, became their virtue. Free education and health care are the grown-up versions of “everybody gets a trophy” and “nobody ever loses.” Intellectually honest millennials preferring socialism to capitalism would turn in their hybrids and smartphones, designer clothes and favorite music collection — all of which have been made possible and available because someone somewhere wanted to elevate their own life by offering a product other individuals are willing to buy — the essence of free-market capitalism.
Does anyone doubt the demands by progressive millennials and their successors will grow? If education is a right others should pay for, and free health care is a right extractable from the collective, then why isn’t shelter and transportation and food and buying power and entertainment and every other need and want in life a shared responsibility? It isn’t a surprise that these same people are making demands for safe spaces, trigger warnings, protection from microaggression, and a $15 per hour minimum wage. If they demanded from themselves a tenth of what they expect from others, they would succeed on their own.
There’s a problem when the millennials’ sense of entitlement can see greed only in the wealthy CEOs or the successful entrepreneurs who work tirelessly and risk daringly. If they want a real example of greed, perhaps they should check out their latest selfie.
Associated Press award-winning columnist Neal Larson of Idaho Falls is also a conservative talk show host on KID Newsradio 590am, 106.3 and 92.1fm, and also at www.kidnewsradio.com. “The Neal Larson Show” can be heard weekday mornings from 8:00 to 10:00. His email address is neal@590kid.com.
It’s demonstrably true that capitalism has afforded people the highest standards of living by far ever achieved by any society in all of history.
Unfortunately, it suffers from a fatal and insurmountable flaw – it rewards people in direct proportion to the contributions they make toward our material welfare.
That means, the people with the greatest combination of talent, skills and ambitions have a claim on most of which they produce, and those who for whatever reason produce little or nothing, wind up with yup, little or nothing.
A great many people feel that those who earn more by working longer/harder/smarter somehow have an obligation to share what they earn with their less productive/unproductive neighbors.
That has the potential to kill capitalism, because it lessens or eliminates the incentive to work longer/harder/smarter.
What we need is more socialism, where we divide everything we produce equally. Of course there may not be much of anything TO divide equally, but at least we will all be equal.
C.R.,
The sad truth is that at this time in the history of capitalism in the U.S., it is no longer about only those who work longer, harder, or who possess the most talent, or who dedicates the most time and energy. Capitalism has evolved into a socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor as Dr. Martin Luther King put it. When you read about the Koch brothers and how they have worked over the years to bring us to where laws are made for the masses and those at the top in the minority don’t have to pay attention to them (because the masses are weak and have to be controlled you know), it is clear that capitalism doesn’t even apply to most people as far as democracy is concerned. Look how they now are able to control who is president.
Mr. Larson is obviously referring to the many young people who support Bernie Sanders for President. By labeling them as “filled with entitlement and delusions of superior intellect, appear poised to demand from current and future taxpayers free education and free health care by implementing a system that could never produce their cherished offspring of innovation: the iPhones they use to post on Facebook pictures of their new Prius bearing the bumper sticker of the latest candidate peddling… socialism.”
I would label them : filled with the realization that their dreams of being able to participate in the American dream of jobs in which their expertise and talents are valued, their ability to support a family is not threatened by education debt, and their perceived arrogance or pride in superior intellect is not just the object of ridicule instead of encouragement.
The economic advantages of the Democratic Socialist economic plans of Bernie Sanders has given them a reason to hope. Contrary to all the right wing accusations of claptrap to the contrary, the plans that have been put out are paid for in large part by the same money that pays for existing programs, not new money except for the education money which he plans to get in part by passing a tax on financial transactions, including stock, bond, and derivatives trades. In Britain, a 0.5 percent tax on stock transactions raises about $40 billion per year. The U.S once had this tax in place. It is supposed that this comparatively miniscule amount will have little or no impact on legitimate trades; however it will actually help to put a lid on the fringe traders that tend to destabilize the markets with their “noise.” Raising taxes is also a part of the plan; however, if such things as health care and education costs are reduced the savings should level out the new tax.
I think that his plans make more sense than he is given credit for. Those young people who support him are actually bringing their parents and grandparents on board through their efforts to bring about the economic changes that are so desperately needed to rid us of the destabilizing and undemocratic brand of neoconservate capitalism that is ruining our country. Viva Bernie Sanders
Jen –
OK, I hear what you and Bernie are saying. It distills to “We’re all in this together and the high-earners amongst us have an obligation to share what they earn with the low earners/no earners. The earnings disparity is far greater than it used to be, and it calls out for ‘re-distribution'”.
The (perhaps unfortunate) facts are that over the course of the last three or so decades, the combination of globalization, high-tech and robotics has served to greatly reduce the market value of unskilled labor, while simultaneously raising the market value of talent and skill. The effect of that is, in the immortal liberal phrase, “The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer”. Another way to phrase that thought would be, “The productive are now even more productive, and the unproductive are now even less productive”.
Bernie cannot recognize the hows and the whys of that situation so all he can do is accuse and blame the high-earners for being “greedy”.
Well, of course the high-earners are “greedy”. The low-earners are also “greedy”, indeed EVERYBODY is “greedy”. What that means is that going around screaming about the prevalence of greed in the world is a fatuous exercise in stupidity and futility.
All you and Bernie can do is keep trying to convince the low-talent low-income earners to vote for the Bernie types, and God only knows, that should not be a tough sell. The numbers are on your side!!
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes and the America that doesn’t. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don’t. That’s the divide in America .
It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.
That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it.
The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just. That is the rationale of thievery.
The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit.
It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful–seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences.
Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.
Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.
You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in equality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”
Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.
It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
“Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.”
Quote Lou Holtz
Yes, it took awhile to say what he said.
You two have good points with which I agree; however you and Mr. Larson are making one colossal mistake when you try to equate the folks who are trying to force politicians to rebuild our economy into a productive one instead of the smoke and mirrors upon which our kids’s futures now rest, with takers and those who don’t want to work or the have nots.
When I was growing up, we were totally shocked when a young man committed suicide. Now Idaho and Utah are the highest ranking states for suicides – most of them young males. The use of drugs has ruined more lives than I can count among kids from the small towns in which I once taught school. These were schools hit hard by suicide as well. It takes more than the fingers on both hands to count the number of young males who killed themselves.
I have a desire to see the attitude of us versus them that you two are demonstrating brought to an end. I know it won’t happen because of anything I say or anything I can or can’t do, but because your attitudes prevail all over this country. One thing is abundantly clear. We all need to start thinking about the children and respecting their hopes and dreams. We need to begin to think that just maybe change can occur if enough kids get behind it. After all, they are our only hope for a decent future.
You don’t need to even use the term “greed” because things have gotten way beyond that now. It is a matter of will we survive without total anarchy or will we be able to return to a democratic nation. All the kids want is for this country and our democracy to endure, and for everyone to have enough.
If you cared to read about the Koch Brothers, for example, you will find that they have actually spent millions on think tanks for the sole reason of finding ways to keep from paying a minimum wage. Not from raising the minimum wage, but to do away with it. They want people to work for less and less. They have also spent millions to break unions and deny workers bargaining rights. They are working to destroy social security and any form of safety net for those who need help. They are the most powerful “job providers” in the country. Isn’t it comforting to know that they are capitalists and not money grubbing, greedy socialist freeloaders?
This is what capitalism offers. And you think Democratic socialism would be bad? Our capitalist society won’t overcome poverty until democratic pressure from below forces the state to engage in affordable education, job training and public investment; e.g., mass transit systems upgraded utilities systems and infrastructure that will create high-wage, productive jobs for all. That would be a small beginning. When more people work, more pay taxes. Maybe then health care and public education will become more of a reality. As it stands, the high costs of state colleges are simply preparing the way for privatization of all our education. Won’t it be swell when the Koch bros. and the rest of their ilk are in charge of that also?
You two have good points with which I agree; however you and Mr. Larson are making one colossal mistake when you try to equate the folks who are trying to force politicians to rebuild our economy into a productive one instead of the smoke and mirrors upon which our kids’s futures now rest, with takers and those who don’t want to work, or the have nots.
When I was growing up, we were totally shocked when a young man committed suicide. Now Idaho and Utah are the highest ranking states for suicides – most of them young males. The use of drugs has ruined more lives than I can count among kids from the small towns in which I once taught school. These were schools hit hard by suicide as well. It takes more than the fingers on both hands to count the number of young males who killed themselves.
I have a desire to see the attitude of us versus them that you two are demonstrating brought to an end. I know it won’t happen because of anything I say or anything I can or can’t do, but because your attitudes prevail all over this country. One thing is abundantly clear. We all need to start thinking about the children and respecting their hopes and dreams. We need to begin to think that just maybe change can occur if enough kids get behind it. After all, they are our only hope for a decent future.
You don’t need to even use the term “greed” because things have gotten way beyond that now. It is a matter of will we survive without total anarchy or will we be able to return to a democratic nation. All the kids want is for this country and our democracy to endure, and for everyone to have enough.
If you cared to read about the Koch Brothers, for example, you will find that they have actually spent millions on think tanks for the sole reason of finding ways to keep from paying a minimum wage. Not from raising the minimum wage, but to do away with it. They want people to work for less and less. They have also spent millions to break unions and deny workers bargaining rights. They are working to destroy social security and any form of safety net for those who need help. They are the most powerful “job providers” in the country. Isn’t it comforting to know that they are capitalists and not money grubbing, greedy socialist freeloaders?
This is what capitalism offers. And you think Democratic socialism would be bad? Our capitalist society won’t overcome poverty until democratic pressure from below forces the state to engage in affordable education, job training and public investment; e.g., mass transit systems upgraded utilities systems and infrastructure that will create high-wage, productive jobs for all. That would be a small beginning. When more people work, more pay taxes. Maybe then health care and public education will become more of a reality. As it stands, the high costs of state colleges are simply preparing the way for privatization of all our education. Won’t it be swell when the Koch bros. and the rest of their ilk are in charge of that also?
Jen –
I don’t know that much about the infamous Koch bros., but looking at the companies that make-up Koch Industries, I seriously doubt that they have a single employee that earns minimum wage.
And I don’t know about them “spending millions to break unions”, but I do know that it was globalization that killed private-sector unions, not the Koch bros.
Jen –
Forgot one thing. I’m actually all in favor of upgrading infrastructure, but it’s worth mentioning that the wages of the people building the new highways, water systems, power grid, etc., have to be paid by the taxpayers – that’s you and me and everybody.
Ah, yes suicides that over the years haven’t changed much, just more people around to try that way out. But just short of 8 years of wonderful Obama economics can’t be blamed? Just the Koch Brothers? How odd? Obama is blameless in that world but Koch are guilty even is they’re successful and Obama is anything but.
http://www.who.int/mental_health/media/unitstates.pdf
Seems one age group generally has the most but ignore that. Males, 75+ age group.
1950, lowest, minimum wage was about $.25 an hour (my mothers wage back then) and now they want $15.00 an hour and that’s better? No prices rise to meet any number that we put up as minimum. So maybe minimum wage isn’t the way to solve it? How about price controls run by the same people who are failing at minimum wage raises?
Local hamburger joint raised their wages to that number. Every time I go in there they have a new bunch of workers as the old ones left after about a week or so. Seems it requires them to work for the wages and they want to do anything but work. Local HEB grocery stores lists starting wage as $13.72 and hour but few apply as they have to work stocking shelves which is too hard for them. Better to sit in Sec. 8 housing and wait for the Food Stamps/EBT cards to show up once a month. Local newspaper did a survey and found that the average person on welfare was taking home $75,000 a year. I need to go on welfare is would triple my income.
When I retired they gave me a list of what I and my employers had paid in over the years. If they had invested it over time I would have had a retirement fund totaling in the millions but no, now they tell me social security is going broke. Got a bunch of acquaintances who spent the years doing ‘contract’ work, i.e. off the books who now pull social security minimums each year more than what they ever put into the fund. But the problem is horrible people like me that put in huge amounts for them and they abuse the system? Can’t have it both ways, but they do try, don’t they?
I retired 7 years ago and my manager recently told me she has gone through 14 people trying to replace me. Good wages too. They finally required a 4 year college degree and still they can’t find anyone to replace me. I never had a single degree over time. My job was to bail out Phd’s in over their heads. Never got hacked once. And yes, fought with my manager’s manger more than once when I bluntly told her doing what she wanted was beyond stupid.
But call it capitalism, which it never will be and blame everything on people who work their tails off over time and see where that gets you.
Oh, did I mention my mother got 40% more social security than I ever have? Yes, everything is paid for in my world and yes, you never own anything in this world do you? I’m paying more property tax in 6 years than this place cost totally. Appraisal district say it’s worth 15X as much as I paid for it originally. But that’s a ‘minimum’ tax? Hardly.
Indeed it would be better if the Koch Bros would be in charge, they know how it works and better yet how it doesn’t? Good idea you didn’t consider there.
But you run with those who want to be paid for doing nothing to earn it and watch nothing get better.
Jen –
The wicked Repubs are guilty of lots of bad stuff, but suicide rates ain’t likely one of them.
Here’s your HERO, Jenuwin.
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines-2016/bernie-sanders-a-bum-who-didnt-earn-his-first-paycheck-until-age-40-then-wormed-his-way-into-politics
One thing that I definitely can’t do anything about is that darned captcha code mess that is so finicky that one can’t tell what has posted and what hasn’t. It takes five or six tries to get one that is “acceptable.” Is there a secret of which I am unaware? Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t.
D.R., You and C.R. are so defensive when it comes to looking at the needs of our future generation. Why?
As for running with the Oligarchs like the Koch brothers, you want to have them in charge? It just might happen sooner than you think. I just finished reading an article on how they are playing benefactor and building many programs that are designed to disarm people all the while they are undermining our government. They have organizations all over the country in every state which they use to defeat issues even on a local level:
http://www.reid.senate.gov/press_releases/2015-10-06-reid-its-time-we-let-the-koch-brothers-know-our-country-is-not-for-sale#.VsV71SlVStg
The article I read said that the Kochs want to make government unbelievably small. Kiss your social security goodbye and medicare will be only a dim memory.
As for the bum, Bernie Sanders, he made a choice that was consistent with the cultural values of many in the sixties. He was against the establishment then as he is now.
And what is all this about Republicans? You remind me of the time one of the kids in art class “spilled” some glue on a chair. I was having a bad day anyway and I said “Now who was the little jackass that did this?” I know. My bad. Anyway, the next day I heard from one of the parents. “My son said that you called him a jackass.” Until then I really didn’t know who had done the deed.
I guess that most of the things I have said seem to be an indictment of Republicans in your minds.
Why is that?
As regarding CAPTCHA.
If you spent more than a few minutes writing your response, then click on the “M” with a circle around it to the right of the code and get a NEW code.
Lower case and Upper case (capital) is important, don’t put in a lower case expecting the code to be taken if the letter was an upper case character.
If not new code appears, click the “M” again and wait until it does appear. If the new one was sent but you don’t see it, the old one won’t work.
Make government smaller? I’m all for it. The social security administration is giving away my SS to people who don’t deserve it and punishing me for their bad economic choices?
Kochs are successful, Obama never has been.
Democrats in 1960 passed a resolution/law about not replacing a supreme court judge in an election year. Chuch Schummer in 2007 used the same logic for not letter George Bush put in a nominee but that can all be blamed on republicans. Nope, just on democrats, seems they don’t remember what they say and think that we won’t notice. Say it and the Internet remembers.
“Given the track record of this president (Bush) and the experience of obfuscation at the hearings–with respect to the Supreme Court, at least–I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circustances.? DEMOCRAT Chuck Schummer 2007.
But now the democrats are saying Obama has the “constitutional right” to do what? Nope.
“When asked by a reporter whether the American people can expect his nominee to be a “moderate,” President Obama laughed.” Oh, he said NO but ignore that.
Bernie is a world class loser. Fathered a child out of wedlock. Spent way too much of his life on welfare. Was a conscientious objector who now wants to be commander-in-chief so he can surrender to all our enemies at one time? The list goes on and on about his lack of credientials. Wrote porn for $50 a story, but ignore that.
Trump would love to run against Bernie, Bernie’s history is littered with failure after failure to even be a responsible anything.
Nope, KOCH is better, they’re successful.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/13/flashback-senate-democrats-in-1960-pass-resolution-against-election-year-supreme-court-recess-appointments/
Look it up.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/03/chicago-law-professor-on-obama-the-professors-hated-him-because-he-was-lazy-unqualified-never-attended-any-of-the-faculty-meetings/
How many more you want, there are a plethoria of them?
Oh, I met the professor quoted above years ago, so no it’s not a rumor.
Jen –
Re: the “. . .organizations all over the country to defeat issues . . .” I guess the reason that does not disturb me is, I think those issues need to be defeated, because they are to the detriment of the country. You obviously feel otherwise, and I get that.
You’re mis-reading me on the “Republican indictment” things. That is not bothering me at all. I’m fully aware that you are pushing collectivism (we’re all in this together and the high earners gotta share with the low earners), and I’m advocating more individualism (Everybody for himself).
And don’t jump the conclusion that that means I’m “greedy”. Actually, I AM greedy, same as is everybody else. I’m also all for charity and generosity, but I prefer it done on an individual level rather than government level.
It’ interesting to me, just how that “greedy” thing works within our national politics.
The reluctance of the high-earners, high productivity people to share their income with the low-earners/no-earners, low productivity folks is perpetually characterized by Dems/Libs as “greed”.
However, the desire of the low earners to force the high earners to share the fruits of their labors with them is NEVER defined as “greed”!!
So tell us somebody, what word does describe the desire to reap where you have not sown???
Negligent?
Never sow but want to reap what others have sowed? That type of negligence?
Not according to my understanding of that word. I’d have to go with ‘greed’, but that’s the point of my question – libs would not agree, so what WOULD they call it? Certainly not “negligence”.
Neither one of you value the “human capital” that makes possible the “success” of corporations. No one is “asking for a handout” when they want decent wages. They are simply asking to be properly reimbursed for their own investment of time, and labor; often work related expenses as well.
C.R.,
I’m a “low earner” and I “share my income” with whomever the state or federal gov. determine may need it. Actually, although I may complain I remember when I had to be one of those “takers.” Often it was only the comfort that my dad gave that kept me going, “You don’t need to worry. I’ve worked my tail off for years and paid my taxes.” I’m glad that I can do the same now.
Jen –
Not true about not valuing “human capital”. I have no quarrel with businesses paying “decent wages” and employees being “properly reimbursed”, and I’m betting all successful businessmen feel the same way.
But the problem comes in the determination of “decent” and “proper”. The only possible criterion for that determination has to be the marketplace. If an employer can find skills equivalent to yours for less than you demand, he has no choice but to hire that person, and if you find an employer who is willing to pay you more for your skills than your current one, you have no choice, right?
As the Soda Springs Ford dealer says on TV every night, “It’s just that simple!”
I’m glad your dad’s rationalizing made you feel better about your former unfortunate circumstances, and I’m glad that makes you feel good about helping others, but I never had that advantage.
Carrier Corporation just moved it’s manufacturing business to Mexico. Seems those employees don’t require as much reimbursement as American ones do. And no, the illegals aren’t going back to Mexico to take advantage of the new wealth, are they?
I remember a computer company named Honeywell/DEC that sold itself to Bull of France. Bull took all the employee funds and ran. PBGC (Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation of the U.S. Government did nothing and we sued to get 17%). I dare you to find any of the companies mentioned still in the computer business. It’s call stupidity and it was fatal for them.
But they never considered themselves ‘greedy’ did they? I remember one manager who bought a $40,000 desk and didn’t see a problem with doing so way back when. He’s long gone and the company went down with him.
Never accepted a single penny of welfare over the years, ever. Put a huge amount into 6 adopted ‘special needs’ grandchildren over time that the government never reimbursed me a single penny for. We’re find that now they’re growing up to be ‘special needs adults’ which is not good. Mom’s pot habit can’t be undone in them.
Enjoy the rationalizing.
The government rewards bad behavior and punishes good behavior and some people never understand that that is at the root of way too many of our problems that are getting worse and worse.