Darwinian Capitalism

Something Jimi said in response to one of my posts has been bugging me.  He accused me (and most Americans) of falling into “the capitalist trap that claims that survival of the fittest has to be the main motivating factor in human society.”  He went on to make a point that free market capitalism grew out of social Darwinism.

I think the most obvious point that needs to be made is that the term “survival of the fittest” is not a very accurate description of the way natural selection works on species.  Jimi, like conservative opponents of evolution, implies that there is cold, thoughtless brutality in nature, that natural selection means weeding out the weak and leaving only the strong.  This is ludicrous.  Natural selection is about passing on genes, and that’s it.  Those that do so successfully aren’t necessarily the “strongest” or superior in any way; they just happen to be a little better at passing on their genes in a particular given situation.

Furthermore, anyone who thinks natural selection is all about thoughtless slaughter and selfishness has not looked at the natural world much.  Cooperation is one of the most powerful tools natural selection has devised.  In fact, take a look at all the social animals in the world and you’ll find the most prolific, intelligent, adaptable, and successful creatures on earth. 

On the other side of the coin, to say that free market capitalism is akin to “survival of the fittest” is gross simplification at best, rank sophistry at worst.  A wealthy and powerful business tycoon either provides a worthy service, or he goes out of business.  If he shams people with a worthless product, no one will buy from him.  If he treats his employees like garbage, no one will work for him.

If you think your boss is exploiting you, go work for someone else!  No one forced you to work for him.  Similarly, all the people of the Third-World countries that big corporations are supposedly exploiting are getting something out of the exchange.  They wouldn’t be working for these corporations if they weren’t better off by doing so.

In short, even the so-called greedy free market capitalists have to play by the rules of cooperation.  They can’t exist in a vacuum.  If they get too greedy, people will go work for other corporations that will gladly pay more if they can pick up the slack and make a profit.  This is how the real world works.  In a free society, the much-feared evil corporation is an anecdotal case that almost always gets its ass handed to it by another company that plays by the rules.

“Survival of the fittest” is the wrong way to look at evolution, and it’s the wrong way to look at free market capitalism.

Pelosi’s Legacy

Maybe this is finally the turning point.  Maybe Nancy Pelosi’s disgusting display on national television will finally drive people over the edge.  Maybe this represents the culmination of every stereotype about lying, slimy politicians who will sink to any level to avoid responsibility and get elected.  This is the Speaker of the House, the person who’s third in line to be president, and she’s so caught up in partisan politics and serving an ideological agenda that she has to disgrace herself by clinging to these ridiculous lies.

And she’s just the latest exhibition, the latest example of why our political system in this country needs overhauling.

Who in America still thinks that politicians are honest?  Who in America thinks the cliche about crooked politicians is too cynical?  Who in America truly wants to trust their future to people who work less than prison inmates, who steal taxpayer money for pet projects to get reelected, and who fly around in private jets and take their families on vacation on the dime of people who actually work for a living?  I mean, honestly, has anyone out there read the numbers of how much (or shall I say how little) time members of Congress actually spend at work?  Compare that to how much time and effort they spend on vacation and getting reelected.  The self-serving nature of these people is absolutely disgusting.

This isn’t a partisan issue for me.  The Republicans are no better than the Democrats.  For all their posturing about fiscal responsibility, all their opposition to Obama’s big spending, the sad but utterly unsurprising fact was that forty percent of all that pork in “Obama’s” stimulus bill was from Republicans.  Likewise, John McCain would have had a lot more credibility with his “generational theft” speech if he hadn’t been the one leading the charge on that first big stimulus piece of garbage during the election.

If we want someone to blame for this economy, I wish we’d stop hounding the people who were just trying to make the most amount of profit possible.  Greed in this sense really is good.  Greed makes competitors.  Greed creates new jobs and even entire new industries.

But greed mixed with political power is not good.  This is where cronyism begins to rule, and free competition is stifled because of sweetheart deals, lobbyists, and special favors.  The economy is fucked because self-serving politicians make the rules.  They’ve sold us out, and they don’t care about anything except their own greasy skins.  Pathetic specimens like Nancy Pelosi even put their own political career above our national security, to say nothing of our economic security.

Maybe this is finally the turning point.  Maybe Pelosi’s shameful mockery of leadership will finally prod Americans into the realization that the biggest thing hurting our economy and country is the same group of people who continue to perpetuate the lie that they’re going to fix it.

Touchy-Feely Economic Policy

I literally can’t understand why the American people think George Bush and the Republicans are to blame for the current economic problems.  Say what you want about Bush, but the economy has been absolutely wonderful for the last seven years, almost the entirety of his time in office.  It’s only the last couple months that things have turned sour.

What exactly have the Democrats done in the last two years about the economy?  I hear all sorts of Johnny-come-lately politicians claiming to have warned about the economic crisis, but not one of them did anything.  Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, the Democratic social engineering programs, and the government-backed groups like Fannie and Freddie all shoulder most of the blame here.  And yet, for some reason people are hooting like monkeys, saying: “This is George Bush’s fault.  This is because of Republican deregulation.”

That’s garbage.  Regulation and social engineering is at least mostlyto blame for this mess, and that’s indisputable.  Government intervention is now making it worse.  If you want to blame Bush for something, blame him for backing (along with Obama, McCain, and all the rest) that sickening bailout bill and these other economic “stimulus” packages.

Still, government’s just not that important in the long run.  The economy will recover, and not because McCain backs a new bill or Obama signs a new entitlement program.  The economy will recover because it’s made up of millions of people engaging in free trade and enterprise.  I wish the government would just stand aside and let them get on with it.

What’s scary to me is that the government is beginning to do the one thing – the only thing – it possibly can that will actually, seriously screw things up forever.  What’s scary is that every Marxist-leaning Chicken Little is coming out and saying “Capitalism is broken.”  They’re growing emboldened.  They see a borderline socialist like Obama about to become president with a borderline socialist Congress to give him whatever he wants, and they’re secretly clapping their little rat claws with glee.  This is the first step towards their version of what’s “right” and “moral” for society.  And it’s inevitable: With this election cycle, we have a choice between Big Government and Bigger Government.  With the economy as bad as it is, people are willing to vote for anyone who promises relief and a check in the mail.  They’ll give the looters a lot of leeway, they’ll nod along to social programs and stimulus bills and more regulation for those “greedy” rich people.

After all, it sounds so lovely on paper doesn’t it?  It’s all about being nice and giving back to the country that’s done so much for you.  You’ve done so well; shouldn’t the government require that you pay a little more – just a little – to help those who simply want a good home for their kids?  What could be more decent than that?  Doesn’t it sound so unfair and mean-spirited that McCain wants to give all those rich corporations tax cuts?  What do those greedy bastards need with more money?

We could say that those “greedy bastards” are the ones doing all the investing in America and creating all the jobs.  We could say that all McCain wants to do is leave them alone and stop punishing them as if they’re criminals who need to be fined.  We could say that someone has a right to do whatever they want with the money they earn.  We could say that it’s stunningly immoral to take what others earn at the point of a gun and give it to those who “deserve” it.

None of that ever seems to matter.  It’s as if all people want to hear is: “We’ll make it all better.  We’re going to reward you with an allowance and lots of rules to protect you from your own decisions because we care.”  This is what they seem to want, and this is what they’re going to get.

How Obama Will Steal Your Money

Two things Obama has promised to do as president is rescind the Bush tax cuts and double the capital gains tax (from fifteen percent to around twenty-eight percent).  I am against both of these steps, so I’ve been informed that the Bush tax cuts and low capital gains tax are responsible for “decreasing revenue and the continuing plight of the poor.”

First of all, what “plight” are the poor in?  The poor in America are much better off than the poor in any other country on Earth.  The poor in America have a major problem with obesity.  The poor in America overwhelmingly have cable TV and cars.  Of course there are problems in America, but a host of starving, suffering poor is not one of them.  Free-market capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any method yet devised, and it is politicians like Obama (with their love of government intervention) who hinder this process.

Secondly, lower taxes for wealthy Americans are not causing the current economic troubles in this country.  The Bush tax cuts are not causing problems, but Bush spending certainly is.  I have no problem criticizing him for that.  Republicans are usually the same as Democrats when it comes to government spending (the Republicans just generally do it without raising taxes).  Even under Reagan, government spending skyrocketed.  Will we ever get a libertarian as president to save us?

Thirdly, raising capital gains taxes isn’t going to bring in more revenue.  You want evidence?  In 1986, the Tax Reform Act hiked the capital gains tax from 20% to 28%.  But surprise: Revenue from capital gains actually went down.  The year before the reform, the government collected $213 billion from capital gains taxes.  Five years later, it was down to $108 billion.  It sounds counterintuitive, but it’s true.  When capital gains taxes are raised, people simply avoid them by not earning capital gains.  Why does Obama think it will be any different now?

Fourthly, it’s an outright lie for people like Obama to claim that raising capital gains taxes only penalizes the rich Americans.  Not only does it affect the millions of middle-class Americans who invest in the stock market or sell their homes, it also reduces venture capital for small businesses.  Needless to say, this will not help the economy.  People are worried that Americans are investing in other counties instead of at home.  News flash, Senator Obama: If you raise capital gains taxes, you give investors an even greater reason to go overseas.  (And investing overseas isn’t necessarily evil anyway.)

Of course taxes are required.  The free market couldn’t operate if the government didn’t tax us and use the money for infrastructure, law and order, national defense, and so on.  But we don’t need the government for much more than that.  We certainly don’t need higher taxes to pay for the socialist dreams and bankrupting promises of pandering politicians.

Let’s all say this together:  Obama wants to transform America into a European social welfare state.  That’s the “change” he keeps talking about.  And I hate to admit it, but he’s almost certainly going to win.  There’s no reasoning with the hordes of people who are going to vote for him.  Is it still too presumptive to say that capitalism is dying?

Why We Should Pay for Our Own Health Care, Part II

I’ve been told that if Obama’s universal health care plan is implemented, the only thing that will change is who pays the bill.  While this is bad enough (I’ll get to why I think so in a minute), it’s simply not true.  The medical institutions may still be privately owned, but they wouldn’t have to compete for the business of those receiving health care benefits.  There won’t be scrutinizing consumers to demand lower prices anymore, just a bloated bureaucracy answering every problem with more money.  I’m sorry, but quite a lot changes in this nightmare scenario.

This is like saying that if a nation made the switch from private education to public education, the only thing that would change is who pays the bill.  Take one look at the shambles of the public education system in America, and you’ll see what happens to an industry that’s bogged down by government handouts and regulation.  If the government stepped in and mandated health care for everyone who couldn’t afford it, we’d see a similar result.  We know this because we’ve seen it time and again.  History makes a compelling case.

The only thing that would change is who pays the bill.  Of course, the “who” in this case is the American people, the taxpayers.  My question is, why should we?  I don’t mean to be a heartless bastard here, but why should I have to pay for a stranger’s medical bills?  This is a two-way street: I certainly don’t want someone else to be taxed to pay mymedical bills.  According to Obama, he even wants us to pay the medical bills of illegal immigrants!

Maybe I am a heartless bastard.  Here’s something else to reinforce that: Consider the hundreds of thousands of Americans who require health care every year because they spend their whole lives eating junk food, smoking, drinking, an not exercising.  These problems are massive for the poor who can’t afford health care, but they are problems created by bad choices.  Should hardworking people be forced to pay the medical bills of people who willingly and knowingly smoke, drink, and gorge themselves into hospitals?

Next, how about we pay for nutrition counselors, and diet pills, and personal trainers, and stop-smoking programs, and self-esteem seminars?  Remember Big Brother’s solution in Orwell’s 1984 that required citizens to exercise in front of the TV/camera every day?  Should we expect something like that from the Obama administration too?