RE: virus: Re: Memes and Jello

John \ (
Sun, 25 May 1997 18:26:18 -0400

I need a brief break from the faith discussion...

First of all, I'd like to state up front that I'm coming from a leftist
socialist perspective on this. I don't think I'm going to quote an awful
lot: I just want to throw a more explicitly socialst meme in the ring.

I recognize little difference between the government and myself, in a
representational context. Ideally, the government I feel should provide the
basic needs of everyone because they are basic needs. If you want better
than that, fine -- you can get that on your own. But access to education,
health-care, housing, food, and legal representation (in civil as well as
criminal cases) I think should be available regardless. I, personally,
would be quite happy to pay the extra taxes for that. I do think that other
people ought to feel this way as well, but I recognize that's unlikely.

However, I'd have to come down on the side that the government's *purpose*
is to provide for the people that it serves. So, yes, if people start
depending on welfare, fine. This may sound a little pat, but there are
people who want jobs who can't get 'em, and people who have jobs that don't
want 'em. Let the people that want jobs have them. (But I do think the
State ought to demand a little more public service out of its citizens, all
things considered.)

>Corporate profits motivate investors to reinvest, or if they've already
>sold out it entices others to invest. Capital goes to building more
>factories, facilities, whatever.

I understand that you are not for government-assisted capitalism. I'll buy
that. Perhaps you'ld like to explain to me how a free-market capitalistic
system will *not* revert naturally to either a) a monopoly or b)
government-assisted capitalism?

Seems to me that competition is not healthy to a corporation: it's
expensive, takes extra effort, etc. Ways to reduce costs here is to:
a) eat other companies (to form a trust)
b) convince governments to assist/support companies (through guaranteed
monopolies, corporate welfare, the cheap sale of public resources.

Also, I'd like to point out that as it stands now, the corporations are
doing all they can to reduce the cost of labor by using the federal
government to cripple labor unions and relax trade-tarrifs.

Corporations are notorious for not wanting labor to charge fair market
value for labor. The company line where I work makes it seem like we ought
to be working out of the goodness of our hearts, to support the "company."
Fwee. I'm (briefly) a capitalist. What're you going to do for me, bub?

(Move to a country where slave-labor is used, more than likely, and the
labor isn't so uppity, and you don't have to worry about OSHA. Or: use the
federal government to break a strike/bust a union.)

Since the capitalistic system in America has gone from rewarding hard-work
and ingenuity to rewarding greed -- pitching greed as a positive value that
makes the world work -- it seems morally justified to step on the backs of
anyone you have to. Phht! go the human rights... and this time it's
Wal-Mart that does it to you.

John Williams ICQ Address: 1213689
Various Artists: Raising the Tide of Mediocrity for Two Years