You are currently browsing the tag archive for the 'capitalism' tag.
I found this funny (in a tragic sense) quote in this MSNBC article about Brazil’s Oil Bonanza:
“Founded in 1953 to fend off an economic crisis and dependency on foreign oil, Petrobras has long embodied Brazilian nationalism and the notion of shielding domestic wealth from foreigners — particularly the United States and Europe.
In 2008, Brazil’s total oil and natural gas production was nearly 2.3 barrels per day. Petrobras was responsible for more than 96 percent of it.
“Most Brazilians think of Petrobras like they think of their soccer stars,” said Eric Smith, an offshore oil expert at Tulane University in New Orleans who likened efforts to get at Brazil’s oil to a trip to the moon. “Try to find Americans who support Exxon like that.”
First of all, what is up with Tulane? Not satisfied with a imported loon they have local loonies too?
By the way, even if this is really true (in which case I can only feel even worse for Brazilians in general) I think it is pretty clear that to compare Petrobras with Exxon is a bit crazy right?
Even though to me I’d think that Americans should indeed like Exxon much more. After all, gas prices are much, much higher in Brazil than in the US…
Now, I don’t agree with some of the things that Yaron Brook says, but to try to blame this crisis on capitalism is the same thing as blaming car accidents on Henry Ford.
People love the concept of freedom.
I am not sure however, whether people really understand all the implications of a free society. I am not talking about geo politics, war and peace, nothing of the kind. I am talking of personal freedom.
Alex wrote this post, where among other things a friend of his describes “how it is to be an American earning a bit more than poverty level income”. The guy has a blog too, so you can read the original.
The point of the original post is that not everyone is rich in the US and that living on a 40k income with a family of 5 is not easy. I don’t doubt that, but I think some things need to be noted since we are talking about anecdotes here. Some years ago, my income was pretty close to 40k. I didn’t own a house. Heck, I didn’t even own a car (I was leasing one). I didn’t have internet cable. My wife and I chose not to have more kids. We didn’t go out to dinner that often. Things were not easy, but we never considered ourselves “poor”.
However, the point I really have a problem with is the one that Alex makes about how being poor is “un-American” and how things are oh so much easier for poor people in poor countries.
He even says that “there is no worse place in the world (US) to be poor”.
Alex was probably going for style here, but this is really a stupid thing to say in any circumstance. You just need to look at what poor people from warm paradises like Mexico and Cuba do to get here. I would expect more respect from such a socially concerned person with the suffering of these folks.
But the issue I want to talk about a bit more is the concept that “being poor” is just something that happens to Americans.
—x—
The real question people need to answer is: Do you understand what freedom means?
I could just walk out of my house right now, enter a dealer and buy a beautiful brand new Mercedes Benz. Furthermore: I would probably be able to pay for it and enjoy it very much.
The word here is probably. I could also lose my job tomorrow and have used up enough money that could be used to buy food for my kids for the next 3 years in a stupid car.
Who rewards me for making the *right* decisions in my life? Will anyone write a book about the guy who saved money all his life and was prepared when the shit hit the fan?
Are the decisions made by someone who earns half of what I do that different than mine? Is choosing to have another kid when you earn 40k a year any different than buying a car that is just too expensive?
Should we force people to follow a certain path?
Yes, life is risky, and the US is an especially risky society. Remember that whole thing about “pursuit of happiness” that you learned at school? Do you ever wonder why the founding fathers didn’t say “pursuit of a house, car and 3 children?”
Would you like if someone told you that your happiness is to have a house, a car and three children? Worse: what if someone told you that you would not be allowed to have those things until you earn X dollars a year?
Would you like that?
—x—
Liberals tend to focus on the hardships of poor people, never how they got poor in the first place. It is not even clear if liberals want to bring people out of poverty or if they want to make poverty more comfortable. To help people out of poverty would require looking at people’s choices and even worse: it would require telling people what they should and should not do.
It is always easier to picture poor people as having extremely bad luck or somehow being downtrodden by society’s worse. A legion of hard working people who get screwed by another legion of scrooge like bosses who despise children and sleep in pillows made of 100$ bills.
Alex mentions the horrendous Ehrenreich book “Nickel and Dimed”, which describes how difficult it is to have a low level job in the US. I don’t think there is any doubt that working at Wal-Mart is not a dream job. What Ehrenreich doesn’t mention is what she really wants to have done to “fix” this situation. Does she want the government to force companies to pay more? Maybe she wants government welfare so these people don’t need to work! Should we force these people back to school? You are never sure.
So they want to give people freedom to make bad choices but want society to pay the bill when things get tough.
I am all for the government helping people who got the shortest straw. But should we really feel bad for people who just made bad decisions?
—x—
I came to this country with nothing but a job and a half good education. Had I lost that job, I would have to leave empty handed. It wasn’t even a fun or well paying job by the way. I had no help from government or family here. Still, I didn’t prosper because of my last name or because of the color of my skin.
The point is not that things could have gone bad for me and my family. This would be the norm in pretty much every other country in the world. The real point is that things worked out. There are very few places on earth where this is actually possible.
I don’t get mad when people bad mouth the US because I am a crazy patriot who thinks Americans are god chosen people who are superior to the rest of the world. I get mad because this country is the closest you can ever get to this crazy idea of freedom. The idea that you are free to choose your profession, how much you want to work, where to spend your money, how many kids you want to have, and even if you want to stay in this country at all.
I get mad because I started from zero, chose my own path and got to a point where I am today.
You got to be kidding:
Greenspan Urges U.S. to Help Those Facing Foreclosure
I experienced first hand the so called “abuse” of lenders. You want to know what it is? First, they don’t want to spend a lot of time explaining how a loan works. You HAVE to do your homework. Second, they want to convince you to buy a bigger house. If you follow their lead, they will help you to lie in your loan application.
During the “boom” years, I had a chance to buy a home twice and refinanced each house once.
My first loan was a mess, mostly because I didn’t do my homework and therefore had no idea of what I was doing. It was a 100% financed loan (I suspect it would fall into the “sub-prime” category) and it was basically a 3 year variable rate. I lost my job soon after and almost lost the house. I refinanced it as soon as I could. I sold that house when I moved and bought another without a problem. The lender was pissed that I didn’t want a bigger house but I simply told him to back off and that was it. I later refinanced because the rates were so much lower that it was worth it.
So I understand how people fall in these traps… but I can tell you with 100% certainty that this is completely avoidable. To compare this with a natural disaster is a total and complete lunacy.
What do you think will happen if the government hands out this kind of help? Do you think these people will say “wow that was close! Let me read some material so I don’t make the same mistake next time!” or do you think they will just say “good! I knew I didn’t have to worry about buying more than I could afford. Now let’s go to Best Buy and get that 42 inch plasma! Pay only in 2010!”
Of course I understand this utilitarian view that the economy will suffer more if people default, and that mortgage based securities will fall all over the market and bring my retirement savings down, etc, etc.
But listen, for once we should all pay the price for that. If my retirement saving goes down, I will find the stock funds that bought those damn MBS packages and drop them. This way they would learn their leasson too!
We shouldn’t be talking about freezing rates or handing out money. We should be talking about having huge government ads and manuals being print at this moment telling people how stupid they were and where to get information so they don’t do it again. That’s it!
I see this kind of crazy mommy government thinking as the main threat to the world economy, especially the industrialized countries.
Capitalism works because is logical and deterministic. People only understand their mistakes when they pay for them. To think otherwise is to profoundly ignore human nature.
Senate Approves Peru Trade Agreement, Sends to Bush
Not even the Democrats could go against this one (vote was 77-18). I guess free trade is not in such a free fall after all.
 |
 |
“When the smuggling began two decades ago, the cost of coming to the United States was around $15,000. Now, immigrants pay $60,000 to $80,000 to be brought to America.”
This same report says that most Chinese illegal’s come from Fujian province, which is not one of the poorest areas of China.
Another NPR report describes as an example a guy called Chen, who works as a chef making around $2,700 a month or about $32,000 a year. The median income in the US is around 40k a year.
Think about it.
These are people who are leaving China, the “greatest new economy in the world”, so they can come here and work illegally for below average wages. They spend weeks in containers, fake marriages (with fake parties and all), risk being arrested at the border, or worse.
They leave family behind, take years to re-pay their smuggler, pay for social services (like social security) they will probably never collect, deal with all the racism and discrimination liberals love to talk about, and for what?
It’s got to be something that crazy Chinese planners can never do for them… Even now when they have a booming economy. More than free healthcare, free housing, or any other hand out that big daddy government wants to provide.
They pay whatever they can borrow for a chance of becoming more. That is how much the American dream is worth.
Most Fans Paid $0 for Radiohead Album
“Among U.S. residents, about 40 percent who downloaded the album paid to do so. Their average payment was $8.05, the firm said.Some 36 percent of the fans outside the U.S. who downloaded the album opted to pay; on average, those fans paid $4.64, according to the study.”
US Economy Logs Brisk 3.9 Percent Growth
“The economy picked up speed in the summer, growing at a brisk 3.9 percent pace, the fastest in 1 1/2 years and an impressive performance even as a credit crunch plunged the housing market deeper into turmoil.”
US recaptures ‘competition crown’
“The US has regained its title as the world’s most competitive economy, according to an influential survey by the World Economic Forum (WEF).”
Here is the complete ranking. Our neo-liberal Brazil gets an impressive 72th place, right below the powerhouses Sri Lanka and Philippines.
The Doing Business rank for 2008 is out.
Brazil continues to show order and progress: it shows up in 122nd place (out of 178), down from 113th last year.
Would it be just a coincidence that today the supreme Tupiniquin leader has announced that “Taxes will be higher for companies that grow and sell more”?
No. It is not.
Do relative status and income matter more than absolute?
If this were true, then most immigration would be from rich countries to poor countries.
On the comments about Alex’s book, Leo said that I was being too radical (no pun) in saying that I would never visit Cuba under Fidel. He even compared me to communists that don’t go to Disneyland just because it would help the US.
Well, I think those communists are right!
People complain that capitalism is amoral, that the market rules ignore human relations, etc, etc. It might be so for people who just go with the flow. But not me.
I am always looking at the country of origin for products I buy. I intentionally bought Israeli wine during the last war (I usually buy Australian wine too). I could have chosen to go to Europe but instead I visited Japan.
Of course there are limits and in a global market products are very integrated. But there is still choice.
I will never visit Cuba, Venezuela, Iran or any other country that I feel shouldn’t benefit from my money. Of course it’s a small thing to do, but so is voting.
Why would I not care where I spend my money?
Costa Rican Voters Approve U.S. Free-Trade Agreement
Who would have thought that Central Americans were so much smarter than South Americans? Costa Rica was the last country to formalize CAFTA, now it’s all done.
Now the best quote I read about this came from Costa Rica’s President Oscar Arias (a Nobel Peace Prize winner for helping end Central American civil wars in the 1980s):
“If this deal is approved, it won’t make us better or worse. Just richer.”
And to think that years and years of the best education in the world can’t teach this simple fact to some people.
Radiohead to Let Fans Decide What to Pay for Its New Album
“In the latest instance the members of Radiohead, the respected British rock act, said that the band would sell its new album, at least initially, exclusively as a digital download and allow fans to decide how much to pay for it, if anything. In a statement yesterday, the band said it had begun taking orders for the album, “In Rainbows,” which will be available beginning Oct. 10.…
In Radiohead’s plan, fans will choose their own price for the digital version of the 10-song “In Rainbows,” which it said would be sold as a download without copy restriction software, known as digital-rights management. In effect, the band is asking fans to establish a monetary value for music, even when widespread piracy means that it would be available free.
Early reaction suggested that listeners would pay, but less than they would for a CD in stores. The blog Idolator.com carried a poll in which the plurality of voters — almost 40 percent — said they would pay from $2.05 to $10.12.”
Wanna pay? Get it for free? It’s up to you. Not sure if it’s going to work for Radiohead but I like that they are free to try.
If it doesn’t they can always call the Karma Police anyway 
Some time ago the folks at MR were discussing the book A Farewell to Alms. I haven’t read it yet but as far as I could tell, the author proposes that some societies have an inherited ability to deal with capitalism while others not.
It appears that this conclusion is mostly based on empirical evidence and there isn’t really a well defined framework to prove it. Most critics at MR pointed exactly at that.
I have to say that, even though it is also just my personal opinion, I think this guy is into something.
For instance: São Paulo has banned all outdoor advertising. Officials say this is a step towards a “cleaner” and “prettier” city.
But when you start looking into it, you can find declarations like this: “The law is a rare victory of the public interest over private, of order over disorder, aesthetics over ugliness, of cleanliness over trash,” Roberto Pompeu de Toledo, a columnist and author of a history of São Paulo, wrote in the weekly newsmagazine Veja. “For once in life, all that is accustomed to coming out on top in Brazil has lost.”
Tokyo, always ready for business
I just came back from Tokyo. My first impression when I got there was “Wow, this is a São Paulo that actually worked out”.
This made me think back to the banned billboards and the theory that some cultures simply get it while others don’t. Think about it: Tokyo was completely destroyed. Thousands and thousands dead, including many of the brightest members of its society. Still, they regrouped, rebuilt and prospered.
Think about China! Decades under one of the most brutal communist regime ever. Millions dead. Generations of children completely brainwashed. Still, give then one bit of good ol’ capitalism and they drink it by the bottle.
Gregory Clark was at NPR the other day talking about his book, and the host (clearly liberal) seemed very distressed over his theory that some cultures are better than others. She asked “So you have a very pessimistic vision of the world! If there is nothing we can do to help these people, not loaning money, not even giving them money, how can we change the world?”
Clark said “The one thing I can tell you that works is immigration. You get people that were struggling in third world countries and they do very well in the US, a lot better than many natives.”
The host was not happy at all.
—x—
Again, all I can tell you all is my personal experience. I have always been pretty much the same guy and still, when I was in Brazil I was not only struggling: I think I would be dead by now. After I moved to the US, I got a new life. No handouts, just opportunity and challenges. I felt like I was finally in my environment.
There’s got to be some kind of social interaction, some form of cultural dynamic that determines this kind of difference between countries.
I do see one problem with immigration though. I think people who leave third world countries are the few who have this “capitalism gene” and therefore the drain is not just about brains – it is about genes.
But maybe I am wrong. Maybe all cultures are “just different” and now that public interest has won in São Paulo, the city will be nice and clean and everyone will live happily ever after.
Some interesting tidbits of the latest Forbes 400: (from here, here and here)
For the first time since 1989 there are no members of the Walton family, descendants of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton, in the top 10. Four members — Jim, Christy, Robson and Alice — slipped to 12th and 15th place.
The Waltons were displaced by Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who came in at No. 5 with fortunes of $18.5 billion, and brothers Charles and David Koch, who run Koch Industries, the world’s second largest private company, and are each valued at $17 billion, earning them 9th place.
Fifty people couldn’t keep up. They include online-gambling titans Ruth Parasol and J. Russell DeLeon, whose PartyGaming (PYGMF, news, msgs) Internet poker company’s stock has fallen 75% in the past 12 months. Also dropping off the list is caffeine king Howard Schultz, whose Starbucks (SBUX, news, msgs) stock has languished over the past year, and Campbell Soup (CPB, news, msgs) heir Dorrance Hill Hamilton, who had appeared on every Forbes 400 list since 1982.
Of the top 400 richest Americans, Forbes said 270 were entirely self-made, 74 inherited their wealth and 39 are women.
According to the gini index inequality has been growing all over the world:
Is this really that horrible? Is it the doom of capitalism and globalization as we know it?
Well, look at this ranking again:
Can you really say that inequality leads to discontent? Look at the history of the US. Was social unrest and turmoil ever greater than, let’s say, Germany? Could you really say that currently there are more social conflicts in South Korea or Japan than in France?
My opinion is that this whole debate in inequality is much more philosophical and political than economical. People deal much better with inequalities than what the media wants to make you believe.
One of the tools of The Empire: Naked mermaids and coffee
BusinessWeek released its 2007 list of Best Global Brands. A lot of companies moving up/down (which is weird since I thought large corporations were all huge mean monopolies) but what really caught my eye was this: 54 out of 100 are brands that belong to American companies. Germany comes second (10), followed by France (9), Japan (8), England (5), Netherlands, Switzerland and South Korea (3), Italy (2) and Finland, Spain and Sweden (1).
I guess the US is doing something different (i.e. better) right? After all, the US economy is large but it is not half of the world. Would good old capitalism (and everything that comes with it) have anything to do with this?
Or would this be just another consequence of the dark and violent Empire so many people seem to “blame” for the American dominance?
McDonald’s Takes Paris
Le Big Mac Booms in the Land of Haute Cuisine (via Leo Monasterio).
“Last year, McDonald’s sales in France grew by 8%, almost doubling its growth in American sales, which have also rebounded in recent years. Every 12 months, one out of two French people visit McDonald’s at least once. Annually, they consume 22 million McDonald’s salads, 60,000 tons of French fries, 32,000 tons of beef patties, 12,000 tons of chicken, and 600 million buns.“We hate it and go to it. It’s our paradox,” a journalist for the French magazine Challenges, Alice Mérieux, said. “We’re very anti-American in principle, but individually, if you’re going to the movies and have to eat in 10 minutes, you go to McDonald’s.”
The paradox of anti-Americans. This is too funny.
Recent Comments