Aleister at Big Government writes:
If the protesters got their way and capitalism was abolished none of them would be able to afford the phones, iPads and laptops they take for granted. They are advocating a backward, retrograde, irrational system that has produced poverty, tyranny and misery wherever it has been implemented, yet they call themselves "progressives."A person learns about an anti-capitalism protest on Twitter, attends the protest, captures a video on his personal cell phone, turns on the laptop computer he bought at Best Buy, logs in to Google, uploads his video to YouTube and then posts it on Facebook.
By the time this “protester” is getting thumbs up from his comrades on Facebook, he has participated in multiple transactions purely thanks to the excesses of capitalism.
How many of these anti-capitalist protesters would be willing to throw their iPhones into the Hudson River? How many of them will permanently shut down their Facebook and YouTube accounts in protest? None of them will, because ultimately, capitalism is fine with them as long as it serves their purposes.
They don’t hate capitalism or wealth; they just want the government to take wealth from others and give to them so they don’t have to go through the normal channels that those individuals with wealth went through — practical higher education, working above and beyond their peers, saving, investment, risk, etc.
In addition to their selective corporation hatred, the proponents of this movement voted overwhelmingly for Obama, the one person they will never blame for destroying their economic opportunities.
Yet they fail to note that Obama got more campaign cash from Wall Street than any other candidate in 2008.
They ignore the fact that Goldman Sachs was the top donor to the Obama 2008 campaign.
If they want to do something about the horrible economy they should move their protests to the White House and protest the anti-capitalist policies of the president - if they actually want things to improve, that is.
Posts
2 comments:
Listen, You are making the wrong assumption that the occupy Wall Street protestors are saying ALL Corporations are evil. They are NOT. This article is being intellectually dishonest. When you see "Down with Evil Corporations" banners, it is saying just that...Down with "Evil" Corporations. Is Best Buy evil for selling us lap tops and I-phones? Certainly not. But there certainly ARE evil Corporations. Like Goldman Sachs which sold triple AAA rated mortgage backed securities to trusting investors all the while knowing they were selling us sub prime garbage and betting against the very product they were pushing. The Result? Goldman Sachs gave multiple $million dollar bonuses in 2008 while millions of Americans lost their lifes savings. Millions more lost our jobs, our incomes, our homes, our home equity and the prospects have not improved. When there are 20 million Americans unemployed, and in the last 3 months there have only been 120,000 new job openings, it is FURTHER dishonesty to tell us to "Get a Job". This is what happens when "Evil" corporations buy politicians to remove the regulations which protect the consumers.
But alas our elected politicians AND writers such as the one who wrote this dishonest article care more for the 1% than they do for the millions of Americans who saw their lives shattered by unfettered Greed.
And More on Goldman Sach. You presume that since Goldman give President Obama a little more than $1 million in campaign donations that Obama is bought and paid for?
Using that logic, Mitt Romney is now the man in the pocket of Goldman Sachs. We see by going to Open Secrets that Goldman has NOW given Romney 6.5 TIMES more money than Obama during this election cycle.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000085
Any it's funny to see how Obama paid back Goldman for their donations....The SEC and the DOJ investigated Goldman for their role in screwing America out of house and home in their mortgage backed securities swindle and Goldman settled out of court for $550 million.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/goldman-to-settle-with-s-e-c-for-550-million
Is it any wonder Goldman is now switching ponies and now betting on Romney?
Post a Comment