You say elitist, I say prophetic

>>>
Isn't it the case that most American political fights are about culture because the economic arguments lack definitive lines, and are harder to think clearly about?
>>>

Well, I'm sure this is going to lead to someone accusing me of being a Marxist, but could it be the case that the political fights that get a lot of press and airtime are about culture because the folks who own newspapers and broadcasting stations have a vested interest in the current economic structure?

It's about culture, but no one seems to want to actually define what the cultural dividing line for the conflict is.

I assert that the line is between having enough to live comfortably vs. having as much as one can get. The cultural shift can take my childhood (60s) as the comparison point: a color TV was a luxury, and we learned to be happy (and happily entertained) with B&W. Today, flat screens of more than 36" is as much a necessity as bread and milk.

Case in point: at least $20 of the current per barrel price of oil is the result of speculation. Not supply, not demand, not refining capacity, not politics, not civil unrest or war. Somewhere between 15% and 20% of the price.

(Deliberate hyperbole alert!)

Now, I don't know about you, but Mr. Average American without a few hundred thousand dollars of spare cash with which to play the commodities market here at this keyboard considers that criminal. It is there solely for those with money to make more money, and their profits are coming directly out of my pocket. That's theft. It doesn't take a Marxist-socialist revolution for the so-called representatives in Congress to decide that theft is wrong, and their taxpaying constituents deserve protection from it, and the perpetrators deserve criminal prosecution as a consequence. Instead, the perpetrators are rewarded for it.

Maybe it's time for the American Dream to actually mean getting there again, instead of getting more out of the pockets of the poor schmucks whose hands are tied.

In 1966 I went to work for a CPA firm after graduating from college and fulfilling my military obligation. IIRC, the top marginal income tax rate at that time was 90%.

Today? What is it? 35% on earned income? (um, that would be salaries and wages) Dividends? 15%? Long-term capital gains? 15%?

Today I work for a company that specializes in managing the financial affairs of high net worth individuals. Trust me, Rod, when I tell you that the rich and the ultra-rich are in no way (from what I see!) suffering from the current economic downturn.

I'm thoroughly cynical when I hear anyone whining about soaking the rich! Believe me, Rod, when I tell you that the rich are not suffering!

That said, I believe that capitalism has been the best economic alternative for us.

Kit: I know Limbaugh-style conservatives adore Wal-Mart, but I'm surprised that a crunchy con who believes in tradition, community, and enduring values would agree.

Kit, I'm on the anti-Wal-Mart side, but I think honesty forces us to admit that to quite a few people in small towns, and people who make less money than people like me, Wal-Mart is embraced, and anti-Wal-Marters are thought of as, well, elitists. To be clear, "elitist" is not a swear word to me, and more often than not it is used to shut down discussions rather than illuminate them. Still, people like me and thee have to reckon with the social implications, and social complications, of the stances we take. It's like that post I made earlier this week, in which it was pointed out that preserving cultural artifacts and traditions often depends on perpetuating poverty.

One other thing to remember about the Wal-Marts of the world, and other large chains, is that they are often given tax advantages that small businesses do not get. They are given reduced property taxes and sometimes forgiven all sales taxes. Towns bid to have them come and give away too much. Cabelas in my neck of the woods is a good example.

So, you have economic conservatives trumpeting free market rules while setting a non-level playing field. This is just business they say. Seems more like political manipulation to me, especially since these deals are seldom conducted in public. Cynical manipulation of taxes to make a profit while trumpeting competition has got to be a sign of moral bankruptcy. I think one of the reasons I sometimes get a bit angry with myself is not doing adequate research about how our current president made his money. If I had known I dont think I could have voted for him.

Steve

As a Walmart shopper, let me add one point to the argument against it -- it's often not cheaper at all. There's a reason why it is so successful, because people like me go in for a loaf of bread and come out with a $200 cartfull of stuff we saw on the way. Since I began shopping at CSAs and small organic type stores that don't have aisles of ads and products I never realized until just now that I wanted, I swear I'm actually saving quite a bit of money.

No one needs 100 million dollars, and certainly not billions. That is perverse.

The is the failure of capitalism - we're dying at the gas pumps.

It's getting to the point where we're buying less food in order to pay for gas. We drove our Olds 100 miles this week and it cost $50 to gas it. Once gas goes above $4, I'll be quitting my job, because most of my weekly salary (it's very small because I'm part time) will be paying for me to get to work.

That is psychotic.

Scott, I surely appreciate what you are saying about high gas prices.

But, you know, things could be a lot worse!

An old friend (grammar school, high school) was here from Switzerland these past few weeks and told me that he pays about $80 to fill up his little crapcan Fiat.

Now as to Wal-Mart: I try to avoid it.

Too big!

Too difficult to hunt for what I'm looking for!

Too many obese slobs waddling to and fro!!

Is this an accurate characterization of Wal-Mart?

I just try to avoid it if I can.

Bob and Eleazer together make a couple of points: As long as Japan makes (or is perceived to make) better cars, profits will flow to Japan and tumbleweeds will roll through the canyons of Detroit. Like Walmart, the parking lots of the Big Tree automakers are full of Toyotas, Nissans and Hondas.

The second point is that nothing will change as long American automakers continue to produce (or are believed to produce) inferior products for the same or more money. The canard that American workers can no longer produce quality products is belied by the fact that most "Japanese" vehicles sold in America are produced in America, though the profits flow to Japan. The problem lies not on the shop floors of American but in the Boardrooms.

People on this board have complained from time to time about "vulgar Marxism." Much more offensive to me is the "vulgar capitalism" that has raped the middle class and threatens our political as well as economic future. Ayn Rand be damned; we ARE all in this together.

Um, unless you believe in the conspiracy theory, Consumers Union -- the most integritous data collector I know of -- provides the objective conclusion: the Japanese brand cars are better constructed, long-term cheaper to own, and of overall better quality than any US brand car.

Some of the possible reasons for this, offered in several documentaries of varying reliability over the years, points to a simple fact: the Japanese manufacturing style far outperforms the American style. One may blame unions, management, majority stockholders or any combination. It still doesn't convince me to trade my 8-year-old, 140 thousand miles and counting, still 32 mpg mixed-driving Toyota Echo for any new car currently offered by the Big Three.

And with due respect and much affection for all of you suffering from the rising prices: last weekend I drove almost 500 miles and spent $35 for gasoline; neener, neener. ;-)

Mike Brown: If the American middle-class would simply accept the same quality of life as our parents and grandparents (smaller houses, smaller televisions, fewer cars, college as a luxury and not a right, etc), we would not have to work so many hours and sacrifice family for lifestyle.

College isn't a "luxury." I have a friend whose daughter has Type 1 diabetes. For her, college is an absolute necessity, because if she does not get a job with health insurance, she will be seriously in trouble. She won't be able to buy a policy on her own. Some day her parents won't be around to help her out. This critical situation is repeated time and again. She can't wait for things to turn around to the "good old days' when you could pay a doctor or even a hospital bill out of your own pocket. There are a lot of people who need expensive medical care *every day* to stay alive - and that means a middle-income job *with* health insurance. Education is the path to getting one.

Re: housing. Back in the good old days of our grandparents, discrimination in housing was legal. Go back far enough, and so was school segregation. Kids with special needs were not allowed access to public schools in many districts. Our grandparents benefited from these situations. They lived in low-crime neighborhoods; sent their kids to school with other kids "just like them" who did not have serious social and behavioral problems. The supposed "stability" of those past eras (really, before 1965 or so) was paid for with the price of severe racial, sexual, and housing discrimination.

bam in ri I suppose thin slobs are OK? Or fat slobs at the local gourmet food boutique?

Mike, there's just one "problem" with your testimony: you demonstrate a concern for the welfare of your employees that is not shared by the vast majority of employers.

To be fair, another thing implied in your post is that your business is lucrative enough for you to make a good profit. Too many small businesses do not have that "luxury", especially when they are competing with big box stores and (inter)national franchises.

Don't get me started on big companies... :-)

You won't get any heat from me, Mike; don't let anyone convince you to stay silent. You are an honorable man, and more precious for being one of the few I've encountered in dealing with employers. For the record, before I changed career paths I was the guy you retained to administer your pension plan and keep it and you in compliance with the ever-changing laws (that being why I left it). I've had a ringside seat for business decisions in companies large and small.

Be well, sir.