Jazzy,
Yeah, I did switch to Beta. I don't see much difference, but they indicate that, ultimately everybody on Blogspot will have to make the change or disappear into the internet ether.
I must admit I have never felt that the global warming issue was, in the main political. No doubt some people with differing agendas have grabbed onto environmental issues to gain political and/or financial advantage. However, I don't believe that most scientists studying climatic changes, who accept global warming as a reality, are politically motivated. The science is telling them what is happening. Certainly, some of it is speculative, and predictions tend to be all over the place, but consider just how complex it all is. I just read this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061214/sc_nm/climate_oceans_dc) online which makes dire predictions, indeed. Is it accurate? I don't know.
What if the nay sayers are wrong? What happens should we ignore the warnings? The price could be dear.
I am a liberal in most respects. I don't hate "the capitalistic free enterprise system." Some do, I suppose. I would suggest that some ultra right wingers are not particularly fond of it either. Some would love to bring about a totalitarian system which would deny us our basic freedoms - social, political and economic.
I do believe that there are inequities in our system, that unbridled greed has allowed a very small number of people to wield a huge amount of power and live in a manner unprecedented at anytime in history, made on the backs of millions of people who live beneath any standards of what it means to be poor - a situation not unlike that prevailing in much of the world hundreds of years ago with the great majority of the world's citizenry living under the thumbs of feudal lords.
The theory of our system states that anyone can succeed. The reality is something different. The deck is stacked heavily against the great majority of people to achieve even a modicum of success or financial security. How well do you suppose you could live on $5.15 per hour?
I am not an apoligist for socialism, but nor do I consider the present system to be a sacred cow.
The choice of economic systems is not simply black and white. What with social security and other assistance programs, we have, since at least the 1930s lived in a quasi-socialist system. There are those who would do away with all of it, social security, medicare, welfare, public education, etc., either in the belief that the private sector would pick up the slack, or skinflint Scrooges who believe that all who can't carry their own weight should be left to whatever evils might befall them. The former scenario would not likely be an adequate or equitable alternative, the latter is unthinkable.
I don't believe that most liberals "hate" capitalism. Such accusations are the stuff of propaganda. But, as I suggest above, many are aware of our system's inequities, and seek relevant change.
I would ask, that you, too should keep an open mind. Consider the possiblity that conservatives who preach against the likelihood of global warming may have their own, and often conflicting agendas as well.
TLS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Terry,
Where in the world do you see more prospertity and freedom than in US?
Where in the world do you see more opportunity for success than in US?
Where in the world do you see people wanting to get into a country like the US?
Minimum wage...... I propose raising it to $25.00 per hour. Do you see any downside in that?
Yeah, it's pretty good here. But is the US the ONLY place that offers freedom and opportunity to its citizens? Is the US the only place that people want to get into? No.
Most west European nations enjoy similar freedom and opportunity as we do here. Many people from relatively poorer countries in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa clamor to live in France, Germany, Italy and England among others.
That is an argument which doesn't hold nearly as much water as it used to. The US is no longer at the top of the list of per capita income. We rank much lower than many countries when it comes to education, rate of violent crime, etc.
Minimum wage? Well, I don't think anyone is proposing to raise it to $25.00 per hour. Every time the issue is raised, people start chewing the woodwork about how ANY increase will result in the demise of small business. But, the last time I looked, small business has survived up to this point.
Do you suppose the poor souls at Goldman Sachs who received those year end bonuses averaging around $600000.would be hard pressed to pay their maintenance staff anything in excess of $5.15 an hour? (The CEO had to settle for a paultry $35 million - I suppose the wife has started clipping coupons.) This is the sum and substance of one of our cows which I no longer believe is sacred.
TLS
You said..... Do you suppose the poor souls at Goldman Sachs who received those year end bonuses averaging around $600000.would be hard pressed to pay their maintenance staff anything in excess of $5.15 an hour? (The CEO had to settle for a paultry $35 million - I suppose the wife has started clipping coupons.) This is the sum and substance of one of our cows which I no longer believe is sacred.
And your solution is?
I've had to think about this for a while. I'm not sure I really have a good answer. What occured to me though was this:
Personal responsibility. Personal restraint. Stupid? Maybe. But that's how it would have to work.
No laws. No artificially imposed limitations. Simply individuals of means understanding what defines excess.
How many of us acquire things, not because we need them, but simply because we CAN?
I recall a story about some monied idiot who bought a shower curtain for something like $200000. How might it have diminished this fellow had he bought a shower curtain at Wal Mart for ten bucks and used the rest to house or feed people?
I'm aware that the above, to dyed in the wool capitalists, is anathema, the stuff of anarchy. But when do we stop working only to be rich, only to acquire more and more expensive toys? When do we realize that no one needs to live in a 75000 square foot house? (Yeah, there are some that large and larger.) Trophy houses. Trophy yachts. Trophy jets. Trophy cars. Trophy clothes. Trophy wives.
Why did Louis and Marie Antoinette loose their heads? Why did Bostonians dump tea into the harbour?
TLS
Terry,
You said..... Personal responsibility. Personal restraint. Stupid? Maybe. But that's how it would have to work.
No laws. No artificially imposed limitations. Simply individuals of means understanding what defines excess.
I think you realize this is unworkable. The definition of excess would be impossible to determine. Can you imagine how the founders and pioneers of America would define excess or those in poverty stricken socialist systems.
Capitalism with all its excesses and warts still delivers the most prosperity to the most people than any system on the planet.
Post a Comment