Keeping in line with the forum topic, this comment was posted December 5, 08 on www.shadowstats.com "November Jobs Plummet 732,000 Net of Revisions, Down 873,000 Net of Concurrent Seasonal Factor Bias" So things are even worse than advertised.
StudentOfJefferson: man, you are cheating, one has to agree with you on the grounds of your name alone! … Just kidding, I agree with you even after reading your posts.
I can’t stop the urge to comment on the remark about the "bottom of capitalism." What capitalism? We don’t have capitalism. Capitalism entails protection of private property, this is inconsistent with a monetary system that permits the surreptitious stealing of purchasing power by money debasement. The monetary system and the central bank are inconsistent with economic freedom. This was admitted even by Alan Greenspan himself after he sold out! (http://www.dailypaul.com/node/2237) The economic and political power is highly concentrated. People don’t seem to realize the power that a central bank has, as it reigns supreme over an economy. The central bank, through manipulation of the interest rates can control: the unemployment rate, the marginal profitability of productive capital, and the creation and destruction of bubble activities. Volatility in the interest rate structure has given rise to a huge financial speculative sector, totally unproductive, that through its activities hurts savers and producers to, as we may painfully see, its breaking point. The destruction of production is what may ultimately determine the ruin of the USA and more than a few countries around the world. In capitalism, a failed enterprise … well… fails! The population’s resources are not confiscated to support the few.
The polar opposites are not capitalism and socialism, as stated in other forums. Look at this from the libertarian perspective. As stated cleverly by someone in these forums a while back, libertarians of the left and the right meet out in the back. What this means is that if the fundamental value of the libertarian left (anarcho-syndicalism) and the libertarian right (anarcho-capitalism) is freedom, then they are basically at the same point in the political spectrum. Both need sound money. Whether in a free society a group of people decides to pull their resouces together in an enterprise under a classical scheme of ownership (the right) or by defining equity ownership by virtue of being a worker (the left: "the workers of the mills ought to own them"), is unimportant, as the people can decide on their own, without coercion. Both practices can coexist. But the point is that ownership and control are exercised locally, by the person in a community, not through some massive bureaucracy elsewhere.
The corruption of these terms (capitalism and socialism) by diverse propaganda systems is beyond belief. The USSR was not socialist. The resources were not owned by "the people" but by a centralized bureaucracy that denominated itself "the people". You do not own what you do not control. The USA is not capitalist, although it has more capitalist traits than the USSR had socialist ones. In countries with social responsibility (I’m thinking the Scandinavian ones), the inflationary currency system is at least accompanied by a welfare state. In the USA we have the worst of both worlds: the confiscation of resources and the falling through the cracks. Note that in Scandinavia, the wealth of the population is related with the existing level of production. Without this, no welfare state can avoid poverty.
The polar opposites are centralized versus decentralized power. Totalitarianism versus liberty, that is what the conflict is. The centralization of power in the USA should become evident when considering: a) the monetary system, b) the control of the housing market by the existence of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which handle this market on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis), c) the redirection of savings into the coffers of Wall St. through mutual funds and 401k’s instead of in investments at a local level, d) the emergence and continued nurturing of a massive "defense" contractor sector (one of the best ways to make fortunes by the way). No free market in the latter, as there can’t be a free market with only one customer: the government, which pays cost-plus in its giveaway contracts. e) Consider also the actions of the legislature and the judiciary in their support of the all-powerful banking sector and a few select corporations. This is not capitalism. This is not even a democracy. A plutocracy might be a better word. But the idea of "democracy" has been jack-hammered into our skulls, fulfilling Bakunin’s statement: the "beating the people with the people’s stick."
Power will never be relinquished voluntarily. Whatever happens will be done in the name of "democracy", and to the extent that people don’t notice the ploy, people will not defend themselves. That is the sad and tragic thing.
PS: I hope I didn’t break the rules by my overextending and sounding like a scratched record on a few of my pet peeves. If I did, I hope that I’m notified to prevent this from happening again.