Capitalism Run Amok

I've been having a little trouble sleeping nights lately (and no, it's not the result of a guilty conscience ... unfortunately).  While much of the TV on late at night makes pretty bad look pretty good if you don't have cable, some of the 'Commercials for Insomniacs' are actually quite amusing.  I am learning more a about American popular culture from these examples of Capitalism than I do from watching the news.

Did you know that that there are elastic waistbands that women can buy to get the layered look without the layers?  While no one has explained to me why women want to look layered without being layered, I was able to grasp that one of the reasons for the purchase of this extra 12" waist band was so that when a woman bent over she didn't expose her waist, or worse yet, the exterior of her posterior.  While I can certainly see the desirability of limiting the display of 'Plumber's Syndrome", I was nevertheless struck that the same could be accomplished (without spending the $20, plus shipping and handling) by not purchasing shirts cut so high and tight they rode up and pants so low-cut and tight that they rode down.  (This is undoubtedly why I am neither an expert on fashion, nor a rich inventor/entrepreneur.)

Did you likewise know that you can buy devices that make slicing, dicing,and chopping far easier than it would be with an ordinary knife?  (Of course you did, since such devices, in one form or another, have been around for years.)  I can't really poke too much fun at this one, as I found myself purchasing one of these technological wonders many years ago in order to be able to fragment vegetables more efficiently ... and create Julienne fries 'in a snap'.  (The fact that I had never heard of Julienne fries before buying this device, and therefore didn't even know if I wanted them, seemed inconsequential at the time.)  While I must admit that the device did in fact slice potatoes, carrots,and onions admirably, and far faster than I could do in manually with a knife (even one of those fancy new knives that slice empty cans of refried beans before creating wafer thin tomato slices), I was still somewhat dubious of the process.  Of course after you added in time required for assembly, tear down, and cleaning; neither method actually proved faster than the other.  

Over succeeding years, I found that by the time I dragged the damn thing out, figured out how to reassemble it, found the proper cutting blades, and finally began to cut, I had lost interest in the vegetables requiring dis-assembly (and sometimes the will to live); so I parted with it through donation to a charitable organization (tax-deductible recycling).  I still have one of those 'slap choppers' collecting dust in the back of a cabinet, but seldom use it.  It likewise did nothing to truly expedite the vegetable dissection process and the memories of the sore hand that I got using it further remind me of why it too should be recycled.

But these forays into personal consumerism and rampant capitalism are educational as well.  I have recently learned that the only way that I'm going to get eight golf balls or a bowling ball out of my carpeting is to buy a $500 vacuum cleaner.  This model of modern carpet cleanliness is capable of maneuvering around furniture that I don't own, getting under tables that I don't posses, and is capable of vacuuming around corners by turning on a dime.  Of course, I like to vacuum in straight lines so I get those 'clean lines' in the finished carpet, and if the power it contains is half of what it brags about, I suspect that it would suck the dime up long before turning on it. I'm also told that it's very easy to carry up and down stairs, but since I live in a one-bedroom apartment, this ability seems of little practical benefit.

Then again, if the vacuum cleaner didn't make me a big enough sucker (and I suspect it would), I could always add to the volume of air movement in my residence by buying one of those massive air cleaners.  According to the nice lady on the infomercial, they exchange the air in a room at least three times an hour (though no one ever seems to explain what they're exchanging it with).  In fact, these devices confuse me.  While I'm trying to live a bit 'greener', dedicating myself in small ways to cleaner air, I can't help but wonder if such a unit wouldn't exchange the air before I had done my efficient best to use it.  Additionally, I'm not sure of the trade off between the pollution generated in order to power the unit with electricity vs the promise of cleaning the air with it is a fair exchange.  I fear I will not be able to reach a logical conclusion to this dilemma until presented with properly documented fact one way or the other.

As for women's undergarments, let me only say that I had no idea that so much scientific development was going into them; or that women could talk about them for hours on end in spite of the fact that they used to be called 'unmentionables'.  It seems that women are willing to buy articles of clothing that manipulate their bodies in ways that would surely get the average man arrested, even if he was married to the one in question.  The parts that aren't being pushed up are being pushed in.  Whatever real or imagined body parts or body faults that a woman has, according the show's hosts, should be quickly surrounded by elasticized material, manipulated, and re-displayed through methods that have already been outlawed as torture by the United Nations.  

And while corsets seem to have for the most part been done away with (except decoratively of course), most of the functionality of women's undergarments seems to have been taken over by the scientists that created the Ace Bandage, and with much the same material.  Perhaps most intriguing in this meat manipulation process (sorry ladies, but that's what it is) is that it's done in a mostly misguided attempt to gain the ability to wear styles of clothing that no one, let alone supposedly mature women, should wear.  While I have always been fascinated with women, like the making of sausages and laws; I suspect that this is a process probably better not viewed too closely, too often, and certainly not on television late at night.

(I am coming to believe that like many other areas of scientific study, women's underwear falls into two schools of thought.  The 'Victoria's Secret'  school of undergarment design holds that "less is more", and charges more for the less that they provide.  The 'Ace Bandage' school on the other hand, believes that "covering more showing less" is the answer, and charges far less than the Victoria's school for the more making it appear that there is in fact less being covered.  It's not a perfect theory, but it's a working one that works for me.)

I may be an unreconstructed capitalist, but some of this scares even me.  The fact that there are multiple channels dedicated to consumerism on such a scale is bad.  The fact that in these tough economic times, there appears to be a great many people with a day pass on the crazy train with 'disposable' income to buy this carnival crap is worse, and may in fact prove that Capitalism has finally run off the rails.  I'm not sure whether to give the process a standing ovation, or pull the covers over my head so I don't have to watch any more.

But if you'll excuse me now, I need to get back to the the show I was watching.  The electronics hour starts in 15 minutes and I have my eye on a deal on a 73" HD, 3D, surround sound TV that if I pull the trigger on it, they probably won't be able to get through my front door anyway.

'Unoccupy' Thanksgiving

Tax-paying citizens from New York to Oakland have patted themselves on the back as law enforcement agencies finally moved into parks across the country to at long last oust 'Occupy Wall Street' (OWS) protestors from these downtown venues.  Cries of "About time!" and "Well done!" undoubtedly greet police and politicians alike as city residents take stock of the damage and take the measure of the clean up efforts that will required to put things in order.  Hearty congratulations ring all around as in what curiously seemed an almost organized effort to free downtown venues from the grip of an ill-conceived and unwashed mass of humanity.  (OK, maybe not mass, but more than a gaggle and less than a herd.)

Curiously (or perhaps not so), few wondered at how so many different municipalities, many with divergent political outlooks and party control, managed to have come to the same conclusion all but simultaneously.  Being by nature a cynic and a skeptic however, I was unable to accept this.  I found that I was uncomfortable with and curious about such timing.  Coincidence is a thing of dime detective novels and not the way that cities are run; so there had to be something else.  Then it hit me ... Thanksgiving!

What would the image of NYC be if the Macy's parade were held with the potential specter of OWS protestors appearing amongst the crowd, or (worse yet) on camera during the broadcast?  How many of the normal crowd of onlookers might be persuaded to pass up a trip to Manhattan to avoid running into some of the more odious (and odorous) of the 99%?  How would the image that Mayor Bloomberg and the city desperately wanted to portray as welcome and safe be affected by crowds of the disaffected attempting to get their message across?  And I'm sure that New York is not the only city to have considered this.

How many other cities around the country are having 'Holiday Parades' that they would prefer not to have hampered by these rag-tag and ill smelling protestors?  How many cities fear the effect on downtown tourism in an already bad economy if it were known that an OWS group were on hand somewhere?  How, for example, would Kansas City's famous turning on of the Plaza lights be impacted by the shadow of disreputable, dirty, and foul-smelling people attempting to take center stage (and that's just the politicians).     

I'm sorry to rain (almost quite literally) on the parade of those whose mostly unwritten and unspoken (except in the privacy of their own homes) demands have been to take back their cities from this movement without apparent cause or purpose; but the horrible truth of it is that the right thing has been done in cities across the country once again for no better reasons than municipal vanity and seasonal greed.  

Not only do these cities not want their worst foot put forward when most on public display, but they certainly don't want a hint of impairment to a season of rampant consumerism in the way of holiday parties at expensive downtown hotel and restaurant venues, and seasonal shopping that accounts for the lion's share of profit for retail outlets in an already down economy.  

Making the move when they did allows cities to clear out and clean up the mess left behind by protestors to whom sanitation was yet another word that their expensive educations had not permitted them to grasp.  Plenty of time was left to hose downs parklands and sidewalks, dispose of the make-shift tents and trash, and process the human debris arrested on misdemeanor charges for refusing to move along.  Thanksgiving crowds will likely even find smiling city workers to greet them on their arrival next week; those workers having already given considerable thanks for recent hefty paychecks (including overtime earned during the clean up) that they have received for their disinfecting efforts. 

Yes, it seems likely that rather than the praise that we would like to heap on our local government, we may be forced to settle for measured disdain.  Altruism probably had little or nothing to do with the ultimate decision have those of OWS move along.  Instead it was invariably political expediency, vanity, and greed that motivated those ostensibly in charge to do what we all knew must be done some time ago.  We may nevertheless take some consolation, as we occupy prime seats for these holiday celebrations, that the unwashed part of the 99% has 'Unoccupied' Thanksgiving.

. 

The Top 1% Win Because They Play

Didn't being in the top 1% used to be a good thing?

I remember my years in high school (difficult to forget, since Gutenberg had just invented movable type) when were given standardized tests.  I took up the challenge of the PSAT, the SAT, and the ACT with relish as part of the college application process certainly, but also to measure myself against other students in the nation in a similar position.  Seeking and achieving a higher score in these tests was not only a source of pride, but assuaged the need to compete that I felt.

After my halcyon days of education and standardized tests were over, I was left to find new ways to measure myself against my fellow man.  Advancement in career was certainly a part of that, and being granted additional responsibilities was certainly a source of pride; but a job title never paid the rent or bought groceries.  No, it was financially that we ultimately measured ourselves against our contemporaries (and even many whose station was above ours).  In fact, I remember telling many a new salesman during their training period that commission checks were not only a justly earned reward for the hard work that they did, but a great way of keeping score.

Competing wasn't limited to work, and contests with peers on the simple electronic games of the time were always a part of the fun.  From 'Pong' and 'Donkey Kong' in those earlier days, to Role Playing Games (RPG's) like 'World of Warcraft' to 'Lord of the Rings' more recently, pitting ones skills against other players and those who write the rules (especially when you figure out the tricks and shortcuts) was eminently satisfying.  And while I'm not as good as some in my clan, I keep score and try to improve my standing.

It's with this in mind that I view the misguided thinking of the whole 'Occupy' movement.  Somewhere in the midst of being caught up in a twisted entitlement mentality, they've come damn close to something, but failed to grasp it.  Yes, the top 1% is getting a lot of the breaks these days; but it's not capitalism that's at fault for all of the world's problems, but crony-capitalism.  After all, we've had capitalism in this country since it was founded, and the disparity that they claim to so disparage has only become an issue in recent years.

What changed?  Certainly it isn't the principles of capitalism itself.  Capitalism is only an economic system in which the private ownership of the means of production and distribution is maintained.  It's a system where anyone can own both physical and intellectual property, and the score is kept based on how much of both you have.  Now maybe I'm wrong, but what they appear to object to is their inability to play the game by what they consider 'unfair rules'.

What they fail to grasp apparently, is that this game that has worked for centuries is increasingly being rigged ... by the government created to protect it. This doesn't make those bending the rules to the point of breaking (or hiring someone to do it for them) worthy of praise, but neither does it make them into maleficent demons.  What it does make them is pretty damn good at scoring points on a real-life strategy game with some pretty twisted and always changing rules. But like most of the electronic RPG's out there, the players don't write the rules.  No in this case, that's done by those clever little programmers in Washington DC and by their pals the lobbyists, hoping to get a jump at getting to and staying at the top of the pile.

Is the tax system rigged?  Of course it is. It's a set of originally simple rules that gets more complicated every time someone in Washington decides to 'fix a bug' in it.  Hell, even the IRS cannot and does not understand the thousands of pages of tax code that they are supposed to enforce. But if you want taxes to stop favoring the rich, simplify the tax code!  Take out the ponderous pages of rules, regulations, incentives, loop holes, and deductions so that there's nothing to take advantage of.  Join with Conservatives that have been pushing for years to see a 'Flat Tax' with the same rate for everyone or 'Fair Tax' based on the consumption of goods.  No exemptions, no deductions, and no tax-free investments for anyone.   (And oh by the way, without a complicated tax system, we'd need little or none of the massive IRS bureaucracy and the money we waste on it.)  

You want to fix the banking system, don't let the government add to the already ponderous regulation that it works under (and under which it collapsed), then bail them out when they flip a coin that says "heads I win, tails you lose".  Get the legislators and lobbyists out of the process and tell them that they're a business like any other.  Tell them that if they gamble their (our) money on risky investments and lose it, they will go bankrupt.  And tell them by the way, that they'll be going to jail as well for doing so, and have every personal asset they own confiscated to settle the bill.

You want foreclosures to end, then shut down government interference in the system and government run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well.  It was government regulation that convinced people to buy houses they couldn't afford and forced banks to lend them the money to do so.  It was government regulation that allowed the bundling investments that burst the housing bubble.  It's complying with government regulations that is hindering with clearing up the paperwork so the system can reset itself and move on.

You want to fix Wall Street, then stop letting Congress write regulations for its operation that allow the most egregious offenders to speculate without putting real money up.  You want major corporations to act responsibly, then yank the government safety net out from under them.  Stop the taxpayer funded incentives, the subsidies, and the legislative picking of winners and losers; and make the system run with little government supervision and no support.  Everybody from people who run trains to those who build cars knows that right now they can continue to operate under practices that are not and cannot be self-sustaining, and when the inevitable happens they can run to legislators under the 'too big to fail' scenario with their Oliver Twist suits on to beg for money.  Tell the government that it has to stop.

If nothing else however, remember that real capitalism is little more than a game with rules that you need to learn and understand.  And like any other game, it's one you can't expect to win unless you play.  Watching over the shoulders of others exerting themselves, and complaining that the rules won't let you compete won't get you into the game or take you to the next level.  So log in, get your password, and start playing with the rest of us.  Who knows, you might find that you enjoy this fairly realistic and rather challenging RPG far more than you thought.

And as for those you're trying to demonize for playing too well ... don't blame the player dog, blame the government writing and rewriting the rules of the game ...