Capitalism is an economic law that stresses the incommunicable possession of goods and property. Under capitalism whatever can start a business and reap the rewards of his or her hard work if the business is successful. Today, because of increased competition, it is becoming harder to result unless the owner is very innovative.
In an economic or political sense socialism is a doctrine that believes the possession of asset is better relegated to the government or some other communal entity. In the communal sense socialism can be considered a doctrine that stresses manipulation of the individual by the interests of the majority. The previous Ussr is an greatest example of a radical form of socialism called communism. There the government owned all business, and population were forced to work for a living in the manner dictated by their government.
The way wealth is distributed in the United States shows legitimately how much capitalism groups of population legitimately enjoy. It's easier to understand if you think of trying to share a total of 0 dollars among 100 people. The table below shows how the 0 would be distributed proportional to the way wealth is legitimately distributed in the U.S. Agreeing to 2001 statistics.
.100 to 1 person
$ 5.325 to 4 people
$ 2.300 to 5 population -----> .90 to 10 people
------------------------------
$ 1.250 to 10 people
$ 0.595 to 20 people
$ 0.225 to 20 population -----> .90 to 50 people
------------------------------
$ 0.005 to 40 population -----> $ 0.20 to 40 people
We could arbitrarily set up definitions for the upper class, middle class, and lower class. The upper class is the 10 population who get .30 and above. The middle class could be considered the 50 population who get from .225 to .25. And the lower class is the 40 population that approximately get nothing.
If you look at the above distribution you can see that most population living in the United States legitimately don't have that much capital to control. As time goes on the upper class is using socialist concepts to try to take off as much wealth as they can from the middle class and get it under their control. The banks whose corporate heads occupy the upper class, use techniques like mortgages, car loans, and reputation cards to gain more and more control over the rest of the population.
Big corporations need a workforce to keep accumulating wealth. They need a workforce that does not cause problems or rebel. population would at last revolt if they believed they had nothing. So the law creates an illusion of possession with loans and reputation cards. The main thing is to keep the workers from reasoning too hard, so they wouldn't cause trouble. The conventional media is used to numb rational reasoning by interesting the communal with mind dulling activities.
Corporations are only capitalistic at the top level. interesting down the management ladder, the employees perceive a greater and greater whole of socialism. They get their orders from the communal they call "corporate". At lower levels, individuality is discouraged and conformity is applauded. Corporations tell their employees that they are part of their house and use the word teamwork to stress conformity in an upbeat way.
The use of technology has greatly increased the bureaucracy connected with the corporate culture. Computers introduced much easier means to track such things as inventory, efficiency, and the workforce. The whole of paperwork connected with previously easy operations skyrocketed. The internet became a home for databases referencing work history, medical records, shopping habits, and many other categories.
Public schools and many "technical" colleges are training population be procedural rather than creative. Man who learns to do things step by step following some rule and never questions the guess for this rule is procedural. When one is creative, one tries to understand why he or she is performing a task. Creativity allows the individual to be able to perform the same task in a variety of ways, not just by following some pre-established rule set down by Man of a higher rank in the communal hive. There is nothing wrong in rules if they are useful. By using our creativity, we can explore how beneficial these rules legitimately are rather just taking Man else's word for it.
When population are conditioned to be procedural, they find it hard to make decisions in unusual situations. The Kentucky based Courier-Journal reports about an unusual hoax that occurred recently throughout the Us. Man called fast food restaurant managers and pretended to be a policeman investigating a theft. He asked that the managers to strip-search, usually, one of their employees. Many of the fast food managers complied. This is not surprising, naturally because population are socialized by schools and the media to blindly obey authority figures.
Phishing schemes, where thieves get population to surrender their personal information are other examples of obedience to authority. The thieves send an email, supposedly from the victim's bank, asking the victim to verify his or her personal information. In this case, the bank is the seal of authority that must be obeyed, even when it's not legitimately the bank. With a microscopic reasoning these phishing schemes can legitimately be spotted. Yet, there are so many population falling victim to this type of scam that the most recent versions of both the Internet Explorer and Firefox browsers consist of antiphishing protection.
Many other similar scams result only because we lack the analytical skills to see them for what they legitimately are. Because of the emphasis on procedural training rather than analytical training, more and more population are becoming robots legitimately controlled by their communal masters.
The media preaches to us straight through radio, television, newspapers, and some forms of internet how we must behave. This is called political correctness. When a communal personality violates any of the rules of political correctness, the media makes a point to ostracize the individual, so that every person would be warned not to say or do whatever that is not in line with "proper" conduct. John Carey, Mel Gibbson, and Michael Richards were personalities that recently made statements that were not politically correct. Their stories were covered for weeks in the media while none of the three incidents was legitimately newsworthy. This form of media coverage is legitimately an assault on individual expression. freedom of expression Agreeing to the corporate alien media can be defined in the following way: every person has the right to say or do whatever lawful, but if what you say or do is not politically correct, we'll discredit you, make you look like a fool, and do our best to ruin your reputation.
The statements of Carey, Gibson, and Richards may have been inappropriate, but they were made to exact audiences. If apologies were required, they could have been quietly made to the population they offended. To turn their remarks into global issues is a way of warning the world to conform to what is considered "proper" by the communal standard.
While most workers and middle managers hear a lot about the significance of socialist concepts such as teamwork and political correctness, upper management is busy reaping the rewards of true capitalism. More and more Ceos are demanding outlandish salaries. Government officials get much lower salaries but they make up for it with varied perks and shady deals. Greed is the God of capitalism, and the rigorous rich religiously keep his commandments. Where is the teamwork there? Even while the time of the Soviet Union, while most of the Soviet population were busy being good communists, the leaders acted pretty much like the capitalists they condemned.
What is truly needed is more socialism at the top, and less at the bottom. Instead of raking in huge salaries, upper management should distribute some of their wealth toward wages and other benefits of the workforce and lower cost of goods and services. Middle class schools should be emphasizing teaching population to think instead of how to memorize. The media should not assault population for saying what they mean, even if the majority doesn't agree. Radio and television should broadcast meaningful discussions by even the most controversial groups. Current bureaucracy should be condensed by reducing unnecessary paperwork and useless busywork.
Socialism in a Capitalist community