I suppose you'd say I have a small business with one employee (me).
So, I guess I'm a capitalist.
Dan Minettte is not a large-scale, monopoly or oligopoly capitalist
like Microsoft, Toyota, or the national oil company in Saudi Arabia.
(As far as I know oligopolies are more common than monopolies.)
He cannot buy out competitors that cost hundred of millions of US
dollars. He does not have the money. He cannot influence the US
government to hand him a tax break that is worth a hundred million US
dollars to him alone.
As economists have said for years, free market capitalists tend to be
competitive; monopoly or oligopoly capitalists tend not. That
produces huge and fundamental differences.
jon louis mann asked
would you quietly go bankrupt if
there was a way you could buy out the other guy.
If he were a large scale monopoly or oligopoly capitalist, he probably
would try to buy out the other guy. But he is not.
Competitive, free market capitalism favors making decisions as locally
as possible, since that wastes the least effort, favors political and
legal equality, since competitors are roughly the same size, and
favors technological advance, since others will be advancing.
Large scale monopoly or oligopoly capitalism favors feudalistic
governance, since bullies have won and ordinary people have lost,
favors inequality, since the winners want themselves to stay winners,
and favors technological hindrance, since those who govern want their
organizations to avoid disruptive innovations. When a large scale
monopoly or oligopoly capitalist has the option, for example, when a
more powerful government does not interfere, he or she tries to `buy
out the other guy'. When it is cheaper, often, when a smaller
capitalist and his or her organization are insufficiently rich and not
necessary as a support, he or she tries to put `the other guy' out of
business.
Large US capitalistic organizations have long been oligopolistic.
(They have been so for more than 120 years and probably longer, but I
don't want to argue that; for a history of industrial growth and
competitiveness in Germany, England, and the United States between
1870 and 1940, see `Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial
Capitalism' by Alfred D Chandler Jr, 1990, Harvard Univ. Press, ISBN
0-674-78944-6.)
My belief is that in the last generation, large US capitalistic
organizations have favored more feudalistic governance, inequality,
and technological hindrance than before.
Robert J. Chassell
i wasn't suggesting that dan was a large scale capitalist; robert, my
question was hypothetical. i am in total agreement that multinational
corporate capitalismis are feudalistic. it is also true that we would not have
the hi tech products that we do if not for large capital investment and wars.
that doesn't make it right, but it is too late to stop global trade or return
to an agrarian society and the small business model. capitalism is not
innately, nor is money; just how these tools are applied, and how the wealth is
distributed and spent...
jon louis mann
---------------------------------
Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
