Economist/Futurist Michael Hudson often points out that in the 19th century, America's industrial capitalists encouraged the government to build public infrastructure—roads, bridges, canals, railroads, and public education—to minimize costs and obtain benefits of efficiency. They also treated workers as assets and provided them such benefits as to insure productivity, such as housing, healthcare, and healthy food. Their motto was that "highly paid American workers can outcompete the pauperized workforce of Europe."
We know that capitalism lost its way when it became dominated by finance capitalism and in time, neoliberalism.
China did not have this problem because after the victory of the Red Army, Chinese finance capitalists grabbed all the loot they could carry and fled to Taiwan or to America's Chinatowns. Thus the PRC behaves much like earlier American industrial capitalists, but applied to the whole population. Chinese workers pay about 10% of their income for housing, enjoy free education from infancy to PhD, have access to healthcare, are able to easily travel all over the country on efficient highspeed rail and other forms of transportation. Thus, a Chinese worker who makes $8/hour lives better than an American worker at $32/hour.
In terms of democracy, China's form is vibrant and active, starting at the local level. It just doesn't look like the West's liberal democracy with its campaigns, election contributions, and facile debates.
This is not a mystery that can only exist in exotic China, but one that can be emulated everywhere, initially by getting rid of the parasites of financial capitalism (send them to Taiwan? Ukraine?), then practicing genuine democracy to sort out the future.
This is a fascinating take on this issue and there's a lot to your argument to consider and admire. Tedder130, you should write more often. Your voice deserves to be heard. I've just subscribed to your Substack.
To begin, I believe that neither the German nor American industrialists were benign socialists, they simply realized the importance of workers. The problem with 'finance capitalism' is that the owners lose touch with the source of their income. They just collect rent, interest, financial fees, and dividends. I call this kind of unearned income parasitic.
Your opinion of China is heavily influenced by Sinophobia, anti-communist, pro-capitalist logic and is not even close to reality. I know Chinese, have studied China's past and present, and have worked in China. You? Read some articles in American magazines, have you?
I am not concerned with the good or bad of capitalism, but I see no benefit from financialization as we now know it. I am sure at one time, money men were productive and important to civilization, but not in this day. I suppose you remember the French Revolution when the people got rid of their parasites with guillotines? In my naiveté, I actually believe that these financial parasites can be re-educated and become productive again, but it is true that China was not troubled by financial dominance because the financiers grabbed their loot and ran away.
Your last paragraph makes eminent sense to me, and "how to balance markets, state power, and finance in ways that maximize freedom, innovation, and shared prosperity" is precisely my motive. You sound like a communist!
About the rest, first, neither you nor I was alive in the 19th century, and whether there was exploitation or not, the record stands that in America and in Germany, the state developed extensive public infrastructure that enabled prosperity. Second, Professor Hudson quotes an American of the time about prosperous American workers being superior to pauperized European labor. Furthermore, Karl Marx wrote of his belief that industrial capitalism would evolve into socialism in time (one view of WWI is that it was a struggle between industrial capitalism of Germany and financial capitalism of England. Finance won).
I don't believe that entrepreneurship, effort, ambition are parasitic. What is parasitic is a landlord collecting rent "in his sleep", a person who bought a patent collecting license fees, a corporate raider who plunders the company he bought, inheritance with its trust fund babies, the practicers of predatory interest (usury), and so on. At this point in time, the parasites of finance suck the life out of capitalist economies. If you cannot see the faults of financial capitalism, we have nothing to discuss.
Your concern for rich people is touching. However, there are kind ways to not have rich, parasitical people. The vast wealth of our time is a product of insufficient taxation on income, and the simple fix is to practice progressive taxation on incomes and financial rent. Coupled with a high inheritance tax and billionaires go away in a few generations, which I agree is kinder than chopping off their heads.
Finally, you opinion of China is based on malign propaganda. You don't have a clue about the Chinese economy or political system. The fact is that China holds the best hope for humanity, if the Americans don't blow up the world.
Please! Do you think I am ignorant of the class war and labor exploitation? Next, you fall into the American economic heresy of claiming that all income is earned income. This is precisely the fault of the current tax system and the reason for such vast inequality we now have. Your opinion of capitalism is just that, an opinion crafted from years of propaganda. There are lots of ways that societies have formed capital accumulation and developed their societies in history, and the one we have now is the worst because of exploitation and alienation.
If you think for one minute that you possess an accurate vision of China and her economy, I will sell you a nice bridge in New York. There are a few activists and scholars in the US who do know, such as Michael Hudson and Carlos Martinez, both of whom are Marxists who have spent time in China. Any other perspective or opinion is tainted either by anti-communism or Sinophobia. If you read anything else, it will be wrong on its face because of the prejudices of the author.
We can start our dialog at any level, but you who want to deflect from basic defects, who are not willing to 'see things as they are' have little to bring to a discussion. In short, the base discussion involves the choice between socialism and barbarism—Rosa Luxembourg.
There's an under reported provision in the new Government bill, with the nickname "Hemp Ban", which puts a big question mark on the future of the $126B cannabis business. The ban doesn't take effect until Nov 2026. So, for the next 10 months the cannabis lobbyists can feather the nests of the lawmakers to get an amendment passed. Once again, congress members will get rich on the backs of those who rely on THC for medical conditions.
Thanks much for the news and stats. With that infomation it boggles my mind why people in Florida still support Trump? Or maybe they dont blame him for it? It was Bidens fault still? Or that Trump is one of them? (smile). Maybe those people on SNAP dont vote?? Maybe those are the ones who DID VOTE for the democrats. Or that being "woke" is more of a fear for Floridians than that everyone has enough food?
Economist/Futurist Michael Hudson often points out that in the 19th century, America's industrial capitalists encouraged the government to build public infrastructure—roads, bridges, canals, railroads, and public education—to minimize costs and obtain benefits of efficiency. They also treated workers as assets and provided them such benefits as to insure productivity, such as housing, healthcare, and healthy food. Their motto was that "highly paid American workers can outcompete the pauperized workforce of Europe."
We know that capitalism lost its way when it became dominated by finance capitalism and in time, neoliberalism.
China did not have this problem because after the victory of the Red Army, Chinese finance capitalists grabbed all the loot they could carry and fled to Taiwan or to America's Chinatowns. Thus the PRC behaves much like earlier American industrial capitalists, but applied to the whole population. Chinese workers pay about 10% of their income for housing, enjoy free education from infancy to PhD, have access to healthcare, are able to easily travel all over the country on efficient highspeed rail and other forms of transportation. Thus, a Chinese worker who makes $8/hour lives better than an American worker at $32/hour.
In terms of democracy, China's form is vibrant and active, starting at the local level. It just doesn't look like the West's liberal democracy with its campaigns, election contributions, and facile debates.
This is not a mystery that can only exist in exotic China, but one that can be emulated everywhere, initially by getting rid of the parasites of financial capitalism (send them to Taiwan? Ukraine?), then practicing genuine democracy to sort out the future.
This is a fascinating take on this issue and there's a lot to your argument to consider and admire. Tedder130, you should write more often. Your voice deserves to be heard. I've just subscribed to your Substack.
To begin, I believe that neither the German nor American industrialists were benign socialists, they simply realized the importance of workers. The problem with 'finance capitalism' is that the owners lose touch with the source of their income. They just collect rent, interest, financial fees, and dividends. I call this kind of unearned income parasitic.
Your opinion of China is heavily influenced by Sinophobia, anti-communist, pro-capitalist logic and is not even close to reality. I know Chinese, have studied China's past and present, and have worked in China. You? Read some articles in American magazines, have you?
I am not concerned with the good or bad of capitalism, but I see no benefit from financialization as we now know it. I am sure at one time, money men were productive and important to civilization, but not in this day. I suppose you remember the French Revolution when the people got rid of their parasites with guillotines? In my naiveté, I actually believe that these financial parasites can be re-educated and become productive again, but it is true that China was not troubled by financial dominance because the financiers grabbed their loot and ran away.
Your last paragraph makes eminent sense to me, and "how to balance markets, state power, and finance in ways that maximize freedom, innovation, and shared prosperity" is precisely my motive. You sound like a communist!
About the rest, first, neither you nor I was alive in the 19th century, and whether there was exploitation or not, the record stands that in America and in Germany, the state developed extensive public infrastructure that enabled prosperity. Second, Professor Hudson quotes an American of the time about prosperous American workers being superior to pauperized European labor. Furthermore, Karl Marx wrote of his belief that industrial capitalism would evolve into socialism in time (one view of WWI is that it was a struggle between industrial capitalism of Germany and financial capitalism of England. Finance won).
I don't believe that entrepreneurship, effort, ambition are parasitic. What is parasitic is a landlord collecting rent "in his sleep", a person who bought a patent collecting license fees, a corporate raider who plunders the company he bought, inheritance with its trust fund babies, the practicers of predatory interest (usury), and so on. At this point in time, the parasites of finance suck the life out of capitalist economies. If you cannot see the faults of financial capitalism, we have nothing to discuss.
Your concern for rich people is touching. However, there are kind ways to not have rich, parasitical people. The vast wealth of our time is a product of insufficient taxation on income, and the simple fix is to practice progressive taxation on incomes and financial rent. Coupled with a high inheritance tax and billionaires go away in a few generations, which I agree is kinder than chopping off their heads.
Finally, you opinion of China is based on malign propaganda. You don't have a clue about the Chinese economy or political system. The fact is that China holds the best hope for humanity, if the Americans don't blow up the world.
Please! Do you think I am ignorant of the class war and labor exploitation? Next, you fall into the American economic heresy of claiming that all income is earned income. This is precisely the fault of the current tax system and the reason for such vast inequality we now have. Your opinion of capitalism is just that, an opinion crafted from years of propaganda. There are lots of ways that societies have formed capital accumulation and developed their societies in history, and the one we have now is the worst because of exploitation and alienation.
If you think for one minute that you possess an accurate vision of China and her economy, I will sell you a nice bridge in New York. There are a few activists and scholars in the US who do know, such as Michael Hudson and Carlos Martinez, both of whom are Marxists who have spent time in China. Any other perspective or opinion is tainted either by anti-communism or Sinophobia. If you read anything else, it will be wrong on its face because of the prejudices of the author.
We can start our dialog at any level, but you who want to deflect from basic defects, who are not willing to 'see things as they are' have little to bring to a discussion. In short, the base discussion involves the choice between socialism and barbarism—Rosa Luxembourg.
Thanks, Mr Bruce. I love reading your essays and I adore Ms Mingo!
There's an under reported provision in the new Government bill, with the nickname "Hemp Ban", which puts a big question mark on the future of the $126B cannabis business. The ban doesn't take effect until Nov 2026. So, for the next 10 months the cannabis lobbyists can feather the nests of the lawmakers to get an amendment passed. Once again, congress members will get rich on the backs of those who rely on THC for medical conditions.
Thanks much for the news and stats. With that infomation it boggles my mind why people in Florida still support Trump? Or maybe they dont blame him for it? It was Bidens fault still? Or that Trump is one of them? (smile). Maybe those people on SNAP dont vote?? Maybe those are the ones who DID VOTE for the democrats. Or that being "woke" is more of a fear for Floridians than that everyone has enough food?