No one can earn
a million dollars honestly.
William
Jennings
Bryan, 1860 – 1925,
an
American lawyer, statesman, and politician, three times the Democratic
Party nominee for President of the United States.
The decadent
international but individualistic capitalism in the hands of which we found
ourselves after the war is not a success. It is not intelligent. It is not
beautiful. It is not just. It is not virtuous. And it doesn't deliver the
goods.
-----
Capitalism is the
astounding belief that the most wickedest [sic] of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of
everyone.
John Maynard
Keynes, 1883 – 1946,
a British
economist whose ideas, called Keynesian economics, had a
major impact
on modern economic and political theory, as well as on
many
governments’ fiscal policies.
In this lengthy, yet
incomplete essay, we have looks at the deficiencies of modern-day American
capitalism and possible solutions.
On “Now,” a program
on PBS, there was a report on “phthalates” on March 21, 2008.
The gist of the report was that phthalates were potentially harmful
to infants. Yet, there is strong opposition to this viewpoint, from a scientist who says that
“Now” might have been dishonest, http://stats.org/stories/2008/dishonest_PBS_NOW_mar27_07.html
.
While I cannot weigh in
on either side with regard to the scientific evidence, as I do not know how
to evaluate the evidence, there is something which caught my attention in
the “Now” report and in comments made about the report:
…[“Now”]
made much of the fact that the EU (European Union) banned phthalates in toys
with the implication that the EU was much wiser and more concerned for their
population that the US. Why was this not challenged? In fact the EU ban was based largely on the
“precautionary principle” rather than fact and science. …
“Precautionary
principle”? Is this
commentator saying that it is not scientific
to say “Better safe than sorry”? Yet,
another commentator seems to support the principle:
Endocrine
disruptors like phthalates and BPA pose a serious ethical and
epidemiological problem. We can't prove these endocrine mimickers are
dangerous to humans unless we use unborn kids (fetuses) as experiments. So
we expose them anyway. Is this
America's brand of Russian roulette? ...
How does the
precautionary principle apply to modern-day American capitalism and this
essay? We in
America
go forward with a profit-making enterprise until it be conclusively,
scientifically shown that there would be great harm.
This is true not only with chemicals in the environment, but, also,
with drugs, foods, tobacco, and even water, now that we have learned that
traces of pharmaceutical drugs have made it into our water supply.
We are resistant to whatever would keep us from making money.
The precautionary
principle is contrary to American capitalism, as the principle says to test and know the consequences before going forward.
If we applied that in
America, our creation of wealth would be slowed, our rate of innovation retarded.
On which side should we
come down? It is good that we
Americans do not agree with the rest of the world on every subject, just as
it is good that our allies take exception to every position which we take.
But when it comes to the health of all Americans, should we be any
less cautionary than the European Union is about
Europe?
Should the laws and
rules of modern-day American capitalism be formed within the framework of
what best advances the health and wellbeing of Americans?
May 8, 2008