People obtain bread in a capitalist society based not on whether they are hungry, or whether their families are hungry, or what they intend to use the bread for. It doesn't care why they might have money, or why they might not have money, or even, usually, what we mean by "money". In a capitalist society, a starving person can receive a long prison term for stealing that bread -- or often, even taking discarded bread from the trash -- while someone gaming the system to limit the amount of bread produced, or artificially driving up the price of bread, or ruthlessly suppressing new bread-suppliers, gets off with a slap on the wrist or is even praised for his business acumen.
At the core, capitalism doesn't even TRY to account for human need. You either buy into an ethereal and abstract system-of-exchange, and earn your way, or you die -- and capitalism teaches you that if you do die this way, you deserved it.
This doesn't mean socialism is the answer. That's a false dichotomy and a logical error. But I believe this does mean that capitalism has it at least partially wrong. As Vedder wrote: Don't sell me "there can't be better ways".
Disgusted by MemberSource Credit Union of Houston, Texas
I have been utterly disgusted with my banking relationship with MemberSource Credit Union of Houston, Texas. Funds are routinely made unavai
Adding click handlers to dynamic content (and why you shouldn't style in...
Ran into this stumper while programming my Global List of Local Pearl Jam Groups for my pjsho.ws site. I have a global map with clickable co
My mom told me that being less sensitive to it would improve my quality ...
I have this unerring knack for hearing errors in American accents. An actor will start talking in a movie, and, if I'm with someone and I'm