I had no idea this was going to be such a passionate conversation. I’ve really enjoyed your thoughts. I hope you guys didn’t waste all of the good stuff on my first post that was just giving you a little backdrop for what I’ve been thinking. Hopefully, I can work some of this out over the next couple of days in these posts.
The main thing for me to remember is that I fully recognize the hypocrisy of my critique of capitalism as we currently view it. I’m a small business owner that relies heavily on making “profit”. I also recognize that there is absolutely nothing wrong with making money and a profit. I have no problem with money. It does seem rather trite at times and I do feel like it clouds things and gets in the way as well, but it’s also a viable resource. I think we all agree it’s just how we use it.
Whether it’s poor customer service, bad products, unethical treatment of employees, recklessness with the environment . . . hopefully I can make a connection to see how they are all related to capitalism and its fundamental foundation of making money. This is not just a critique of customer service. It’s a critique of the whole framework that funds my life. My food. My shelter. My toys. My trips. My vehicle.
So my main “uneasiness” with capitalism is this whole emphasis on profit at all costs. I know the point of a business is to make money. I’m not naive to that. But I think it’s the “at all costs” that bothers me. When making money is the main goal at the expense of everything else. Service . . . quality . . . fair treatment . . . environment . . . and the list goes on and on.
To me when profit becomes the main engine that is driving the corporation you’ve immediately taken the focus off everything else but the company. In my opinion, it becomes selfish. Make as much money for the company as you can regardless of anything else.
It becomes about squeezing the last nickel and drop out of the product and the consumer. At the expense of everything else. This is understandable to a certain extent.
The owner of the business wants security (money). The stockholder wants security (dividends). The employees want security (paycheck). The customers want security (cheapest possible product for their money). In this version of capitalism that has PROFIT at its main thrust everyone is focused on getting as much as they can out of something by putting in as little as possible.
It’s selfish. And inward focused.
The company was created out of the need for the owner to have some sense of security. Employees go to work in order to get their security. And the consumers buy.
Work then becomes all about my security. Capitalism becomes all about what I can get out of the economic system.
However, I get a different vision with Jesus. An economic system that is not built around my security but our security. Not about what I can get out of the system. But about what I can give to it.
Security is a dangerous thing. Especially when it’s rooted in “things” like money and guns. The need to feel secure will make people do some weird things and justify things even weirder. For most of us our security is extremely self-centered. We want to make sure our children our secure so we bomb Iraqi children. We want to make sure we’re secure (or at least having fun while we do it) so we run the rat race to make money and to buy nice things.
Nothing wrong with nice things. Nothing wrong with wanting to feel secure.
But what about an economic system that doesn’t have my security as the focus. But the security of us all?
I’m not sure if capitalism has the ability to meet the needs of all. In many ways “free-market economy” is intrinsically survival of the fittest. What about those left behind? Who aren’t fit?
And I’ve got about 4 more posts. So cut me some slack in the comments about how shallow and superficial this is right now. I’m still building and thinking.
But what are you thoughts? Especially on this idea of capitalism being intrinsically selfish. And the connection that security plays in it.
on 
on 
on 
on 
on
23 Comments
Here is something interesting i was speaking to my friend Tim about today, it goes along with “Capitalism being intrinsically selfish.”
I pointed out that the goal of Capitalism is perpetual growth. Of having a company that is always making more and more money (for security as you have pointed out) with the hope of being able to not sustain the same level of profit but to generate more revenue every quarter. The interesting thing about this idea of perpetual growth is that its the most unnatural idea in the world.
For instance, there is no living example of anything on this planet that would lead us to believe that anything is meant to perpetually grow. We have no examples in nature of anything that is always growing and never ending. Plants grow and then they die. People are born and then some years later they die, you get the idea.
So as I was discussing this with Tim he turned to me and said, “So then maybe Capitalism is the new Tower of Babel?†I thought about that for a moment. Capitalism is uniting (whether by choice or by force) many different peoples underneath its banner that promises a secure future (a promise no one can make with any real surety). But then I thought that maybe what makes Capitalism so much like the Tower of Babel is its blatant disregard for the natural order of life on this planet.
Whereas everything else on this planet is meant to die Capitalism promotes this idea of financial immortality, this idea that there will always be resources for us to pull from the earth (oil, coal, etc.) and people to exploit in order to keep Capitalism moving ahead.
Many proponents of Capitalism have taken on this idea that Capitalism is the end all. “This is it folksâ€, they say, “we have reached the peak of human civilizationâ€.
I fear that if this is the peak than we may be awfully close to falling off of the edge.
I still think you’re missing the mark when you blame capitalism. Try to imagine for a moment (and this might be a little difficult for you) and ethical business owner. One who is unselfish, who cares about his employees.
His employees work hard and the company profits. The ethical business owner shares these profits with his employees, or uses the excess to expand the business to provide more jobs to a community of people.
It’s easy to see how everyone in a given community can benefit from this type of system. Using resources responsibly, sharing in the fruit of each others’ labor. Almost sounds utopian, huh?
The problem arises, however, when greed takes over in the hearts of men and “profit at all cost” really is the name of the game. Workers labor for as little as possible, and whatever excess the company produces is hoarded by the owner. Note that this is not a deficiency of a capitalist system, but a deficiency in the heart of man.
This is why I absolutely love capitalism. We, as individuals, each make our own choices regarding our fiscal ethics. There’s no government agency dictating how much money I give to the unemployed, the poor. I can be generous or I can be a miser. I am responsible for my own morality.
The truth is, if poor people exist in a capitalist system, it shows that we’re simply not sharing enough.
I once heard a guy on NPR reading an essay on giving. I know I’m getting the quote wrong, but he said something like this: “I can’t say how much you should be giving, but if it doesn’t hurt, you’re probably not giving enough.”
This is a call for personal sacrifice. But a sacrifice should be made freely at the will of the giver, not forcefully by the hand of government or anything else.
i agree clint. and i like your perspective on choosing. but lets be honest, outside of small, small business owners and a few ethical mega-corporations, you don’t have this type of attitude. i would dare say that 90% of western based corporations are more of the “at all costs” types.
corey.
that perpetual growth idea is really rich. i didn’t think about that part but it fits right alongside with the security.
Clint, I think I heard the same story on NPR. . was it the one that showed that Conservative Christian Republicans usually give more than Liberal Democrats. . and compared what the average American gave?
I agree with you Clint, capitalism isn’t to blame here at all, greed is. I also don’t see what the critique of capitalism is. . . is it that it lets greedy people be more greedy? Is that the arguement?
I think capitalism lends to provide the most services by diverse companies. Moreover in our structure we have incredible ways of evaluating which companies provide what kind of service, so we can make educated decisions about who we want to give our buisness to. For example. . . if you hate how Walmart or Target does buisness. . . shop at 10,000 Villages. . there are alternatives and options that many economic systems don’t allow for.
I would also like to see how you can say 90% of buisness people are “at all cost” people.
Josh- I would think that 90% is a pretty high number, but I know what you mean. It’s gotten too big too fast. And whatever deal was made with the devil and big business was made too long ago for it to be able to change overnight. The best we can do is the best we can do. Shop local. Bomb Wal-Mart.
Nick- While I agree that there are alternatives to Wal-Mart, shopping at 10,000 villages seems preposterous and unlikely. This is going a bit beyond sarcasm don’t you think? Maybe shopping at just a two or three other villages in your area would suffice?
Here are some timely resources that can shed some extra light on the topic:
For big business
For the consumer
Duely noted.
nick,
sadly most of our country is not educated nor concerned. because in capitalism, the cheapest product we can get is the customer’s goal. and the highest possible profit is the producer’s goal. which leaves very little room for OUR common good. that’s why i’m attempting to reimagine what capitalism can look like in my small business. and in how i shop. and where i put my money. i never said do away with capitalism. i do think we need to seriously think about it’s foundation. and whether that foundation pushes back against the kingdom of god.
this is where this started for me was with when i got my business license. getting ready to start my new company. what made or would keep me from becoming a big corporation focused on profit at all cost. so that’s what has gotten me to start thinking about this.
and so for now i’m convinced that most corporations are individualistic in their “profit-making” and most consumers are individualistic in their buying habits. that’s why we have new walmarts popping up everywhere because no one cares as long as the product is cheap. and that is why we buy expensive houses and boats and toys. because we are individualistic when it comes to our spending. i agree that the root cause of that is greed. and i don’t think we need to become socialists or communists in order to share and live globally and commually. but i think there is definitely some possibility for at least rethinking this system that feels, for me at least, highly out of control.
when you have the rich getting richer. the poor getting poorer. and the middle class spinning their wheels to move up. you have a flawed system. one that is not operating in rhythm with the kingdom.
Maybe the best route then is to write a mission statement for how your company will be different and how your company and your personal life will reflect your beliefs about how an economy should work(which I guess is where you are going in a round about way), being that you are connected to capitalism at every point and being that you can’t fix greed.
thats what i’m attempting to do by writing these posts.
1st part of any argument is to state the background. 2nd part, state what’s wrong. 3rd part, describe your role in what’s wrong. 4th, create a solution.
Ah. . I was unfamiliar with the 4 tier structure.
you didn’t have that in macroeconomics? it’s basically a 6 tier. but i went with 4 for simplicity sake. its kind of like a pyramid.
Do you think it’s possible that government intrusion into capitalism, trying to curb excess, has actually made it worse? For instance, the government taxes profits, so businesses often make an effort to lose money every year (or at best, break even) to avoid taxes. The government taxes dividends, so businesses reinvest most of their profits to grow the business rather than redistribute dividends among stockholders.
The point is, if I’m a stockholder in a company, the only way to simultaneous have a return on my investment (without which there are no stockholders) while avoiding paying taxes is to have the company grow – in terms of value, which is directly correlated to revenue.
If you could imagine a scenario where government taxation didn’t force people to make strange decisions, you’d see more dividend payouts. You’d see people receive their return on their investment in terms of yearly profits, instead of having a huge emphasis on company growth.
When things aren’t working right, there are pretty much always two things to blame – the human condition of sin (greed, deceit) and government’s well-meaning attempts to control it, which nearly always backfire (taxation, minimum wage, etc).
Didn’t take micro or macro anything. . . but I like the 4 tier structure. . it drawls everyone in and even makes me bite. . . I am going to do one of these very soon myself.
I think Derek makes a really good point with the tax statement. When all the Democrats start crying about the Republican regime giving tax breaks for big business, all the Republicans are trying to do is stimulate the economy to provide for greater growth and greater shared wealth.
with all due respect . . . screw the trickle down effect.
Yeah, I see your point. The trickle-down effect is solely dependent on the attitudes of man towards generosity and sacrifice. Still, I feel like that’s the idea it’s modeled after.
Also let me add- Being out of town on business and staying within half a block of a great local pub is dangerous business. I’ve had to re-type this thing five times already. The fact that I can still enter this comment without an error is simply miraculous. If you’re ever in the Portland area, check out The Merchant of Venice restaurant and bar.
Umm, ok enough advertising- time for bed.
“You’d see people receive their return on their investment in terms of yearly profits, instead of having a huge emphasis on company growth.”
I still struggle with this idea because it is implying that there is not a cap to what a stockholder should expect from its company. In a land of extreme excess i have trouble believing that people know when to say, “enough is enough”.
What does having enough money look like within American society? How many examples do we have of someone who has worked toward a reasonable goal (monetary or other wise), reached that goal and then actually decided to say they were content upon reaching that goal? Not many, that’s for sure.
We as a people do not have a good perception of the word “enoughâ€. For the most part, we are always seeking more and trying to convince ourselves that we need more to live the kind of fantasy world that the media and our minds tells us really exists. It’s a lie. Whatever it is that you think you need to live is probably not as detrimental to your well being as you perceive it to be.
I’m glad your continuing to think on this Josh. I’m not going to get caught up in the comment thread either. I think your right about profit being the bottom line, and how that is not a good thing. Makes me think about hummers.
Have you considered anarchy as an alternative system? Might be worth it.
Keep writing, I’m listening.
“I still struggle with this idea because it is implying that there is not a cap to what a stockholder should expect from its company. In a land of extreme excess i have trouble believing that people know when to say, “enough is enoughâ€.”
That’s only an issue if the company generating those profits holds a monopoly. As long as competition is possible, then insane profits is a drawing factor for more providers.
The problems being brought up about capitalism are really problems being brought up about spirituality, not economics. There’s really little you can do about that from a regulation/control standpoint. At least, not without making things far worse. My point is, most of government’s attempts at regulation and control skew the system and makes things worse – and when things get worse, few people question to what degree government is responsible.
what if economics and spirituality are connected.
josh,
nice.
This to me is the crux of it: Capitalism tries to harness greed, to make it a good thing. Adam Smith said the selfish but clever baker could be trusted, because he knew he could not get away with poisoning. Like I said before this requires sufficient information to know if the baker’s putting crap in it, and anything you don’t know about is immune to capitalism. But there are other features of people that are good to use, not just their desire for power/influence and their fear. Ecclesiastes says that God has given man the capacity to enjoy his work, and clearly seeing what you have achieved is immensely satisfying, as is seeing other people blessed by what you do. If you rip everyone off and then spend the money on a Ps3, then you are missing out one of Gods biggest gifts to godless man. People also need vision, and a sense of progression, and while that is most fully found in being discipled by Jesus and the promise we have, just as service is perfected in sacrificial love, companies can still get a vision and be invigorated by it. Cooperate culture study fills a billion books, but from my perspective it’s basically about harnessing creative drive, satisfaction in service, and the desire to move forward. I forgot to mention love, but that is the invisible centrepiece, as people need to feel valued and loved, and if they can’t get it elsewhere they will try to get it in work. People will react to the love of Jesus in the workplace like they do everywhere, they need it but they won’t always accept it. Also Jesus said an interesting thing about efficiency in the parable of the moneylender. This guy lets all his bosses creditors off lightly, not getting the full profit he could off them, and in future has more clients. Efficiency above all else is inhuman, but a little bit of mercy goes a long way. This is mirrored in the old law, where people would produce as best they could, but when the time came to harvest, they would leave the edges of the field to the poor, so that the final tricky 20% went to the desperate, and the rest to everyone else.
One Trackback
[...] part one part two [...]