Romney "Guarding" Free Markets

-
How can Mitt Romney be the protector of free markets and small business when he will be indebted to the cronies who are destroying free markets?

On July 19, 2012 the Financial Times reported Paul Ryan saying,
"Both political parties have fallen victim to “partnership” with large and well-connected companies, especially in energy, housing, finance and healthcare. Republicans have been guilty of confusing our pro-market principles with pro-entrenched business policies.... A growing coalition of reformers ... reject this pernicious crony capitalism. Our solutions promote an opportunity society, one that is rooted in the US commitment to free enterprise."
Based on the source of their campaign funds, how is the Republican ticket going to say no to those filling their coffers?

"Republicans rule among these mega-donors. In total, mega-donors have now given $229.9 million to super PACs out of a total of $337.8 million contributed through July. Of that, $166.9 million came from just 79 Republican mega-donors. Democratic mega-donors, of which there are 42, have given $57.2 million. Another three donors have given $5.7 million to nonpartisan super PACs.
These donations have helped the two top GOP super PACs -- Restore Our Future and American Crossroads -- spend in excess of $18 million to help the Romney-Ryan ticket in July and August.
...Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino magnate, and his family have combined to give $37.75 million to super PACs in the 2012 election cycle. At first, Adelson pumped money into Winning Our Future, the super PAC supporting Newt Gingrich, but now he is funding groups backing Mitt Romney and congressional Republicans. Adelson is ranked on the Forbes list of the richest Americans at number eight, with $21.5 billion in net worth."  Super PAC Contributions Top $300 Million, Most Goes To GOP Groups, Huntington Post, August 22, 2012
We must demand government carry out its function of protecting free markets from tyranny, both public and private. Romney is vocal in defending markets from public tyranny, but silent when it comes to tyranny from the private sector.
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” Justice Louis Brandeis 1928
A private sector without umpires, and controlled by oligopolies, got us into this mess with sub prime lending. The umpire, the government, was bought with campaign contributions from oligopolies.
‘People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public or in some contrivance to raise prices.’ (Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, 1776).
In today’s market, the major goal of oligopolies is to pursue their self-interest of keeping the oligopoly alive. This goal is not in congruence with the citizens of this country. Why are we not demanding the enforcement of anti-trust laws? This country seems to be transforming into an Oligarch from a Republic and the defenders of free markets are doing nothing about it.

The quote below is from the book Capitalism and Freedom written by Milton and Rose Friedman. Dr. Friedman is the economist quoted most often when conservatives are praising free markets and capitalism.
“…But we cannot rely on custom or conscious alone to interpret and enforce the rules; we need an umpire. These then are the basic roles of government in a free society; to provide a means where we can modify rules, to mediate differences among us on the meaning of rules, and to enforce compliance with the rules on the part of those few who otherwise would not play the game.”
I have concluded that our “conservative” politicians ignore private tyranny because they enjoy the large campaign bribes provided to them by these oligopolies. What is the excuse for the rest of us? Why do we allow it and not speak up about the injustice?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

China And The Five Baits

-
Image
If you are under the age of 50 you should be concerned about China from an economic and global power standpoint. Some believe China is seeking peace with the rest of the world. Based on their long history, I am not convinced. For China long term is hundreds of years and for the United States it is the next election cycle. China's focus is always on the long term. Much of this post is drawn from a book,  On China , written by Henry Kissinger, the Secretary of State under President Nixon and a research paper of the National Intelligence Council titled  Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds . Whether the future will prove China's desire for peaceful co-existence depends on whether its middle class will sufficiently benefit from economic growth and not allow their leadership to throw it away by creating enemies with trading partners.  This requires the country becoming more democratic and less inclined to be a threat to the remainder of the world.  The jury is still looking
Read More

Keep Freedom on The Internet!

-
Image
Net neutrality under attack:   Don't let Verizon and Google dictate the future of the Internet. Contact the FCC! This post reflects a comment received from Common Cause. It is time to stand up with them and keep the internet free . As the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) considers how to write the rules to protect freedom and openness on the Internet,   who should they turn to: consumers like you and me, or the oligopolistic telecommunications companies?   Verizon and Google announced this week that they have it all figured out when it comes to net neutrality.* They unveiled a policy framework that would give telecom companies the right to speed up or slow down certain kinds of content, and to block outright  applications or content on wireless networks.
Read More

Save Some Art or Save Detroit

-
Image
  This is something I wrote back in 2014 while Detroit was struggling with a bankruptcy. I profess not to know the value of all the art held at the Detroit Institute of Art (DIA). Further, I do not know how much of the art is owned by the city of Detroit. I think we should find out and use it in the best way possible to save Detroit and its citizens. I  commend all the foundations and the state of Michigan who have stepped up with hundreds of millions of dollars in proposed contributions to save the DIA and the art work that it holds. Is the plan presented to the creditors concerning these donations and the leveraging of the art the best way to save Detroit and its citizens? Is saving the artwork more important than saving the city and its citizens? Stephen Henderson of the Detroit Free Press made a valid point with his editorial titled “ Detroit’s Rebirth Must Include More Than Downtown, Midtown “. Detroit will not succeed  if it does not cultivate a middle class and we cannot wait de
Read More