Occupy Wall Street, Capitalism, and Steve Jobs
City Journal's Nicole Gelinas has a very interesting piece comparing the Occupy Wall Street protestors' anger at corporate America with the respect many protestors also seem to have for Apple co-founder and wealthy corporate executive Steve Jobs:
In their first official statement, didn't the protesters say that they stand with people "who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world"? And aren't they demonstrating against the "1 percent" of the population to which Jobs belonged?
But the protesters' affection for Jobs isn't necessarily a sign of bad faith or ignorance. Rather, it could be a healthy discernment, however poorly articulated. The point is not that Jobs was "this different, quiet billionaire," as one protester put it, but that he lived by the rules through which free-market capitalism should work. When Apple released a product that people rejected, such as the Apple III or the Lisa in the early eighties, the company suffered the consequences. Apple could not expect tens of billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury or from the Federal Reserve to save it from its own mistakes. Apple was not too big to fail. Before the iPod, the company was struggling. Apple had to make itself too good to fail—and that's exactly what it did.
Contrast the capitalist world in which Jobs lived with "capitalism," as the U.S. government has applied it to the big banks against which the Zuccotti Park crowd is—imperfectly—protesting. If you're a bank or an insurance firm, and you create a product that your investors and your regulators can't understand in a crisis, you aren't punished, as Apple was when it released products too complex for its customers. Instead, you get rewarded with bailout money. It's hard to argue with the Zuccotti protesters' manifesto on this point: "They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sums it up for me.
Do corporations have a right to make a profit if their policies and business models don't work? When did Orrin Boyle become CEO of BoA?
Reading it again, it sounds more like they're saying that the bailout was supposed to go to the taxpayers, but the corporations took it from them.
Given that the bailouts were freely given (and supported most strongly by the politicians OWS favors), that's about the only interpretation that makes sense.
Or that bailouts were given and taxpayers had no say in their distribution or say in how a corporation who received a bailout ought to use the money.
Kind of like having a say in how welfare money ought to be spent. Taxpayers don't have a voice. We elect representatives to be our collective/majority-rule voice on larger matters, but it seems like we don't know what we want until we get it, and aren't happy.
Then go Occupy the Congress.
If the Congress votes this morning to send me check for $1 billion, I'm cashing it. (And then turning around and using that money to run them all out of office, but that's another story.) If you as a taxpayer don't like that waste of money, don't come and whine to me about it. Bitch to the people who wrote the check.
I think most people don't understand that this is the process to protest, not the banks taking the money. Well, both, actually.
Economic illiteracy serves a very high purpose for pols.
What we are seeing is the old, tired Progressive narrative of Big Business versus the Peoples' Representatives, in which Big Government is supposed to protect us from the "excesses" of capitalism. Crony capitalism -- in which Big Business and the Peoples'Representatives take care of one another at the Peoples' expense -- does not fit into that narrative, so it is ignored.
LAST NIGHT ME RAPE FAT CAT. THEN ATE BURGERS WITH HIS WIFE AT CAMP. YUM.
So how was rather?
Why would an NFL wide receiver do that?
I never supported TARP or bailouts, I do not remember too many of these hippies who complained at the time though. I recall people supporting this because they believed the world would end. These people are protesting for the sake of protesting trying to now find a principle to latch on to, they will just as easily find an arbitrary past injustice to use as an excuse to protest.
While I'm not sure if any these "hippies" opposed the TARP either, many of the politicos they vote for did.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10.....ayers.html
Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptur, Elijah Cummings, Baron Hill, etc.
They voted along with Jim DeMint, and Ron Paul. While others like Congressman Paul Ryan voted with Obama, McCain, Pelosi, and Boehner.
Yes these protesters are incoherent as hell and voted for pricks like Obama. But I'm not sure if this makes them anymore responsible for TARP, than anyone else.
I guess these guys might be far enough out in left field to be Kucinich and Sanders types instead of Obama, Kerry, and Clinton types. We'll see.
Bullshit. All these same protesters are also up arms about Walmart. Walmart didn't receive any bailout money. Jobs was note-for-note as ruthless a capitalist as Walton. Walton endeavored to sell cheap goods to people without a lot of money. Jobs sought to sell expensive and trendy goods to people with disposable income.
It's all aesthetics. Jobs wore jeans and was perceived as "cool." That's the difference.
exactly. And their idea that somehow Apple is the only cool capitalist company is only because they don't know a lot about business. Businesses everyday work hard to do the right thing and sell a good product, only they aren't selling consumer goods to teenagers
Hence, the lack of a cohesive message. You got a couple "End the Fed" types mixed in with a huge mess of "Gimmie! Gimmie! Gimmie!" types.
First of all, don't generalize. You don't know who among the OWS crowd is in favor, against or indifferent about Walmart.
Second, Walmart gets a shitload of tax breaks, eminent domain deals and other corporatist goodies (transportation subsidies, insurance mandates that kill smaller competitors etc.) - that's how they finance their neverending expansion. I don't expect anti-Walmarters to know about this, though (most of them probably don't care about free market principles at all), but don't try to claim Walmart as a free market success story.
This is where you are wrong. I know exact who is in support of and opposed to Walmart.
It's all aesthetics. Jobs wore jeans and was perceived as "cool." That's the difference.
Sam Walton wore jeans and drove a pickup. He just sold his stuff to the wrong people.
They view jobs as McCartney and lennon's love child because he liked the Beatles and kind of had the right look. They're poseur douchebags, so that's all they need. Of course I don't have any real reason to believe this, but it's the narrative I like.
Actually, Steve Jobs did accept a bailout...
from Microsoft.
I never supported TARP or bailouts, I do not remember too many of these hippies who complained at the time though.
Nor do I. To be fair, when the TARP thing was being pushed, these protestors were starting a semester at school. Unemployment was still in the sixes. They also had the distraction of a presidential election. Between school, the election, and plain old youthful inexperience with money I can see how they might not have grasped the significance of the bailouts.
I do remember polls that showed widespread opposition to the bailouts at the time. News reports claimed Congress was getting phone calls and letters 10 to 1 against the bailouts. It was Congress that got stampeded into believing the world would end. It was Congress that ignored the will of the electorate. The president was the lamest of ducks with approval ratings below 30%.
The public punished Team Red in 2008 and then Team Blue in 2010. So we cannot say they have not tried, however ineffectively, to show their disapproval. I see these protests as the next step as people lose faith in the system.
People are frustrated with both parties of government. A good start! My concern is that rather than coming around to libertarian freedom, the public will seek a "strongman" to take care of them.
That which cannot be sustained, won't be. "Change" really is coming. But I am not optimistic. And that is why I've goneGalt.
when the TARP thing was being pushed, these protestors were starting a semester at school.
BTW, I do make the distinction between those protestors who should be in school(tsk, tsk) and those who have graduated in the last three years.
We believe that no one person is inherently "better" than another person. The current system is a hegemonic patriarchal abomination that only reinforces the hierarchy of white male domination and the inevitable destruction of the biosphere.
That Steve Jobs was successful while I'm not is because of one thing: White Male Privilege
^This
I concur.
Alright then, it appears we have a consensus here. Are there any blocks?
block!
while eye agree with what white chick has said, eye find that her excellent ability to summarize our beliefs makes her appear to be "better" than others at summarizing beliefs. this seems to be set a dangerous precedent and may intimidate or otherwise make those who feel they have inferior communication skills not feel comfortable speaking up.
eye also feel that the use of upper case letters is inherently hierarchical and should be avoided.
*note that eye reject the use of the phallic "I" for self reference.
okay, we have a block. how does everyone feel about the block? do we have consensus on the block?
Somebody, just shoot me already!
Okey Doke!
I motion that the two white chicks make out as show of feminine power and authority.
"They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity."
Except for that fact that some banks who didn't want or need TARP money were arm twisted by the government into taking it anyway.
And the fact that most of the banks who got TARP money have paid it back with interest so the taxpayers are not really out of pocket on the deal (note this does not mean I was in favor of TARP - it's just that the facts are the facts).
Furthermore the banks aren't "Wall Street" The stock exchanges are the vehicle for trading shares in thousands of companies - the vast majority of which had nothing to do with TARP bailouts.
And I haven't heard any of the OWS gang complain about the taxpayers money bailing out Fannie and Freddie - two government created entities.
It seems to me that they should be assembling to protest at the headquarters of those two GSE's instead of on Wall Street.
During the 1980s and 1990s Apple was in thick with the education establishment and trying to get in thick with the "Federal/Government" establishment. Ostensibly, they were practicing voluntary capitalism, but they were also heavily lobbying for tax breaks to compensate themselves for discounts and giveaways to schools. Like textbook publishers, they energetically jockeyed to become the monopoly (or at least "preferred") provider of computer gear in school system after school system, government department after government department. I know this because I watched it from the inside.
I'm not really criticizing here. Any business would have been crazy to leave the education and government-sector dollars on the table if they had a shot at getting them. But believe me, while individual employees at the time might have railed against "crony capitalism" and the dangers of getting in bed with the government -- especially seeking monopoly/"preferred" status when dealing with school districts or government agencies -- those dissenters were, at best, only tolerated. The real decision makers and movers and shakers within Apple were well acquainted with the crony capitalism game, and more than happy to play it, almost continuously. Apple has never been the Camelot of "pure capitalism" that some of its starry-eyed apologists might believe or like us to believe. I'm OK with that, and am only trying to add a drop of realism to this discussion.
James must be one of the few Philistines that still uses a PC.
Oh, but I have an Apple III, Apple IIGS, Mac Plus, Mac SE, and Mac 5400, all once well-used and all now gathering dust in the garage. No sinner like a reformed "saint," 'eh?
One other thing about the OWS crowd protesting about "taxpayer bailouts":
About half the people in the country don't pay any federal income taxes in the first place and some of them get "refunds" of taxes they never paid (i.e welfare). And of course they are using all the same government services that those who do pay taxes are and some more handouts besides (food stamps, Medicaid,etc.)
I would venture to guess that a signficant percentage of the OWS crowd is part of that no taxpaying group.
So if they are against "taxpayer bailouts", they should be protesting against themselves for taking them. The aggregate amount that the actual taxpayers have to pay to carry those people year in and year out is far greater than the TARP bailouts.
I wonder why the 99%ers always mention the bank bailouts but never mention the auto bailouts?
They were both of the same catalyst - crappy decision decision making by the company. The banks ignored market and credit risk issues. The auto manufacturers ignored the fact that they were making cars that an industry didn't want (though at least I understand that they were making big hulking expensive cars because that was the only way they could make enough profit to pay for the bloated union contracts and associated healthcare expenses)
"I wonder why the 99%ers always mention the bank bailouts but never mention the auto bailouts?"
Becuase that would piss off the labor unions - seeing as how what was ostensibly the auto bailouts was really a UAW bailout.
"The public punished Team Red in 2008 and then Team Blue in 2010. So we cannot say they have not tried, however ineffectively, to show their disapproval. I see these protests as the next step as people lose faith in the system."
I completely agree with you goneGalt but I'm a little bit more optimistic about the outcome. As numerous posts have pointed out, despite all the anti-capitalist rhetoric, the protesters are grossly materialistic.
My generation as a whole values shiny electronics, brand name clothes, expensive coffee, gourmet food, and partying on the weekend at the newest club and/or hipster festival. We are a generation of narcissists gladly spending hours a day on Facebook informing our friends of every mundane activity of our daily lives.
In other words, we are the ultimate individualists. We may have been spoon-fed Marxism through our cartoons and the public education system but communists we are not.
Most of us don't realize it at first (because we were never taught economics), but all the things we love are only possible via the (semi-)free market. Once we spend a few years on our own though, some of those opinions change (it did for me anyway).
The current system will only continue if people of my generation are willing to make sacrifices, i.e. accept a lower standard of living. But if the choice is between paying higher taxes for the welfare/warfare state and being able to afford the cool new Apple computer/phone/camera/music player/thing well...
Sorry to rant. It just seems a lot of people posting here are expecting mobs of hipsters armed with skinny jeans, fake mustaches and hula hoops to burn down the stock exchange or something.
Sorry to rant. It just seems a lot of people posting here are expecting mobs of hipsters armed with skinny jeans, fake mustaches and hula hoops to burn down the stock exchange or something.
It's not the mobs of hipsters--it's the growing numbers of others. I was at a membership meeting of my local community theatre organization last night, and there were people there (mostly older retired folks) organizing an 'Occupy Detroit' demonstration for today. And there's going to be something even bigger here on Friday, with a mass march.
Again, it will probably be white folks marching and black cops arresting, but I'm staying away from downtown on Friday. This movement makes me very nervous, although I must admit I don't exactly know how to prepare for it getting worse.
Hmmm...I can see the concern then. Older liberals do seem to genuinely believe in socialism. And they have the most to lose when the current system collapses.
Our only hope is that old people will prove to be terrible rioters. "Damn arthritis! Can't throw my Molotov cocktail."
Have you tried shutting down all the Country Kitchens in the area?
Ha ha.
Look at the apologists for plutocrats hanging around on the heavily subsidized oil billionaire's pet website.
Look at these alleged pals of liberty as they shit on First Amendment right to protest, cheering as cops haul away peacefully demonstrating veterans, lowering the flag while doing it.
Ha ha.
Look at the little turds burp up lies about "hippies" as the streets fill with retirees, teachers, librarians, veterans, and everybody else in the formerly middle class who is about to be forced to eat from a dumpster thanks directly to the douchebags Reason exists to protect.
Look at the greasy little corporate apologists squirm as the crowds grow bigger.
And bigger.
Ha ha.
Don't know what planet 'Orel Hazard' lives on, but on my planet the iPhone 4S sold out in twenty-four hours, and I'm fairly sure it wasn't 'the 1%' who bought it.
I wandered around the local high end, open air mall this past Sunday and the folks in the stores were these 'formerly middle class who [are] about to be forced to eat from a dumpster' and they seemed to have lots of money to spend. The Apple store was just as busy as it always is. Those folks weren't eating in no dumpsters, and they looked like pure middle class, 80% folks to me.
Yes, there is high unemployment, and yes, Obama and his friends colluded with Bush and his friends in bank and car company bailouts. But give me a break. Most of these folks have an incarnate anger about something or other and supported most of the bailouts when they happened. Certainly those in Detroit did for the car companies.
Ha ha.
Look at the apologist for big business brilliantly point out that protesters are, like every American breathing, customers of big business.
Look at him conclude that fact means protest against big business's near-total capture of the state isn't valid. Look at him pretend being a customer means you necessarily give up being a citizen.
And watch the crowd keep growing as he keeps on pretending.
Growing and growing and growing.
Ha ha.
Ha ha.
Look at me. I'm a fucking retard.
Ha ha.
Derp.
Ha ha. I'm needing some fetid diseased dick to suck. You've seen the mix of saliva and cum I can spew.
Ha ha.
Geoff - 2011 Blog Post
Don't know what planet 'Orel Hazard' lives on, but on my planet the iPhone 4S sold out in twenty-four hours, and I'm fairly sure it wasn't 'the 1%' who bought it.
Jules Feiffer - 1972 Satirical Cartoon
How could Nixon have won? I don't know ANYONE who voted for him?"
Feiffer was poking fun at the insularity of his fellow liberals back in the 70's. But it is a lesson and a warning to all of us.
I am pleased the Apple store is doing well. I would expect no less the weekend after an iPhone release. But this should not be seen as a proxy for the larger economy.
None of us really know who these folks at the mall are. They might be mortgage deadbeats with extra cash now they are not paying their bills. They might be making bad choices and going deep into credit card debt. Some might be shoplifters. There might even be a 1 percenter or two.
And before anybody says it, I AM NOT excusing any bad behavior! I am not advocating for a "New Deal". But we do need to present a "Better Deal" if we want liberty to prevail.
Tossing out terms such as "deadbeat", "lazy", and "stupid" will be of no use when the mob arrives at my door. Depending on the size of the crowd, neither will a shotgun.
I am not the 1%.
I AM sweating.
I have goneGalt.
"Depending on the size of the crowd, neither will a shotgun."
Maybe not.
But an M134 minigun should handle it just fine.
But an M134 minigun should handle it just fine.
True Dat! *Smiles*
Eventually though, the mob is gonna run out of places to loot and then they will turn on themselves.
My concern is when the government and their soldiers crawl out of their bunkers and re-assert control.
We're gonna have some 'splainin' to do!
If you own an Apple product, you are greedy.
None of their products are necessities.
thanks