In this book, Mike mentioned a topic that has always been of my interest - Overpopulation. As many of us know the scare of overpopulation is still highly prevalent in our society. This has grown again slightly after renowned physicist Stephen Hawking's death took place and many of his followers learned that he said that humanity's fall would be due to an exponentially growing population. From what I had learned last semester, in a geography class that I took, was that a lot of the beliefs of overpopulation relied on Malthusian rhetoric which Mike mentioned briefly in Ch. 1. Basically, his belief was that the Earth's population was growing at an exponential rate that would soon overcome our food production capabilities, thus inciting what is known as the Malthusian Catastrophe. One of the biggest counter-arguments to this theory was given in Economix which is increasing the population itself.
As counterintuitive as this sounds, the reason why capitalism is so beneficial to "preventing" overpopulation is because a higher population means more creative minds that help us solve our problems. When transportation became a necessity and not everyone was able to afford a horse and buggy, someone invented the locomotive, when the locomotive was not useful for a trip to the store, cars were made, and if land and water were not enough planes were then invented. It was also mechanized agriculture that basically destroyed the fundamental idea of the Malthusian Catastrophe. This ongoing innovation that creates competition is directly stimulated by capitalism. Surprisingly enough, what we measure overpopulation by, really isn't even how many people there are on the planet, but rather, how much we consume. Do we honestly believe that the world is reaching its limits for providing for us due to 10.85 million people in Haiti or 8.5 million in New York? If the whole world consumes like the average American then yes, we have a bit of a problem on our hands, however, that is not the case. I am not denying the fact that a finite planet cannot sustain an infinite growing population, all I am saying is that the geniuses that discovered the various purposes of corn have really prevented "the end of the world due to overpopulation" many times over. I do however recognize as well the carbon footprint we are leaving, but again it all ties back to how much is each person really consuming. A big issue I also want to bring forth to the light is once we start believing so much in overpopulation, it is almost as if we instinctively start evaluating who is and who is not worthy of using our resources. If you are not a rich white male, the world can change pretty quick for you, history has proved itself many times over.
Like the book states, in many instances, Capitalism is not the solution to all of our problems and its hard to say for me personally in my religious beliefs that the benefits outweigh the costs, especially when the cost is a person who cannot find a job and is trying to feed their family or a person who is paying the taxes that corporations should be paying and is now facing the reality of not having enough money for his/her rent. To top this all off then face the reality that no minimum wage job 40hr/week can afford a 1 bedroom apartment anywhere in America. As someone who worked at A&W as a cashier/cook making $8.50/hr I began to get tired of working so much and getting paid so little and wondered if the CEO was really working 100x harder than I was. 11 hr shifts standing up near the grill was no easy task even for a 17-year-old in high school. Now what makes me or anyone else think that a 40-year-old man or a 60-year-old woman can do this for the rest of their life? The answer is often, "If you aren't getting paid a livable wage, then get a new job!" If this is an answer you may often give, I'm sorry to say that certain priveledges need to be checked. I know countless adults and family friends, who even if they wanted to become a lawyer, physician, engineer, teacher even be a driver for UPS or work at Delta since we all know they pay well, simply cannot. Why? Short answer is that they have no work permit. Although the beautiful capitalism allows "everyone" the mobility in work, others get the short end of the stick in this deal. This means no matter how many benefits your employer might cut, no matter how many fewer dollars you are making less than a 17-year-old high school student, no matter if your job is degrading or if your co-workers or customers treat you like the very matter they excrete after a heavy meal, some people do not have this luxury of mobility because their priority is to provide for their families and the alternative remains living in the street. When I read that even businesses compete for workers, I said, "must be nice..." It's nice to know that when I graduate from college at 22, I will be wanted by an employer, yet someone else in our society is seen as an expendable because they didn't "work as hard as I did." This problem isn't even limited to undocumented immigrants, imagine the millions of ex-convicts and homeless people that cannot get a job because in all honesty who is trying to hire Randy with a criminal record or Bill who has no home address to put in his job application after his name? Are they not seen as expendables in a capitalist society? When did the safety net of corporations suddenly become a greater concern than an individual person or family's safety net? (actually, this is mentioned in the book)
There are many benefits to Capitalism yes, however, it is within a person's religious belief, moral code, or just basic humanity to see that although Capitalism gives us many materialistic items, ideas, and freedom, it also leaves many people behind and that in and of itself is a great injustice.
No comments:
Post a Comment