Chapter 8: The Casualties of Capitalism: Humanity, Compassion and Common Sense

In Capitalist paradigms your rights are directly determined by your wealth or lack thereof. In practice this overrides any legal or Constitutional guarantees or assertions to the contrary.

Let's look at analogies from engineering and the physical world.

If there were a squadron of aircraft airlifting supplies across a mountain range, the more powerful aircraft will logically be more heavily loaded than the smaller aircraft. If upon approaching the mountains it becomes clear that certain aircraft cannot reach the necessary altitude, then the squadron will land and redistribute the load, moving heavy items from the weaker to the stronger aircraft so that all will clear the mountains.

The same principle would apply to a flotilla of boats. If one boat were sitting low in the water and in danger of sinking, then weight would be redistributed to larger boats that could accommodate the added mass without danger of sinking.

On a bridge, if certain supports are found to be weak and in danger of collapsing while other supports are more than strong enough to support the expected load upon them, then the weaker supports are strengthened, even if it means temporarily closing the bridge for safety reasons. No engineer in the world would waste resources strengthening the strong supports and increasing the load on the weaker supports. Such an engineer would be fired.

Likewise in electrical wiring, if there are multiple circuits available to power an array of equipment, the equipment that draws the most power is plugged into the circuits that can carry the most amperage. No electrician would connect a 200 amp piece of equipment to a circuit that can only carry 40 amps while connecting a 1 amp piece of equipment to a circuit that can carry 500 amps.

Yet under Capitalist paradigms, the norm is to strengthen and to lighten the burdens upon the economically strongest, while placing the heaviest burdens upon and providing the least amount of support to those individuals and sectors of society that can least bear them. Anything contrary to this is almost always the result of strong sustained public activism against this scenario. Such activism eventually puts enough pressure on politicians and legislators to force them to pass laws protecting the weaker sectors of the community. This inevitably comes in the face of strong, well-funded strenuous opposition from the stronger sectors, the smallest minority who wield the vast portion of the power and control the vast majority of resources. Such gains are inevitably and systematically eroded, subverted and reversed over time through sustained action of this same sector of neo-Feudal lords.

Examples abound in every aspect of Capitalist societies.

In the United States, at the time of the financial crash in 2008, Presidents of both dominant parties took billions of dollars of taxpayers' money to "bail out" gigantic corporations that were in danger of going out of business due to reckless unethical practices driven by unbridled greed. The CEO's of these companies received huge bonuses of hundreds of millions of dollars even though they were among those most responsible for these abuses. Even the CEO's who were fired, received such bonuses. Some of these corporations proceeded to host lavishly opulent meetings for their senior leadership to discuss the crisis, while freezing employees’ wages as austerity measures to reduce expenses.

The unprecedented tax breaks given to corporations and the neo-Feudal lords starting in 2017 were publicized by their perpetrators as a measure that would lead to the creation of more and better jobs while benefiting the economy and the American people. In fact, as was observed in the 1980’s when this “trickle-down economics” was first tried in the United States, the corporations took their windfall billions and performed stock buy-backs, thus concentrating the wealth more firmly into the hands of the few at the top of the pyramid and even giving extra bonuses to CEO’s. Many companies used the funds to lay off thousands of employees and close facilities. Layoffs cost employers money because they are required to provide severance pay and other compensations to laid-off employees. The only jobs created were sub-living wage jobs, while many living or just-over-living wage jobs were eliminated.

Meanwhile wages stagnated while the majority of employees saw their tax burden increase. The national debt skyrocketed as the Neo-Feudal lords consolidated their wealth and control. The legislators who passed the law, being willingly and fully compliant to the will of the neo-Feudal lords, propose to offset this out-of-control debt by eliminating all forms of aid and support for the weakest through median economic sectors of the population.

Meanwhile, small businesses that find themselves in the same position are allowed to fail. The businessmen or businesswomen behind them are left to fend for themselves and held personally liable for the debts of their businesses. There is no significant help for them. Yet the taxes they pay are harvested to fund the mega-corporation bail-outs.

For the individual who makes a living as an employee, the situation is even more dire. When a large corporation or ultra wealthy person experiences a bank overdraft, the bank works with them and waives penalties. When a typical citizen or small business experiences an overdraft, they are subject more often than not to penalties that recur and multiply rapidly into a crippling burden. The worse a person’s financial situation, the less banks are willing to work with them, give them a break or waive a fee.

Yes, as Capitalist apologists like to emphasize, there are a few people who choose to spend more than they have; but they are the minority among the lower reaches of the pyramid. Such practices are actually much more prevalent among those near the top of the economic Pyramid. We must also take into consideration that all sectors of the population are constantly awash in a sea of advertisements and a cultural environment that strongly reinforces consumptive behavior.

The typical person's or small business bank account can easily get overdrawn because of timing issues (a bill gets charged before a paycheck comes in) or because, by design, the person is paid barely or less than a living wage. It can also happen because of an unexpected unavoidable expense that depleted their savings, if they had any. To a person living paycheck to paycheck, a rent or mortgage increase, unexpected house or car repairs or dental visit can drive their bank account into the minus.

People in this situation are barely surviving, no matter how frugal they may be. Yet banks in the United States penalize them $35 every few days for any overdraft. It is not uncommon for a small overdraft of less than a dollar to escalate into an overdraft of hundreds of dollars that the bank will take from them. This creates a vicious cycle that can lead to homelessness, inability to keep a job, crippling stress and loss of all quality of life, compounding the plight of hard-working people. Banks strongly select against compassion on the part of their employees – there is a growing trend for bank accounting software to not allow account managers or customer service agents to override or reverse penalty fees. This is absurd, illogical and self-defeating, even for the banks themselves. The more they add fees and penalties to the burden of people in that predicament, the less likely they are to be paid what they are asking. But that doesn’t stop them from ruining lives.

Banks also charge fees for having less than a certain minimum amount in an account, less than a certain average amount over time, or for more than or less than an arbitrary amount of activity on the account, while they reward accounts with huge amounts. For people living on a barely or sub-living wage, these fees for not having enough money in the account can push an account that is a few dollars positive into the negative and trigger the cycle of overdraft fees without the account holder spending a penny.

One can easily imagine a person living on sub to barely-over-living income who is down to under $10 a week before their next paycheck. This person prudently and reasonably refrains from making any purchases until their paycheck comes in. Then when it does, they discover their account is several hundred dollars short of what it should be. When they call the bank, it turns out that a week before the paycheck came in, the bank charged the client a service fee, plus a penalty fee for not enough activity and yet another penalty fee for not maintaining a sufficiently large account balance. This caused the account to go negative, resulting in overdraft fees, which compounded until the paycheck came in at which time these fees were all deducted. The bank employee scolded the client for being financially irresponsible and said that they couldn't reverse the fees. The victim then does not have enough money to meet living expenses until the next paycheck. The cycle escalates until six months later the victim is living in their car. It is not hard to imagine because all too often it does happen.

This is identical to strengthening the strong supports of a bridge while adding more load to the weakest supports, or removing weight from a boat riding high in the water to place it in a boat on the verge of sinking, or redistributing more to supplies to the weaker aircraft from the stronger aircraft before crossing the mountains. The result is that the citizen loses and the bank loses too because the client will be increasingly unable to pay. In the end the bank will end up paying to collect what they have decided they are owed. All parties lose and the lives of struggling human beings are devastated.

Credit card companies follow similar practices. When a client cannot pay the minimum payments, the card company raises the interest rate from sometimes as low as zero or single digits to as high as 35%, making it virtually impossible for the debtor to realistically ever be able to pay off the balance in their lifetime, since the most likely reason why they couldn't pay the minimum in the first place was extreme financial hardship.

Eventually, after repeated harassing calls and letters to the debtor, the account is sent to collections, which leads to an offer to settle for less than the total amount but only if paid in large amounts. For example if the debtor owes $1,000, the collection agency may call the debtor and offer to settle the account with one payment of $500, with no possibility of dividing it into payments. This defies logic and common sense. If a person is in dire enough financial straits that they cannot make a payment of $50/month, then it is clearly illogical to assume that they will be able to make a lump sum payment of $500.

These behaviors on the part of credit card companies and others, lead to a lose-lose situation. The debtor is already stressed and struggling, not surviving on their income. Increasing their debt arbitrarily to punish them for this situation only serves to increase their stress, destroy their quality of life, and reduce their ability to pay off their debts. The credit card companies also lose because, as stated earlier, these behaviors reduce or even obliterate the debtor's ability to pay off the debt, which leads to the credit card company having to expend resources on collections and settle for less than the full amount, possibly paying legal fees if they choose to take the debtor to court. Nobody wins, everybody loses and yet banks, credit card companies and others continue to follow these practices.

A number of recent articles spell out in detail how the current Capitalist paradigm places the greatest burdens on those least able to carry them, thus benefiting nobody. For the economically weak and disempowered, financial help is less available and loan interest rates are much higher. One is more likely to incur more frequent and higher fees and penalties including reconnection fees, late fees, overdraft fees and the added interest brought on by having to purchase on credit and make minimum payments. Financial planning and investment opportunities are impossible. One is more likely to be unable to keep one’s car insurance, registration and other costs current, opening one up to geometrically escalating fines, loss of license, impounding of one’s vehicle and inability to pay the fines with the added burden of taking longer to get to and from work if there is even public transportation. One is more likely to have more expensive debilitating car and other repairs because one can’t afford to keep up with routine maintenance and minor repairs. The same is true of medical and dental costs. Buying in bulk is not an option, and accessible stores are often those that sell small quantities at gouged prices. If one can’t afford first and last month’s rent plus security deposit, much less qualify for a mortgage, then in order to not be homeless one must pay for lodging by the day which is much more expensive than by the month. One’s physical and mental health are compromised by stress, overwork, and poor nutrition because healthy foods are out of reach, and likely living in more polluted and crime-ridden areas. One often pays a much higher percentage of one’s income in taxes than the wealthiest individuals and corporations. The list is nearly endless.

One of the classic definitions of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. The current economic paradigm is illogical, impractical, inhumane, cruel, wasteful, self-defeating and has no justification in any conceivable framework. It is equivalent to adding weight to the weakest supports of a bridge.

Of course the ultra-wealthy and gigantic corporations at the top of the economic pyramid are unlikely to ever find themselves unable to pay their debts; but when they are, banks and credit companies are always ready and willing to work with them to make it easy for them to repay debts. This is the same as strengthening the strongest supports of a bridge and makes about as much sense.

Here again we see that given the psychosocial reinforcers that operate under Capitalist paradigms, money and profit are valued far above human beings, who inevitably suffer as a result. The dysfunctionality of the paradigm is clearly evident in the inevitable observable and predictable trajectory of Capitalist principles in practice.

The use of credit scores, financial status and history to judge and evaluate people is further evidence of the ultimate unworkability and anti-humanity of the Capitalist paradigm. In the United States a person's chances of finding a place to live, transportation, and sometimes even a job are heavily impacted and determined by their credit scores and financial situation. The weakest members of our community are effectively shackled, weighted down and excluded from the possibility of changing their situation, even more than their less-unfortunate peers, just by virtue of their situation.

As Medieval society believed that Feudal Lords were in power over serfs and peasants because God had made them more capable and worthy, so Capitalist society perpetuates the same circular logic: that the ultra-wealthy are there because they are superior and deserve to be, while the disenfranchised and poor are there because they are inferior and deserve to be where they are. This is just as insidious, dangerous, destructive and untenable a myth as was its earlier incarnation in the European Middle Ages.

In practice this means that those in a strong financial situation will always be given extra consideration, support, respect, benefit of the doubt and opportunities, whereas those in weak or catastrophic financial situations are effectively doomed and locked into those situations. Employers, landlords and others who have the power to grant or deny access to the necessities of life, will deny persons access simply because of their weakened financial situation. Let the hungry starve and let the wealthy feast upon their meat. That is the essence of the mentality and "value system" that Capitalism fosters, engenders, reinforces and enforces.

In other spheres of endeavor as well, the greatest burden in Capitalist paradigms is primarily on those members of the community who can least bear it.

For example, the U.S. Constitution places the legal burden of proof in a court of law on the prosecution or plaintiff. This plus the presumption of innocence is intended to protect citizens, individuals, from being judged unfairly by rigged courts.

Under Capitalist paradigms, this noble intention goes awry and works against those it was intended to protect when the individual citizen brings criminal charges or a civil suit against a mega-corporation or one of the ultra-wealthy at the top of the economic pyramid. In this scenario, the presumption of innocence works against the victim and protects the perpetrators, especially when the concept of "corporate personhood" comes into play.

This is how it works. In most instances where an individual has been physically, psychologically, emotionally, financially or otherwise abused or wronged by their employer, bank, or landlord, the burden is on the victim to prove that a crime or abuse has been committed. If a corporation or member of the ruling elite is clever, which they almost always are in such matters, then the task of proving discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination or other injustice is an upward battle for the victim.

Mega-Corporations and the ultra-wealthy all keep top-notch legal teams on retainer to service them and only them for whatever comes up. The individual employee, consumer or citizen who has been wronged or harmed is almost always utterly unable to afford any but the worst lawyers, if any. Public defenders are assigned to persons without means who are accused of a crime; but when the plaintiff or petitioner, the wronged party, is a person without means, then they are pretty much on their own.

There are low or no-cost legal aid organizations, which are universally far too understaffed to help more than a tiny fraction of people who need their services. Attorneys at the low end of the scale charge more for an hour than most clients make in a day or two; the best ones charge more in an hour than most clients make in 2–4 weeks. For most people this means an attorney is out of the question. So the wronged party going up against a Capitalist Feudal Lord or Corporation, is in the position of a half-starved and beaten Christian in a gladiatorial bout against a top-string team of professional extreme fighters and their trained lions.

It is common practice in many companies to surreptitiously keep negative files and performance reviews on every low and mid-level employee, in order to be able to easily fire the employee without having to provide severance and other payments that they would legally owe the employee if they laid them off. Employees are generally not aware of these files and reviews, having had positive reviews and been led to believe that things are fine.

Employers are almost always successful in staging such situations to appear to the court that the employee was the problem and that the lawsuit or charges against the employer or member of the ruling elite is merely a shoddy and tawdry attempt on the part of a substandard employee to smear the good name of the benevolent company or elite member. This is skillfully played out in such a way that the wealthy or corporate party, knowing they are in a strong, almost unassailable position, appears calm and reasonable while the wronged employee or private citizen who is aware that the proceedings are stacked against them, tends to become angry and upset, which can easily be manipulated to bring their mental health into question and make them appear an irrational, vindictive, petty person. It is the same strategy used by abusive spouses to make themselves appear the long-suffering, caring concerned one and their victim appear to be the crazy irrational unstable one.

Corporate Personhood also shields individuals responsible for such offenses from any personal responsibility. Proving discrimination, harassment or wrongful termination is notoriously difficult. It is easy to make the person bringing the charges or lawsuit appear crazy, frivolous or of doubtful character. If the prosecution or plaintiff does not meet the burden of proof ("beyond a reasonable doubt" for a criminal case, "preponderance if evidence" for a civil suit), the court will automatically find the defendant or respondent innocent. There are exceptions; but as a rule, a large corporation or ultra wealthy person will only lose such a case if they have been so blatant, obvious and stupid that the case is provable against them, or if there are witnesses or a paper trail that cannot be impeached.

As you read this and ponder these words, Capitalist society continues to spread at gunpoint across the body of humanity like a lethal cancer, turning humanity against itself and recreating the horrors of the Middle Ages on a new and technologically more advanced stage. It is more urgent than ever to stop it in its tracks and replace it with a paradigm designed on sound psychosocial principles and crafted to create a viable society that is sustainable and beneficial for its members.

A society or civilization that deems itself successful and prosperous because its financial indicators are good, even though the vast majority of its members are withering and dying in despair, is a gravely and critically failing society. It is time to put it out of everybody's misery, decommission it, and redesign from the ground up, guided by what brings out the most constructive attitudes and behaviors in human beings vs. what destroys.