Text of Ken [Complete]

Capital Moves v. The Working Class Majority

Introduction

There are many different views on what an economy should and shouldn't be. The two most popular are the views of the capitalist and the socialist. The capitalist views an economy that exists solely to provide to those that provide to it. The socialist views the economy as a way to enrich the commons of a given community. Michael Zweig in The Working Class Majority: America's best Kept Secret is staunchly socialist in his narrative, depicting capitalists as almost conspiratorial in nature using large scale statistical data to demonstrate economic inequality. While Jefferson Cowie also takes a socialist perspective in Capital Moves, he tends to try and remain historically neutral, rooting his narrative in factual events. We can break down the discrepancies in perspective in to three main issues. They are Ethics, Power, and Solidarity.

Ethics

The capitalist will often argue that it is the capitalist that takes the most risks, and thus deserves the most rewards. But what risk does the capitalist really take? The risk of becoming just a normal person when he fails? More often than not these days, investors are risking other people's money. What is the alternative choice of the capitalist? Retirement? Does the worker not take a risk when they put their faith in their employer to be the sole contributor to their livelihood? Does the worker have any real choice not to take this risk? Does the absence of reward define an absence of risk?

As Stated by (Zweig 2011), "Between 1980 and 2008, production of all goods and services in the United States increased 126 percent (after correcting for inflation). You might think, therefore, that the average person improved his or her living standards by something close to that amount. But it didn't happen. That's because the increased income from production was distributed very unevenly. The average household of the top 1 percent of earners saw its income increase 281 percent (after adjusting for inflation) between 1979 and 2007, from $347,000 in 1979 to $1.3 million in 2007. Those who fell into the middle quintile (the 20 percent of all earners who fell in the middle of the income distribution) had their income go up 25 percent over the same period (far less than the increase in production), from $44,100 to $55,400. The poorest 20 percent of income earners saw even more modest gains. They went from an annual income in 1979 of $15,300 to $17,700 or 16 percent (all figures are in 2007 dollars)."

In Capital Moves, Cowie tells of RCA's constant abandonment and manipulation of communities. Exploitation of the worker seems to be treated as ethically acceptable because the worker is considered to be volunteering to be exploited. But when not volunteering has dire consequence, such as not having food and shelter, exactly how voluntary is it? There is no option in society to exist without servitude unless you are a capitalist, the investor class. When companies like RCA come in and strip a town as they did in Camden, Memphis, and Bloomington (Cowie 1999), what ethical motivation to these towns have to welcome these companies to be involved in their communities?

Power

It seems to be without a doubt, solely the power of the capitalist investor class to provide a livable income to the people of the United States. We see this over and over again in Capital Moves as RCA shows great promise of new economic opportunities when they arrive, but also a devastating wake when they leave. Why is this? Why are cities like Camden and Bloomington so dependent on companies like RCA? Are not all the land, resources, people, banks, and everything else that made up RCA not the already there before RCA arrived and all still there after RCA leaves? RCA isn't a person, an angel, or a demon. RCA is just a bunch of slips of paper filed in various cabinets of county clerks across the globe. So what is it that RCA has?

RCA has power. RCA has voice and influence. When RCA makes an appointment with the mayor, she takes it. RCA has connections at the local, state, federal, and international levels. RCA has liquidity. RCA doesn't get turned down for loans at the bank. They get a lower interest rate and can buy goods at a lower price. RCA has freedom because it isn't bound by the same moral and social obligations as real people are.