Question

This question is in reference to the film, “Capitalism: A Love Story”. Michael Moore argues that there was an age of capitalism that was “humane” (or the golden age of capitalism in the U.S. – i.e. during the post- WWII period until the 1970s. During this period, working class families could achieve a good standard of living, working in factories as blue collar workers (e.g. Moore’s Dad). Since then, this possibility has been diminished (e.g. people losing their homes and jobs during the Great Recession) and inequalities have been on the rise. He shows many images of a more brutal type of capitalism (“vulture” capitalism). He also argues that we can build a more economically democratic system (economic democracy) through worker owned enterprises and provides examples of those. Do you agree or disagree with Michael Moore’s arguments about economic democracy? why or why not? Was the “golden age” a “golden” age for all segments of the U.S. population? Is it possible to transform the U.S. to an economically democratic system by starting with worker owned enterprises? what is the economic bill of rights and what is the relevance of Moore’s solutions to achieving economic rights? What else would need to be achieved to really achieve the economic bill of rights ?

Answer 1

Michael Moore’s new movie, Capitalism: A Love Story, doesn’t pull any punches in its depiction of capitalism as the monster that is destroying America. Moore’s villains range from Wall Street bankers to Wal-Mart to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, while capitalism’s victims include those who are losing their jobs, their houses and, in some cases, their faith in a system that is supposed to reward hard work and playing by the rules. Moore — whose other documentaries include his diatribe against General Motors in Roger & Me, his condemnation of George W. Bush and the war on terrorism in Farenheit 9/11, and his blistering attack on the American health care system in Sicko — is no less opinionated and entertaining in his latest film. Knowledge@Wharton asked Kent Smetters, a professor of insurance and risk management at Wharton who describes himself as “generally right of center,”

Capitalism: a Love Story doesn't just go after the seamy side of the American economy, although that is captured neatly in the scenes of "condo vultures" feeding on Florida's housing bust, alongside the corporations (including Wal-Mart and Amegy Bank) which take out insurance policies on their employees and cash in big when they die young. These ghoulish derivatives go by the charming name of "dead peasants" insurance – which says it all, really.

But Moore has bigger targets in his sights: he is questioning whether the whole incentive structure, moral values and political economy of American capitalism is fit for human beings. Although this will not seem so radical in Europe, where most countries have had governments in the post-second world war era that at least called themselves socialist, or in most of the developing world, where socialist ideas have popular appeal, it's pretty much unprecedented for something that can reach a mass audience in the US.

If this were a different kind of movie, it might make sense to point out here that neither capitalism nor democracy nor socialism exist in pure form, and that pretty much every nation in the Western world, including the U.S., combines elements of all three. But Moore, to borrow a phrase coined by a physicist, is "not even wrong." He makes jokes and tugs at heart strings. He shows pilots who can't make a living wage, corporations that take out life insurance policies on their workers and families who are thrown out of foreclosed homes. It's a litany of economic disasters, but it's not an argument. I've heard him compared to Leni Riefenstahl, which is apt insofar as he is a brilliant propagandist

History doesn’t exactly repeat itself, but it does run in cycles. One of the most robust theories of such cycles was articulated by economic historian Carlota Perez, in her influential book Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages (Edward Elgar, 2002). It suggests that humanity can get through the current period of upheaval and economic malaise and enter a new “golden age” of broad economic growth, if the world’s key decision makers act in concert to help foster one.

This may seem far-fetched, but it’s happened four times before. We are in the midst of the fifth great surge (as Perez calls them) of technological and economic change since the Industrial Revolution. The last one, the age of oil, automobiles, and mass production, lasted most of the 20th century and still shapes many people’s attitudes. Our current surge started around 1970 and has rolled out information and communications technology around the world: It is the age of the computer and the Internet

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.