The Limits of Capitalism

The society can never perfect in the way especially in the way business is done. The particular reasons behind disorder in society are not particularly hard to discern given the fact that capitalism and the principles behind it are not perfect. To look and detect that things are not right in the society is quiet something. While there is a general abidance in the fact that free market and capitalism underlines absolute freedom in business, I believe capitalism and free markets should have limits in every sense. Such kinds of propositions point to the fact that people should sell and buy anything they want without controls and measures on trade by the government. This in my opinion is wrong given the fact that this is the seed to a “spoil market”.

In a review of the “Capitalism, a Love Story” Michael Moore presents an interesting case for the primacy of politics over business and economics by alternating between criticizing the nature of the current markets and illustrating the pains suffered by the recent economic crunch through comical satire. The views of Michael More support my assertion on the need to set limits on capitalism and free markets because of the effects of the Don Regan during President Regan’s years. The spiraling effects of uncontrolled capitalism and free markets result to exploitative free markets, exploitative free enterprises, more powerful corporations, weakened unions and widened economic gaps. The film opens up lids on major corporations’ scandals such as Luzerne County court scandal, cases of dead peasant insurance on how companies profit from the death of their employees and leaked Citigroup memo happily branding Unites States as a plutonomy.

Moore therefore has effectively managed to portray the effect of uncontrolled capitalism and free markets on the social structure of the society. The interview with Catholic priests reports that Christians have a view that capitalism contradicts the teachings of Christianity. The negative concerns on capitalism without limits have been demonstrated not only by Moore but also by other economists and researchers on the importance of a balanced market structure. According to Hawken (1993) “the major concern of the masses is that of deficiency of ethical content in neoliberalism-guided, capitalism-led, profit-driven path of globalization that is not good for United States.” The analysis of the capitalism reveal three conceptual bedrock foundations that include private property, free markets and self interest that guide the basis on which business operations are undertaken and populations act. While free markets does not exist in practical sense in the world over because markets exist within social frame works, the fact that a free market and capitalism structure would definitely not be a good thing for the United States.

The negative effects of capitalism and free markets is illustrated by Hawken (1993) in stating that “capitalism is inherently incapable of dealing with the extraordinary problems of externalization of costs onto society and inequality, but at least in theory government and inter-governmental bodies can deal with these problems and must.” The effects of uncontrolled capitalism would then need more than the theories of the government to control. A situation in which everything would be for sale points to a society without any kind of social structure. According to Hilfiker (2007) “on a level playing field, are there no fundamental grounds for limiting markets? Of course there are, and the reasons go back to why there are some things that money can’t buy: The things themselves – from love to a Nobel Prize – would be completely corrupted by the transaction.” This means that human beings have the capacity to buy anything they want without control and limit.

The levels of controls and limits on capitalism and free markets should aim at underlining the social and economic aspects of the society with keen cognizance to the poor. Limits must therefore exist in the trade of some activities. Cline (2006) insists that, if we presume that there are no justified limits to what can be bought and sold, except perhaps for human beings, then there is no basis for restricting the exchange of money for things like surrogate motherhood and human organs. If, however, we presume that there are some things which simply can’t be bought and sold without degrading why people want or need them in the first place, then it’s simply a matter of determining what standards we can use for making such evaluations.

According to Handler (1993), “this is an extraordinary film about the creation of the American corporation, its legal organizational model, its global economic dominance and its psychopathic tendencies, and its incredible ambition to influence every aspect of culture in its unrelenting pursuit of profit.” The analysis of the movie reveal that large corporation in America have too much power that does strive to achieve a common good for the people. This is because these corporations go at great lengths to legally or illegally pursue profit as their major driving factor.

The phrase “Death of Birth” in the Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken’s lead Ray Anderson in the film “Corporation” to personally epiphany in a number of definitive ways. This refers “to the enormous extinction rate now occurring and explains the fearful consequences of exceeding the carrying capacity of the biosphere.” Handler (1993)this phrase attempts to bridge the gap between environmentalists and businessmen by stating that Ray Anderson’s input in need to finding a solution to the environmental crisis that is a problem to everyone. The shift in the way he sees the world and the way he sees business means that operation in business must involve the interest of everyone and seek to save the environment from wanton destruction.

This is because in the understanding of Anderson, “good environmental policy, in other words, is also optimal business policy and the structure of the world’s industrial economy is what pits business against the environment” (Handler, 1993). This influences Anderson to have a different opinion on the way business is handled.

The ground breaking proposals in changes in business that are geared towards restorative environmental policies has impacted on the views on pollution, reusable containers and the elimination of non-degradable toxics from industrial processes. His vision and the way he does business changed regarding ecology and the environmental ethics by the adoption of ground breaking policies aimed at balancing environmental immature and mature ecological systems. The contributions of each and every business in the addition of value to the economy and the society with the central objective of making positive contributions to the environments is therefore an entrenched system in organizations that have influenced Anderson to have a different view in business management.

The assertion within the phrase “Death of Birth” as demonstrated by Handler (1993) that ‘Environmental’ companies that limit the damage done to the environment and to human beings by other companies, strictly speaking, do not add value. Reducing the harm caused by ‘growth’ is a self cancelling contribution at best, no more a factor in real economic growth than the rescue of a man who has been thrown overboard is an act of mercy.” It can be confidently discerned and stated that this phrase has influenced Ray’s vision and understanding of business management in that he has had a different perspective of management that encompasses the need for a keen cognizance in environmental conservation.