"You know, whenever you're exposed to advertising in this country you
realize all over again that America's leading industry is the manufacture,
distribution, packaging and marketing of bullshit.  High quality bullshit,
world class designer bullshit to be sure, hospital tested, clinicly
proven bullshit, but bullshit nevertheless." - George Carlin

     Economics is the key to our system in that, just as the autoexec file
in a computer, it controls the operation of all the other systems within 
the sphere.  Thus progress in education, health, scientific frontiers, 
government, foreign relations, etc. are basically dependent on economics; 
namely, the control and distribution of wealth in a society.  Thus 
alterations must be made in that key area if we are to expect to 
effectively utilize the latter areas (which are wanting) in dealing with 
the impending dangers to our survival on Earth.  These dangers include 
rising levels of alienation, overpopulation, increasing environmental 
destruction, and loss of control of the burgeoning technological revolution.

     Here a generally accepted philosophy, as well as banks and systems, 
will be considered as an institution.  Thus, in America Free-enterprise 
Capitalism might be looked upon as the major institution guiding our 
economic policies.  The Free-enterprise system is also generally viewed as 
the source responsible for the many personal freedoms enjoyed in America.  
However, we must also realize that Socialism is also, and in many cases, 
unavoidably entwined and included in our system. The military, post office, 
public education, etc. are examples.  

     To the apostles of "Free-enterprise", all the wealth, the material 
comforts, even the abundance of natural resources we exploit and share in 
America we owe to that system.  Whatever shortfalls may appear in the 
society tend to be viewed as the fault of "big government", or "creeping 
socialism".  The avant-guard of this capitalist- free-enterprise philosophy,
referring to themselves as libertarians, tend to believe that if only we 
could somehow eradicate those compromising, parasitic elements of socialism 
from our system, all the world would traverse the path towards "wine and 
roses".

     The practitioners and material benefactors of capitalism, inevitably, 
through the ages, would acquire many high priests and philosophizers to 
support and to justify their position.  At the core of this justification 
theory lies the famous "trickle-down" idea espoused by such names as Adam 
Smith, Nelson Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and Ronald Reagan (ie. The more 
wealth gained by those at the top, the more would sift down to those below, 
and the final result would be greater benefit for all).  No doubt very 
appealing logic for those on top!  Carnegie found wide public acceptance 
among the successful for his "American Beauty Rose" theory, where he 
related socioeconomic progress to Darwin's "survival of fittest" theory.  
By culling out the lesser roses in his garden, Carneige could produce a 
finer strain of rose.  Similarly, reasoned Carneige, in business, if left 
unrestricted by governmental interference competition would weed out the 
weak, resulting in the  most productive and beneficial outcome for all!

     The ensuing "Great Depression" of the '30's, and Roosevelt's 
socialistic cures put such theories on hold, and showed that life and 
economics was not so simple.  Of course, the  resurgence of prosperity in 
the '50's thru the '80's, led to renewed sounds of "Social Darwinism"!  
Yet, the great S&L debacle of the eighties accompanied by the quadrupling 
of the national debt bestowed again a sobering effect on most. (Refer to 
section on S&Ls)'

However, relative to the overall issue 
of human survival, these arguments over the 
efficiency of supply-side economics (modern 
euphemism for trickle-down) misses the point.  
The question that remains, is are we 
producing things that are in our best 
interest?  Are we allocating our labor and 
resources sufficiently to such urgent needs 
as education, health care, and housing?  
J. K. Galbraith, in his best-selling book, 
"The Affluent Society", written in the late 
'50's, documents his point that at least 
three-fourths of our production consists of 
"manufactured needs", directed by 
"Madison Avenue" (the advertising 
industry) which contribute nothing to our general welfare.  To cite one 
example, more money is spent annually on alcohol and tobacco in America 
than is spent on public education.

     Again, the words of Walter Cronkite, that trusted icon of American 
journalism, "Today", he says, "We see the extreme strain which all the 
presumably strongest economic powers are suffering from an effort to 
support both the free independence of capitalism and the costs of humane 
social welfare.  With scarcely an exception, the democratic nations are 
failing to support both.  So a different system is going to be required. 
...We may have to find some marvelous middle ground between capitalism and 
Communism." (LA Times Mag. Jan. 21, '96)

     An even more serious consideration asks: How does this intense 
devotion to economic competition and struggle affect our ethical and moral 
concepts?  Does this cutthroat competition lend itself to the development 
of the attitude of brotherhood, cooperation, and human compassion.  Might 
not justice, and fair treatment inevitably take a back seat in the arena of 
dog eat dog, unregulated free enterprise systems?  After all, "how many 
times must a man turn his head" not to notice that unethical practices 
often have an edge in commercial and financial competition?  It would seem 
that it would require a rather large degree of naivete to deny that this 
type of commitment to economic competition would not have an important 
place in the shaping of "human nature", especially regarding the value
and importance of taking time to participate in the democratic process.  
Finally, in this age where the primal need is to develop individuals who 
can find satisfaction in serving others, more than just themselves, simple 
logic seems to tell us that the American "love affair" with unlimited 
free-enterprise has become seriously antiquated.

     Robert A. Rankin (LATimes, Feb. 16, '96) reports on the growing gap 
in wealth between the relatively rich and everyone else in the U.S.  "The 
average blue-collar worker's weekly wage peaked in 1972 and has fallen 
18.5% since then, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  The U.S. 
economy has grown 30% since 1980, but almost all the money made off that 
growth flowed to the richest 20% of U.S. families, according to the U.S. 
Census Bureau.  Sixty percent of U.S. families actually made less money in 
1994 than in 1979...Meanwhile the richest 5% enjoyed a 44% increase in 
income over that period, census data show."

     Real, and effective cooperation among the citizens of America, and 
also among peoples of the world can occur only when a climate of mutual 
trust is created.  For this to happen people must first be both willing and
anxious to treat each other justly and fairly.  These are simply not 
values fostered by Capitalism.  After over two hundred years of 
trickle-down in America we find that only 5% of the people possess 95% of 
the wealth.  It's little wonder a large portion of Americans don't buy the 
Horatio Alger fable.  Many have little trust for others in the society.  
Economic disparity leads to periodic riots and insurrection in the cities.  
Economic disparity and its inevitable partner, unequal opportunity, are 
directly correlated to a climate of hate, violence, and crime of all sorts.  
How could we not expect to find arsonists who would find satisfaction and 
joy in the burning of expensive homes during the firestorms of Southern 
California?

     In reality, the inevitable outcome of a reliance on the capitalist 
structure is to produce a social system designed to condition the minds and 
limit the opportunities of the populace in such a way so as to protect and 
enhance the existing imbalance of wealth.  The conventional wisdom in 
support of maintaining this structure can always cite the great progress 
in material comforts achieved.  Yet, while the capitalist free-enterprise 
system provides extraordinary economic benefits for some, and a comfortable 
living for many in "western countries", there, nevertheless, exists a 
serious downside to the picture.  (unsurprisingly, generally ignored by 
those of affluence)  While perhaps but a quarter of the inhabitants of the 
U.S. live below the poverty line, over three quarters of the people of the 
world live in poverty.  Since the inception of the Industrial Revolution, 
and the avent of capitalism over three hundred years ago, such conditions 
throughout the world have not improved.  

     As the '80s flowed into the '90s, the interlocking relationship 
between politics and economics became dramatically apparent as the great 
S&L crisis began to unfold, as well as did the entanglement  between 
politics, economics, and  foreign relations  during the Persian Gulf War.