America's First Monopolie

It can be said that money is power in the United States, and this is brought out in the essay, “Class in America---2012” written by Gregory Mantsios. He says that even though many Americans do not like to discuss class, “it can determine where people live, who their friends are, how well they are educated, and what they do for a living” (Mantsios). Many Americans do not speak about class type, and most find it unacceptable (Mantsios). Unfortunately, we can see that there are laws that are built to help and better the wealthy, while it cripples the rest of us. According to the Economic Policy Institute, “The richest twenty percent of Americans hold nearly ninety percent of the total household wealth in this county” (Institute) Gregory Mantsios without reserve describes the majority of people are at a disadvantage in their social class, while the upper class is compensated.

Since colonial times, monopolies have been present in the United States’s economy. But as always, with time comes change, and that situation directly applies to the monopolies in this country. A monopoly is defined as the exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes the manipulation of prices possible. Monopolies had a negative impact on the United States due their unfairness to consumers and laborers, they don’t allow for innovation, and they stifle all competition.

With great money comes great power. In the United States, the richest men and women of the country own the top 20% of wealth. The kind of money the wealthiest people in the country have, they can approve or disapprove any law passed by the government. So, money brings on power over the government. The government mostly pays attention to the monetary backbone of the country; if the backbone is not satisfied then trouble can brew. That is why the poorest people in the United States decide not to be active with politics because they feel as if their vote will make no difference. They will be in the same situation no matter who the president

On the most elitist extreme, Mills in The Power Elite (1956) provides a strong argument that the decisions made in politics are the direct result of the actions of a highly selective group of individuals who do not have the best interests of the mass public at heart. This elite is made up of (presumably) men from the realms of business, military, and high-level politics. Socio-economic factors such as income and social circle keep the elite in a position of power through their cumulative advantage. The tight control over decisions and actions of importance that this elite has is legitimized by their positions of legal, economic, and political importance.

The corporate rich have all the power because money is power to a lot of people worldwide,

America was built upon the belief that Power and Wealth lead to success in society. The distribution of power in the United States, specifically its centralization, is a topic of major debate do to public outcry for reform and government intervention. In regards to social, political, or economic subjects, change is not only profoundly desired, but also greatly needed.

Many people believe that monopolies are bad for society. Large corporate monopolies prevent small business owners and start up companies from competing in the market. Some would say that this type of market would be preventing the American dream. Large corporations keeping the little man down, but has that always been the case? Throughout the economic history of the United States there have been times when monopolies have benefited people. For example, John D. Rockefeller build the major monopoly Standard Oil in 1800s. During this time people, who could afford it, used kerosene to light their homes (Constitutional Rights Foundation, 2000). There were no regulations or standards that had to be met during the production of kerosene. A man could

The public in America is disillusioned to believe that they run the government as they are on the top in the hierarchy of democracy. However in practice the incidents suggests that the rich are ruling the country while the general public is left with no choice but to follow the rules set in favor of the few. Ironically, there is an indifference towards this attitude in the general public as it is seen as a part of the American dream.

In Who Stole the American Dream? Hedrick Smith paints a clear and accessible but grim portrait of how economics, politics, power, and democracy have vastly changed in the United States. I agree with Smith that wealth and power inequality are extremely harmful. That a few individuals have prospered at the expense of the many is extremely unethical and unjust. I appreciate his critique of the current system, and historical perspective regarding how democracy has been systematically and intentionally eroded by corporate interests.

The huge wealth gap that exists in the U.S. is a huge problem. The “us vs. them” mentality being nurtured by this gap separation only creates division among society. Those with the most wealth control resources, yet those with immensely less wealth manage those same resources. The end result could be as catastrophic as a revolution if confronted by the people. Or perhaps lack of confrontation would pose an even greater threat in regards to environmental disasters waiting to occur.

First, let’s begin by analyzing the arguments put forwards for a market system by poster boy for modern laissez-faire capitalism, Milton Friedman. His arguably most famous text Capitalism and Freedom puts rests the argument for free market capitalism upon three pillars of thought that Friedman believes to be self evident: privately operated markets are naturally occurring, significantly more efficient than a centrally planned economy because of the limited information available to individual actors, and morally justified as an expression of the rights to self-determination and political freedom. As defined by Friedman, “Political freedom means the absence of coercion of a man by his fellow men. The fundamental threat to freedom is the

Politics has created this falsified ideal that a competition driven economy between the division of socio-economic class is inherently equal in opportunity. That these classes “that of the more able and the less able, or that of the rich and the poorer, or even that of the ruler and the ruled,” are “at times, have been of “ameliorated social and religious ideals that instructed the strong to help the weak.” In fact, the exact opposite is true in nature. Traditional religious and political notions do not exist. Only the skeleton remains of what once stood an influential governance upon the economic structure of life. Barry further exemplifies the change in economic structure of life “as a purely economic ideal, competition does not contain or imply any such instructions.” The strong influence that is shaping society and even our government is the ability that ideal competition generates the ability for “the loser to simply accumulate in human dumps, like stores of industrial waste, until they gain enough misery and strength to overpower the winners.” Thus reflecting the nature of power that the changes in the economic structure of life has lead to the transformation of politics being controlled but the structure itself. This can be seen in the modern day example of how Wall Street was able to get away credit default swaps right from underneath the nose of the government and thus controlling the entirety of the economic

Actually, in the real world some financially powerful people do not follow such principle and have sufficient money to buy almost everything that allows them to take up some power to influence, or better yet, command the economic policy. On the matter, Henry Kissinger once said that “Who controls food, controls the people; who controls energy controls entire continents; and who controls money controls the world.” (Are We Western Money Slaves?). Of course the first thing a private ruler of the economic policy would do is to assure a huge and always increasing income and wealth to a small group of already financially powerful friend members. Consequently, the income and wealth of a society so dominated follow trends of eternal concentration;

In a free market, everyone is dependant upon one another for survival. This is due to the limited expertise each person possesses. For example, not everyone can effectively farm, or build a house, or manufacture a car, or set up a PayPal account. It

The power elite is able to exert power over society. The power elite’s control over politics demonstrates how inequality is functional. This validates the class-domination theory of power, which is distributed based on economic power. By controlling economic resources, the power elites political influence in government shapes law and those involved in government to the power elites benefit. In today’s American society these laws have impacted both the corporate community and the elite. Furthermore, the author’s portrayal of the elite displayed how the elite have control concerning choices in government policies, elections, and laws.