JP Morgan is the outsourced arm of food stamp and other welfare debit card systems of the US government, and is making a quality profit off providing these services to Americans in need. Not only is the company profiting, but also has saved money by further outsourcing its own public service call centers overseas, which many Americans view as a spit in the face of the very issue they believe caused the need for welfare in the first place. Not only have major Wall Street corporations asked for bail-out from the American people, but a heavy argument decries that they are unwilling to return the favor.
I know many people might want to blame the corporations. “They shouldn’t ask for bail outs!” “It’s their fault our economy is in the tank!” “They should be willing to give Americans some grace given their own fallacies in our economic downturn!” “They’re the cause of our problems!”
People are angry, and rightfully so. But I want to point out the succession of sources of our problems in order of importance, and explain why our anger should be far less at the corporations — not that they are absolved of their behavior — and far more toward the true source of our anger.
Let’s start from the very beginning, the very core of our issue.
Americans do not like to be held responsible for their own poor decisions. They may have put their eggs into one basket with a single employer who promised benefits they never delivered on and/or were fired from with no great compensation. We have been raised by our educational systems to be good employees, instead of powerful, free-standing entrepreneurs. We want to suckle at the teat of some large company and then grow shocked when they don’t love us as much as we love them, or at least as much as we wish they would. As employees, companies don’t owe us anything. They trade a wage for our labor. We trade our labor for a wage. There is nothing beyond what’s agreed in the contract, and if you chose an employer poorly, then you can blame no one else than yourself. And if you depended upon that employer as your sole retirement, then you have put all your eggs in one basket and then cried foul when they all broke together.
2) SIZE OF GOVERNMENT
There is an old saying: “Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Government, whether monarchal, parliamentary, militant, democratic (generic), republican (generic), constitutional, or the like, will always grow corrupt. Government is, at its very root, the management of power, and when you create a system where individuals can manage power of any kind over others, it will attract those who seek to use it for personal gain. This is nonnegotiable. Never in the history of mankind has a government, however initially benevolent, served the needs of its own people through unneeded growth.
Our Founding Fathers recognized that the role of government should remain as basic as possible — to protect individual liberty. When individuals are empowered through freedom, they become the most hard-working, innovative, and indomitable society ever seen upon the face of the Earth. What you see today as the power of the United States of America came not from a loving government, but a body of free people who worked for themselves, gave to their communities and served their own gods without government assistance or direction.
When government grows, it attracts both those who would control its power from within (politicians) and those without (corrupt business). When government remains small, so do its fallacies and corruptions. As the government has grown, it has become equally corrupt alongside business, and both collude to control the market. The government’s primary role is to protect liberty — not security — and stay out of the way of the free men and women who call themselves citizens. Since the government has failed to live up to this task, I lay the second-most important blame on it, as without it, big business would be subject to the competition of mom and pop.
3) EMOTIONAL MORALITY AND POLITICAL EXPECTATIONS
Society has begun to demand something monstrous of people and business entities big and small — emotional morality and political expectations. Instead of abiding a system of laws that determine right and wrong by the core liberties and rights of individual citizens and businesses (such as the right to work for a personal profit instead of the profit of another who didn’t earn your labor), people have, instead, demanded the ethics of the mob.
“WE WANT WHAT YOU HAVE AND DEMAND YOU GIVE IT TO US WITHOUT COST!” sums the mob’s mentality, and what a terrible fallacy this is. They make a moral issue of their need, and vilify the true costs of filling it. If you bring up how much it costs to help someone you don’t know, you’re considered evil, and are forced to bow to the will of the “people” and their political expectations.
If a man must live according to the opinion of a political pulpit, then his life no longer belongs to himself, but to those who can see him on CNN. Man is not free. He is not free because the government no longer protects his liberties, but enforces the mob’s emotional morality. People live by the emotional morality that: “If it’s a hard decision or an uncomfortable choice, it must be the wrong one.”
In other words, “If it feels good, do it,” has evolved into, “If it feels good, it must be right.”
We cannot live by anyone’s emotions, but by the inviolate right of the individual and his own conduct of business to remain free according to his God-given liberty. No one may make judgement upon a man for exercising his liberty to his own benefit. The key is that people tend to forget that no one is making them buy these products, use these services, bank with these lenders, or apply for these welfare benefits. They claim they have no other choice, but that is simply not true. It is merely a matter that the other choices are uncomfortable, and they do not like them, and therefore that uncomfortable choice must be an evil choice, and any entity — individual or business — who does not support their choice to remain comfortable, must therefore be evil.
4) EXPECTING CARNIVORES TO ACT AS HERBIVORES
Carnivores are meat eaters, plain and simple. They are born to eat meat. While they can often eat plants and might have omnivorous tendencies, they cannot go without eating meat. They were designed, by God or nature, to devour the meat of another animal. That is their design and their intent. It is not evil that they must eat meat, it is nature, and to vilify it is to vilify yourself.
Businesses are carnivores. They are designed for one primary goal: provide a service for a profit. There is no other higher purpose for a business. When the entire economy of business works to provide a service for profit, everyone benefits. Every company makes more money, reinvests it in itself, which makes the company grow, hires more employees, provides more and/or higher quality products, increases pay and the local standard of living, improves the local and national economy, and brings a positive return on investment for the investors willing to risk capital for the person who designed, built and risked everything he had to see the business grow.
To ask this carnivore not to eat meat so the lamb can feel better about himself is more than wrong, it’s an insult. Businesses don’t operate for the good of the public, and shouldn’t. They operate for themselves, their employees, and their shareholders. When a company does this, it improves its industry. When its industry improves, so do other industries. When all industries improve, so does the whole economy.
If you ask carnivores to go without meat, they die. You can make it a moral issue and say they shouldn’t eat meat, but it’s not your decision. You’re not God, or Darwinian evolution, or whatever cause you give to the carnivore’s design.
Businesses are designed for profit.
BACK TO THE ISSUE
The US Government outsourced a program it has no business in, in the first place — taking money from earners to give to non-earners (welfare). It doesn’t matter how unfair life is to some, if the government kept out of the economy in the first place, large companies would be subject to the competition of te smaller companies. When the government gets involved, it can LEGISLATE small companies out of business, thus securing large companies who are apt to abuse their power. If you don’t believe this happens, start studying modern economics and historical legislation and who supports it. Big business supports regulations, because big business can afford to comply. Small businesses cannot.
JP Morgan is designed for profit and has little positive competition.
JP Morgan has proven untrustworthy with money. Despite that fact, it still saved the government lots of money by running this program. It did what it was DESIGNED to do — save money on costs, make a profit. To expect JP Morgan to help the American people is stupid. Ask the wolf not to eat the lamb. Here’s the key, don’t let the wolf in the pen! The government has no right to give away the money of earners to non-earners, nor should it shoulder off its attempt to redistribute that money to a for-profit agency.
The government should stop taking money from people (higher taxes) just to give it back to them (welfare) and say it was the moral thing to do. What if you let the people keep their own money (minimum taxes) so they can reinvest it how they see fit (personal responsibility), let people follow the example of successful companies (market economics) without undue interferences (regulation) and then step back! Watch us go!
If you claim the individual isn’t smart enough to help himself, you’re telling me that you’re a dumbass.
If you claim that you’re smart enough to do so but others aren’t, you’re telling me that you’re an elitist.
If you say corporations abuse and governments don’t, compare to me how many each has killed.
If you say that freedom is more dangerous than security, then you don’t belong in the Land of the Free or the Home of the Brave.