“That means only a wage slave is a good wage earner? The only problem, which they completely ignore, is that the majority of society consists of wage earners who they would like to chain again like slaves, but who at the same time are the consumers who have to consume these products that are produced, so that the owners of the means of production can continue to capture the added value. Without consumers there is no sales and without sales there is no turnover. Who should buy the ugly things that are produced in such excess, without regard to losses, destroying nature and animals and people.
The social legislation that you so condemn ultimately helps the capitalists in their progress, because only when the people actually working have enough time to consume and pursue their leisure activities can more be brought onto the market. And so that wage earners don’t get the idea that they are using their free time to further their education or become politically active, they are encouraged to consume and have fun. And that works very well too. Capitalism has achieved this sensationally, so that now everyone or very many people think that you are what you have and not you are what you are. While they’re all fighting each other, just thinking about how to get out better themselves, they don’t see how it’s making them sick. A sick society that turns people into self-centered but at the same time submissive individuals who are ready for any betrayal as long as it serves their own advancement. But if it wasn’t getting ahead that was relevant, but rather life itself, unnecessary consumption would stop.”
“And jobs are lost,” the first lady completed the sentence, “Despite all the disparagement, forget that the owners of the means of production, who you so vilified, who are responsible, have an overview and only they are in a position to do this Manage assets properly. The mob is far too stupid for that.”
“So, the capitalist said to the churchman, you keep them stupid, I’ll keep them poor,” added the second lady, “The church no longer has that much to say, but the stupid media has taken its place. And what about responsibility? Companies are managed into bankruptcy, whereupon people stand on the streets and the highly praised responsible people move on happily to continue their work of destruction. And while the people who actually work are desperately looking for another job, people continue to speculate and, above all, speculate. They leave behind scorched earth for others to rebuild.”
The coffee is brought, carefully for the lady who seems rich, sloppy for the other.
Scene II.
“It’s old hat and has long since been disproved, the old wives’ tales about evil speculators. They all operate within the legal framework. They can’t help it if it’s not the same everywhere. And as the good Adam Smith said? The invisible hand of the market takes care of everything by itself, you just have to let it do its thing. All interventions and regulations are harmful and upset the balance,” said the second lady delicately in the conversation.
“Adam Smith, who liberals like to refer to, lived from 1723 to 1790, meaning economic opportunities have changed a lot since then. What was true in 18th century England no longer applies today. They take it as a hook that although national orders protect the economy, the economy is allowed to exploit all its possibilities across borders. What they want to do should be protected. Where they feel restricted, they demand freedom. However, it is often overlooked that Adam Smith not only advocated the abolition of price and wage regulations, against guilds and privileges, but also against monopolies. This is cherry-picking, because if the good man, who was a moral philosopher and not an economist, is actually used as a hook, it should not be possible for the global economy to be in the hands of a few giant companies. This means they have such market power that they can buy entire governments, probably out of petty cash. This does not stop the deforestation of the rainforest but eliminates those who oppose it. Entire paramilitary organizations are hired to exterminate indigenous peoples. I don’t think that was, could have been, in the spirit of Adam Smith. But let’s go back to the speculation. You can still place bets on staple foods – and playing on the stock market is nothing more than betting. It can happen that grain in Ecuador is suddenly 30% more expensive. Depending on how the speculator bet, he wins or loses. Most of the time he has done a hedging transaction. This means that his risk is minimal, and the chances of winning are high. But what does that mean for the people of this country? What impact does it have on people who only have the minimum subsistence level when a basic food item becomes 30% more expensive almost overnight? That’s right, they’ll starve. But for the yuppie sitting in his loft in New York pressing buttons, it’s a game. For others it’s a matter of life and death. That doesn’t seem to matter, but when someone comes and demands that a financial transaction tax of only 0.1% be levied on these profits – which are nevertheless not counted as unemployed income – it immediately becomes a case of dictatorship and disproportionate interference in the free market ranted. In short: free market, yes, but only where it is useful to capital. Any attempt to protect nature or species contradicts this. Capitalism eats everything away like an insatiable monster, ultimately the basis of one’s own advancement. He eats himself up by exploiting everything that can be exploited, regardless of whether it is nature, animals or humans. “Everything has to be subject to the utility factor and is judged accordingly,” the former couldn’t refrain from saying.