Is a welfare recipient just a good capitalist?

Are we all nothing more than small businesses trying to stay afloat?

In March of 2020, a few individuals were arrested for buying up large quantities of masks, gloves, and hand sanitizer. Their goal was to resell these items for a profit. While morally bankrupt, this is an example of the American way. Buy low and sell high. Oddly enough at this same time, corporations were taking an identical approach and while people moaned, there was zero litigation of any kind… towards the existing companies.

If no one is paying attention, the American dream included the idea that an individual could make choices, start a business, and prosper in the free market. This dream is no longer possible due to the massive chasm that exists between the individual and the corporation.

If one looks at a large company as those with the top 30% of market values, and small companies as the bottom 30%. The difference between these two groups has been widening since the early 80s.

The US is 4 trillion deep into a bailout attempt to help with Covid, however, 2.3 trillion of this went to corporations to maintain the status quo rather than to do anything related to helping the pandemic. One could argue that the vast percentage of the remaining funds also went to these same corporations. For example, 884 billion went to workers and families, but these funds were almost immediately used for essentials (back to large corporations) or bills (back to corporations through stock purchases with non-essential funds).

Is capitalism not survival within the free market?

According to Bloomberg, 20% of the largest public firms can now be classified as Zombie companies. If you’re unaware, these Zombie companies are financially “undead” or they cannot survive on their own without constant infusions of credit. The CARES act and other Covid related programs significantly helped zombie companies stay afloat.

One cannot help but compare this 20% number to another number. The percentage of American’s that use some version of “welfare” is 19%. Does this mean that we should accept that our “system” allows for 20% of the participants or players to take more than they contribute? Should this similarity prove that there is no such thing as “it’s not personal, it’s business.”?

This is a game after all, isn’t it?

To those raised after 1980, the American ideals of personal responsibility, capitalism, and progression have been instilled philosophically within our daily strategies. Side hustles, startups, retirement planning, the list goes on and on. We are all searching for those pennies based on the marketing ideology that those pennies add up.

But this is not another boomer vs millennial argument. This is a perspective versus a truth one. America today is different than the 1970s one, it just is. Our food, our culture, the political landscape, the availability of assets — it’s all different. Almost anyone would agree with this. But, their reasons for this difference are stark. Older generations will say that the difference is mentality or how the younger generation works, thinks, and follows through. The younger generation will say, “no” and then move on to outline lost opportunities such as swelling costs like home values, rents, and college tuition. They might also point to clear inflation in areas that just so happen not to be tracked as inflation such as the cost of milk.

If our existence is truly tied to the survival of the fittest then it would seem that the change in perspective and this change in opportunity comes from how businesses operate. In the 1970s and earlier, there was more personality in a business. The small mom-and-pop companies that lined main street stood behind their name and their products because their businesses were defined as a part of their self image. As corporations have swelled, so has this responsibility to care about the personal side. When one calls customer support in today’s world and they are inevitably greeted with “due to unusually longer hold times…” we all know it’s a lie meant to manipulate. Businesses have developed the specific ability over the last 50 years to avoid any kind of morality because “it’s business.”

And, this brings us to the question — Should we all view ourselves as individual corporations? It’s unclear when it started, but there is an almost daily stream of articles motivating people to build their brand. The idea is simple, make people care about you, your personality, and your actions, and you can create money from your life. This concept of “being a brand” comes directly from the mind of marketing agencies at large-scale companies. The difference of course is that a corporation wants to be a person, except when it doesn’t.

The next logical question beyond, should we all view ourselves as individual corporations, will quickly become — how does this affect our morality?

One only has to turn on the news to hear of the most recent deal with some large corporation to exchange tax credits or benefits for job opportunities. The idea is that if a company arrives at a new locale and creates jobs, then they shouldn’t have to pay as much tax. This is part of how large corporations pay so little in tax each year. Maybe it makes sense or maybe it’s corrupt, but the point is clear — it’s a good idea to take advantage of government programs if one is a company.

So, if we are all little companies running around then the goal of taking advantage of government programs such as food stamps, welfare, medicare, etc is not morally wrong in any way and it is actually just good business, isn’t it?

In America, the most capitalistic thing a poor person should do is to claim government handouts are a good thing. And, this is where the divide between generations comes from. If a married couple realizes that there are governmental benefits to being divorced, should they take them? If a person sees that their salary is just over the limit of where they’d have access to many government programs — should they quit their job?

Many people will point out that this line of thinking is all that’s wrong in America. They’ll say, “Look! This is why America is failing.” But what if instead of separating all the little single owner businesses struggling to stay afloat (people) from the larger corporations, we just grouped them all together and sorted by revenue? Wouldn’t this provide a more accurate view of reality?

Last year 55 corporations within the fortune 500 paid $0 in income tax. Now, certain people will probably claim they benefited society in some other way, but this is just once again — better branding and improved messaging.

In the pursuit of deciding whether or not a person should be viewed as a company, one first must go back to the original goal of an open and free market. Corporations literally create laws, and as a part of those laws, they restrict access to the smaller players.

Consider that when LinkedIn started, they didn’t know what their product would be, but they did have 26 million emails. They actually raised money on their email list alone. Once their company started, they would then spam the hell out of their email list. If you don’t remember, when people would initially join LinkedIn they would be asked first to import their contact list (to help the user find connections of course…), and then they’d spam those people. Spam was the name of the game and it led to actual sales and actual growth.

But, in today’s world, we consider unrequested and vetted emails as spam. This significantly hinders the free market in untold ways. As a user, you may appreciate fewer emails, we all do. But your lack of access to new ideas will be directly impacted. This is because the only sources of emails that can wade the waters of email deliverability, content that avoids spam filters, and the murky and costly world of double opt-in email addresses, will be these same companies who have rewritten the rules now that they’ve already benefited from them.

In the end, the question is not — should we individuals as companies? It’s also not — are poor people taking advantage of a system only companies should be able to? In the end, we should all be focusing on — how do we create an actual free and open market? After all, we’re just following in the footsteps of these rockstars we call corporations.

It’s not a trick question and the answer doesn’t start with targeting those who are scrounging for pennies. It’s also not a conspiracy to say “if you think this, your thoughts have come from a well positioned advertising department.”

The greatest scam ever achieved is that the person with ten million dollars has somehow convinced the people with $100 dollars that it’s the people with only 10 cents who threaten to steal their money and ruin their lives.

As one final point, this previous example uses numbers which are to scale if one looks at the most wealthy versus the majority.

$10 million dollars compares to 100 billion, the wealthiest people have this and more.

100 dollars compares to 1 million , there are 20 million millionaires in the US

10 cents compares to $1,000 dollars, only 40% of Americans can afford an unplanned $1000 expense.

So stop being manipulated with marketing by getting angry at all the small businesses wandering around trying to figure out where their next source of revenue will come from.

— The Delusional Writer

I’m a writer and a software developer, and I’m currently working on my first novel about the worlds we build within our own mind. Please join my mailing list to learn more about my book and other things I write.

Related posts:

It some respects it seems like he passed just yesterday. The last time I saw Gary alive was a month before his death. Jeff Wilpon and I flew down to Palm Beach Gardens, FL to visit him at his home. I…

I spent the last week in the Philippines visiting family and celebrating my grandmother’s 90th birthday. I found it rather serendipitous that it also happens to be Asian Pacific American Heritage…

you pick up his smooth jaw and jagged teeth toss them into his icy blood for the spectacle of a single ripple you run your hand through your hair our mother’s dark and verdant flesh trembles her…