Comments about ‘Legitimate, productive businesses are America's golden goose’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Aug. 4 2014 8:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Yes, Capitalism has lifted hundreds of millions of people in China and India out of poverty. In doing so it has also destroyed the American working class and is now quickly eating away at the middle class.

It is instructive that all of our so called "free trade" treaties have abundant protections for capital and zero protections for labor. Capitalists get protection from capitalism while labor goes down the tubes. A capitalist system cannot survive if people who work can't make a decent living.

Adam Smith warned us about collusion between employers to suppress the wages of their workers, thereby enhancing their own profits. As in much else, Adam Smith was right.

liberal larry
salt lake City, utah

This editorial states:

"The recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage shows that anti-business sentiment is growing"

Unfortunately the rest of the editorial uses Cuba, one of the worlds most extreme communist countries, to illustrate that capitalism is good.

We need an editorial that seriously addresses the decline of middle class incomes, and the huge pooling if America's financial resources in the top 1%, not a discourse on the evils of Cuban communism!

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The real truth of why business has a bad name is simply that business cheats the people, denying the people their rightful service and performance that business is expected to give. All the smoke and mirrors like this article will not change that but it does seem to perpetuate the false notions of business.

The purpose of business is to provide the mechanism for the sharing of the talents and benefits of a civilized society. Unfortunately, the greed of men turned that around and propagated the notion that business was part of the right to happiness and had seniority over the rights of people in general. Throughout all of history, the goal of men of power has been to extend their control over others and their labors. Present company NOT excepted.

Small business is a political scam. While there are many small businesses with only 1 or 2 or a few employees, the small business that politicians are concerned with go all the way to more that 600 employees. Most of the small businesses portrayed in the propaganda come and go at a terrible failure rate.

Hayden, ID

And Obama and the Democrats are doing everything in their power to kill the golden goose! Get the government boot off the necks of businesses and you will see America prosper, again!

Virginia Beach, VA

"The recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage shows that anti-business sentiment is growing."


How can anyone confuse the "recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage" with anti-business sentiment?

There is no relationship there.

That's an old "Conservative" tactic isn't it? . . . Setting up a straw man to knock down.

A recognition of a growing income disparity is NOT anti-business.

It's just an example of facing the facts.

Come on "Conservatives" . . . FACE THE FACTS . . . And quit making stuff up.

Orem, UT

There have certainly been a number of problems with capitalism where greedy and corrupt players have done some really bad things, so we definitely need some level of government regulation to keep those things in check.

But I am amazed at how many anti-capitalists there are out there who hate business and seem to think the answer to every problem is more government. Why do such people put undying faith in government bureaucrats to regulate "fairness" in the market, when government has proven itself time and time again to be less honest and effective than the private sector?

They will rail on "evil CEOs" all day long and give "evil bureaucrats" a complete pass. Why?

Most of the problems in the private sector are caused by crony capitalism. Big companies are able to abuse their customers only when competition is scarce. Competition is scarce when the barriers to entry are high. Most of those barriers are caused by government regulations designed to protect entrenched players from better upstarts.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Sorry, Mr. Bell, but your article here is simply not accurate.

John Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT

"Whenever the vicious portion of the population shall be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and burn churches, ravage and rob provision stores, throw printing presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this government cannot last."
--Abraham Lincoln

Those who criticize capitalism are advocating the very anarchy that Lincoln warned about. Let us be clear, those who are against capitalism are against American itself.

Virginia Beach, VA

The rise in economic disparity correlates directly with the implementation of Reaganomics in the 1980's. Look at the graphics available on the internet, and you can see a steep and continuing rise in income disparity beginning during the Reagan administration.

Reaganomics greatly reduced taxes for the highest earners. But the highest earners generally are NOT small businessmen.

The highest earners tend to be heavily invested in large corporations and business. The highest earners control big business.

By giving more breaks and benefits to high earners and big business, the Reagan administration created a HUGE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE for big business. And that made small businesses less able to compete.

As a result, small businesses went belly up. They went out of business. And the millions of people employed by them lost their jobs.

Meanwhile, large businesses controlled by the highest earners, heavily outsourced jobs to other nations, and Americans lost even more jobs.

Reaganomics is the ENEMY of small business.

Reaganomics was supposed to provide jobs. It did just the OPPOSITE.

The solution?

Reverse Reaganomics.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Actually, the anti-business sentiment is coming from those foul CEOs themselves.

By killing off the American middle-class they are killing off their golden goose. If the American middle class has purchasing power then those CEOs make more money.

Just as Ford demonstrated in the past century when he paid his workers sufficient wages so they could buy his cars.

Killing off American middle class makes sense in the short term for stockholders and greedy get rich quick CEOs. But in the long term it sinks all American businesses.

Irony Guy
Bountiful, Utah

Who has anything against "legitimate, productive business"? Nobody. The anti-business sentiment in this country is due to the illegitimate, non-productive behavior of robber barons who run finance and insurance industries and the environment-destroying coal and oil businesses. And that sentiment is well taken.

Far East USA, SC

It is disingenuous to put forth the notion that people despise corporations.

Most thinking people know that corporations are the life blood of this country.

But, that does not mean that everything they do is good.

If corporations (and unions) did not lobby or make political contributions, the other problems would get cleaned up.

Many corporations (and unions) purchase legislation from congress which allows them to do unethical things in order to make more profits.

They have managed to unlevel the playing field.

That is generally what causes peoples' unfavorable view of corporations.

West Jordan, UT

Mr. Bell would be wise to watch "Inequality for All". He can find it on Netflix or Amazon.

If he did watch it he would discover that we Americans are not anti-business, we are pro middle class. Our American economy is dependent on consumption....in fact 80% of our economy is based on consumption. It's really quite elementary to understand that a shrinking middle class will reduce consumption, which then leads to less demand for workers and products. That then puts pressure on businesses to cut hours and staff or raise prices. Which then leads to an even greater shrinking of the middle class.

We are in a downward spiral here in America. Our middle class is shrinking. Our lower class is increasing. The rich are getting richer. I'd recommend watching Inequality for All to learn about more of the solutions we can implement to make life better for everyone.

West Jordan, UT


We are not criticizing all capitalism, merely unregulated/deregulated/unfair capitalism. Markets work under the rules that governments make for them. Governments need to make rules in the market place or you would have corporations suppressing workers and consumers in a variety of ways.

Do you honestly think McDonald's would pay their workers minimum wage if they were not regulated to do so? You and I both know they and other corporations would use the glut of labor to the disadvantage of labor by stating: "here is $4 an hour, take it or leave it...we can find someone else more desperate than you."

Or do you really think corporations wouldn't use cheaper ( and often toxic) materials and processes if they were not regulated? We find Chinese products all the time that end up all over the word made with cadmium, a toxic metal.

Governments set a majority of the rules of the markets that all play in. These rules - or lack thereof - have allowed others to efficiently drive a huge majority of wealth to the top leaving crumbs for the true creators of value - laborers.

Innovators & risk-takers deserve a big piece of the pie, just not 80%+.

Orem, UT

JoeBlow: "It is disingenuous to put forth the notion that people despise corporations."

Exhibit 1: Irony Guy - "...robber barons who run finance and insurance industries and the environment-destroying coal and oil businesses.."

Exhibit 2: Ultra Bob - "...business cheats the people, denying the people their rightful service and performance that business is expected to give."

Sounds like some people do despise corporations.

Commodore: "Innovators & risk-takers deserve a big piece of the pie, just not 80%+"

Yet liberals are fine with government (which does none of the work or takes any of the risks) getting a bigger piece of the pie than do the innovators.

Salt Lake City, UT

As a small business owner (18 employees) I keep looking for this boot on my neck from the federal government I keep hearing about. I would love for single payer health care, I could offer the same health care as IBM. And my competitors would be paying the same as I am. But the Republicans keep telling me they are trying to help me, when it is the likes of the Koch Bros they actually help. Orin Hatch thinks there is nothing wrong with buying companies in other countries, and then claiming they are owned by the company they just bought so they can avoid paying taxes. All the while enjoying the benefits of having their company based in the USA.

Far East USA, SC

"Sounds like some people do despise corporations."

No doubt that some do have problems with the way some corps do business.

But then you go on to paint with the broad brush of

"Yet liberals are fine with government (which does none of the work or takes any of the risks) getting a bigger piece of the pie than do the innovators."

I would venture to say that most "liberals" like corporations in general but feel that at times they go too far in their quest for profits.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Could it be that the golden goose that just now died was the last of the poor, weak, nations of central and south America that could be oppressed by American businessmen. And now that the American businessmen are aiming their economic and political weapons at Europe and Asia and finding resistance, have come to the realization that America is dying, so grab the money and run.

The article states: " Next time you attend a symphony or play, notice who sponsors the performance. Who supports our charities? Most major donors are businesses or businesspeople". This is probably a lie. The truth is that the ordinary people, tax payers, are the ones taken by these

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Joe Capitalist.

Who owns business?

Who creates the opportunity for a business operation?

Who creates the need for a business operation?

Who provides the customers for a business operation?

Who provides the workers for a business operation?

Who specifies the quantity, quality and the manner of creation of the product?

Who provides the infrastructure needed for the business operation?

Who provides the protection from other businesses for the business operation?

Who provides the rules and regulations for the business operation?

Who pays for all the costs, wages, taxes and profits?

The answer to all of the above is Society and its agent called government.


Who provides the money to build, run and create the product?

Who gets all the profit?

The answer to these questions is the Investor, who loans the business operation some of his surplus money.

Poplar Grove, UT

If you want to compare the efficiency of the private sector vs the public that is a conversation. However, why do you implicitly trust business, but not the government? For total capitalists like yourself, I don't understand why the government is the boogey man, but large companies can do no wrong. Fundamentally, there isn't a huge difference between a massive corporation, and the government. You can find virtually everything the government does in the private sector, so why is it that when one side runs things, they are untrustworthy snakes, but the other are angels, seems to me that we should be equally worried about both sides of the equation.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments