You’re either an owner or the dog

You’re either an owner or the dog

Seems that’s the unspoken general philosophy these days, either own any business or you’re somewhat worthless. Like a product they will get what they want elsewhere cheaper and you wont matter, when in a world full of ex-communists and people who will work for peanuts, with virtually no union power, we have to be thankful to be better off than our Victorian counterparts. …for now.

Is there an effort to press the workers of the world down [not to mention the middle classes too]? To make us again into paupers. …but that’s how the markets* are eh! Is the world recession real or is it all contrived by those with the power of control?

Philosophically is the sentence ‘you’re either an owner or the dog’ in any way acceptable, irrespective of the conditions* it rests in?

Its just that unspoken philosophy I am dealing with here, there once was a time when workers could be proud, now they are simply exploited and treated like sub-humans. Well that’s how I have observed it and many people around me seem to concur with the general sentiment.

Well, the economic conditions for it have been developing since the late 70’s and has accelerated greatly since the 80’s and the Reagan revolution. But it seems like the philosophy expressed in your quote really seemed to take hold, strangely enough, in the 90’s. Nurtured by the confidence that came with the Clinton boom, there seemed to be a Neo-Nietzschean attitude that also found some expression through the No Fear movement. It was like you suddenly had all these guys in sports bars, flush with success, and standing around all tightfisted and acting as if they had created that success in a vacuum. In fact, I would argue that it was the success of the Clinton economy that got Bush Jr. elected.


is there any rule that says you have to use money?

live in the wild, take care of yourself

i’d say someone doing this successfully is neither an owner or a dog

but perhaps its easier said than done…

i suppose that some people would choose this option over being a dog

some people should be happy to be dogs, perhaps myself included, when being anything else is not an option

but why isn’t this the case?

perhaps its the potential of being an owner

Before that better period they were also treated like shit. What we had was a period of relative wealth before globalization. Corporations/(the wealthy) needed a skilled class of laborers to increase their own wealth. Once they could move production, service and everything else out of the country, they did. They never gave a shit about workers, but they had to treat them with respect pre-globalization. Now the third world/first world split will be seen inside countries, rather than as a comparison between countries, more and more.

I agree with you in a lot of ways, moreno, but I’d like to add this. If the American worker is thought of as a dog it’s because in a lot of people’s minds, that’s the way s/he was thought of. It took unions to start to change that conception. Once the American worker demanded more than a leashed walk around the block, a scratchel behind the ears, and a “Good Dog” every once in a while, their jobs where shipped off-shore–where other ‘dogs’ were more amenable to being treated as dogs. To make it worse, the American worker thought of their Asian counterparts as even less than dogs!

Now that unions have been essentially broken (not just by the movement to off-shore non-union workers, although that has a great deal to do with it,) will American workers be willing to take on the jobs the less than dogs did–if and if manufacturing ever comes back to the US?

There was a significant delay between the formation of unions and high membership in them and the shift offshore. There simply wasn’t the infrastructure for moving production and service overseas. So the corporations had to wait a number of decades before they could make the shift. Some sectors moved earlier, but generally there was still a good deal of manufacturing. So in the 50s - which conservatives long for, but fail to remember things like the 50s having incredibly high corporate tax rates and union membership - the working class could in large part have the same property - homes, cars, gadgets - that the middle class had. This last for a few decades, then Reagan came in and also globalization and unions have been gutted over time ever since.


Manufacturing will not come back until it is at least as cheap. And while the economy is very bad, houses in the US and rents in the US and food in the US are priced way to high to let workers take manufacturing jobs for the wages in China and India. They would be homeless beggars.


The success is created in the gap* between owners and their dogs earnings imho. Gradually they killed off worker power got products made cheaper and in greater amounts, so now its all about those who own the greater share in profits. Those same profits that were argued about when the federal reserves act was brought in [1911 I think], and income tax introduced in america.

I doubt they would even debate that profits belong entirely to owners these days!
When before at least they accepted there was a general contribution and so profits should be in part socialised.

I don’t think its plausible at least on mass, we simply have to have the industrial scale farming of today in order to feed the populations of the world, which even then we fail to achieve.
that’s why for me its all about how we interpret excess and usage.


Indeed it seams that way. It seems that wealth redistribution [not necessarily in personal terms] is the only way forwards if we want to live in a better world than that dualistic system creates.

I prefer the prison analogy more better.

Your either a warden (Owner/ director/ Plutocrat), a guard ( works for the warden and prison administration protecting it), or a prisoner ( A slave just shit out of luck being oppressed and deeply imprisoned within the whole system).

At the moment I am still a prisoner which explains my attitude. :laughing:

I have been a prisoner for so long that I don’t know any other lifestyle. :laughing: #-o

I am just waiting for a prison revolt where the guards and wardens become overthrown which happens from time to time. =P~

Quetzalcoatl what you must understand is that society and indeed all of civilization works like a well tuned prison labor camp.

Think of modern nations as being individually distinct prison work or labor camps competing amongst each other.

Once you understand that everything else becomes all the more clearer and the illusion or facade is lifted.

An interesting book on the subject that gives a more balanced view coming from a left of center thinker, Robert Reich, is Supercapitalism. It’s thesis is that all of this was the inevitable outcome of improved technology that resulted in increased competition among corporations. It also points out that the decades when the middle class was stronger was due to corporate confidence built on the dominate oligopolies. At the time, they could afford to be corporate citizens looking out for the interests of labor and society as well as consumers and investors. But as competition grew, due to changes in technology, they were forced to narrow their focus on consumers and investors.

That sounds about right. Most people keep overlooking the technological component. Very soon it will come and bite everybody in the ass.

James L Walker

Well it is a bit like that ~ which is immoral. Simply change the model then it wont be like that ~ I say ‘simply’. lol

The illusion of an ethical society I think is something to keep hold of and build from.

I think future technology with change the landscape dramatically, and the politics will have to bend to that. …which we need to encourage.

edit; e.g. artificial diamond and robots will create indestructible goods and a means to replace cheap labour.