by Rick Lowe
Typical of opinion pieces in the New York Times, like this one… (subscription required), they attempt to convey capitalism and capitalists as bad.
First of all the title chosen for the piece is, "When Capitalists Cared". The point being, none of them care any more.
Second, they say, "Today the prevailing cut-to-the-bone business ethos means that a company like Caterpillar demands a wage freeze and lower health benefits from its workers, while posting record profits." Again, the point being all major businesses/capitalists are mean.
It would be interesting to know how many businesses large and small, operate differently?
How many companies struggling in the fragile US economy but kept staff on instead of laying them off?
How many of those same companies have not cut wages and benefits because they realise the importance of their associates?
How many of those same "Capitalist" companies give millions to help the less fortunate, and in more tangible ways than government programmes?
The New York Times itself was reported to have laid staff off "to adjust to the changing business environment and maintain our financial health".
I guess it's easier to cloud the meaning of capitalism with what Caterpillar reportedly does, but it only shows their bias.
But in spite of the New York Times consistent attempts to discredit it, Capitalism continues to bring more people out of poverty than any other economic system to date. Is it perfect? Of course not, but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater because of the "Times" drum beating.
My goodness Rick,the New York Times is nothing but a left wing outlet for Obama.Their circulation has dwindled down a whole lot,I for one would never purchase or subscribe to their bias.They do not even count anymore.Personally I think they should all be locked up by themselves somewhere with rubber walls.They hate capitalism but yet its why they are still here,how stupid can you get.
Dennis you hit the nail right on the head.. The New York Times (NYT), which once upon a time, was a great American newspaper has lost all sight of journalistic objectivity becoming nothing more than a left-wing, propaganda rag.. Intelligent people want to read news that is objective and not biased by some apparent or hidden political agenda.. This says a lot about its New York readership but I won’t go there..
Why did all this come about?? Well perhaps you have to look at the ownership, the Ochs-Sulzberger family which has owned the NYT since the 1890s.. They control not only the content and story paging but the editorial policy as well.. The NYT has a motto, All the News that’s fit to Print, which perhaps now should read, All the News that the Arthur Ochs Sulzberger wants to Print.. You guested it, he’s the Editor..
What we must recognize is that the NYT is in real financial trouble.. Over the past decade the paid circulation has dropped from about 1.2 million readers in 2000 to about 950 thousand in 2012.. Newspaper advertising, the primary revenue source, is also dramatically down as well.. NYT investors have little to be happy about as its stock, which trades on the New York Stock Exchange, over the past five years has fallen from the mid-50s down to a recent price of under 10.. Now that is an 80 percent loss.. The only thing that is going up is the newsstand price which has been raised 50 cents to $2.50 on weekdays and $5.00 for the Sunday edition.. This once great publication seems to be going the way of the dinosaurs..
To add further insult to the ideals of objective journalism and unbiased thought, the NYT summary edition has been added as an insert to the Nassau Tribune.. Do they have a new master, only time will tell, but I must say that I am pleased to have more paper to rap my throw away garbage in..