this is really just a one-off ramble or something..

everyone talks about the greater freedom capitalism has incorporated with respect to the lower and middle/labor classes.  but has anyone evaluated the greater degree to which one can become indebted?  i dont know...there are surely a lot of coincident social freedoms going along with capitalism, the free market, but what about economic freedom?  surely, there are two ways to look at economic freedom, the freedom to become wealthy and the freedom to become shackled and poor?  more people across all classes can rise up to the upper class


this of course ignores the inherent unethical nature of capitalism in the false sense of competition, pitting human on human..where i may not succeed without your failure, your exploitation.  further, its a false sense of competition bc the main conveyor is not ingenuity but money.  and possession of money is oe of the most arbitrary things in the world, in the view of hereditary inheritance.  also, it's problematic because it causes stagnation.  the rich write the rules to their advantage through lobbyists and campaign contributions.  obviously this is nothing new.  just a rant.  but this is all at the heart of my critique of society and what i think is wrong with the way we're living.  we're allowing them to define the rules of the game as money and pleasure collection.  this has been a problem with humans for millenia.  plato and aristotle both wrote about these as false, fleeting happiness'.  but i just feel like the people with the 'true freedom' of wealth have bought off the rest of us with the freedom to consume the drugs of our particular pleasures.  we're concerned with having, possessing pleasure in the moment, not who we are when the moment stops and the traffic jam of our past honks a thousand horns.