#记录我的2024#
In today's America, every aspect of social life struggles to adapt and adapt to the needs of large corporations. Whether it is ordinary people, grassroots institutions, public organizations, legal systems, and even international policies, they are largely influenced by these giant companies. Although, to a certain extent, we still have options, such as companies being eliminated by consumers due to mismanagement, business scandals, or legal problems, these choices often fail to get to the root of the problem.
The crux of the matter is, can we hold accountable the investors and holding groups behind those companies? Can we demand public ownership of the means of production? Can we demand that companies be equal with individuals in terms of resources for legal proceedings? These are often issues that no one wants to face.
In fact, these companies rarely admit that they are actually exercising a primitive form of power when they make demands on society, the government or the public. Since the 50s of the 20th century, under the influence of pressure from the Soviet camp, Western companies have stopped openly expressing their views on the advantages of capitalism. Instead, they have appealed in a variety of ways, including on the premise of providing jobs, shaping their own agendas and persuading those involved to make reforms and compromises in order to achieve what they call public good and social democracy.
As a result, the main goal of schools in modern society has gradually shifted from traditional knowledge transfer and character development to preparing students for future employment. The core mission of the education system has now become to help students acquire practical skills that will enable them to excel in the competitive job market. To a large extent, this shift reflects changes in societal values, as well as the pursuit of economic gain.
At the same time, similar changes have taken place in the tax system. In the past, tax policy was primarily aimed at achieving social equity and redistributing wealth in order to reduce the gap between rich and poor. Today, however, the central goal of Western tax policy has become to maximize job creation to ensure the survival and profitability of companies. This change means that tax policy is now more focused on incentivizing business development and innovation to boost economic growth rather than addressing social injustice.
In terms of land planning, in the past, the government and society were generally concerned about how to improve the quality of life and ensure the basic safety of the people. Today, however, land planning standards must be compromised in favor of creating more jobs. This means that urban and rural land-use policies are increasingly inclined to support enterprise development and industrial expansion, even if it means sacrificing the environment and the quality of life of residents.
However, there are certain drawbacks to this employment-centered development model. As a country's economy deepens in modernization and privatization, so does its reliance on corporations. This has in turn led to fewer jobs in the country, and all companies are more aggressive in moving jobs to lower-cost locations. This phenomenon has intensified competition among workers for limited surplus jobs, as well as hatred for other countries.
In this context, in order to reduce costs and increase profits, companies often choose to move production lines to other countries, especially those with low labor costs and lax environmental regulations. This practice not only leads to unemployment among workers of origin, but also forces them to accept inhuman wages. In addition to outright wage cuts, companies' strategies of moving jobs abroad have intensified competition among workers for limited remaining jobs.
In addition, this competitive mentality can easily lead to hostility among workers towards other countries. In the midst of fierce competition, workers may blame national factors such as immigrants and trading partners for unemployment and economic hardship. This hatred has been exploited to some extent by politicians and the media, which in turn has exacerbated international tensions.
To sum up, in the world of corporate individualism, the close intimacy between corporations and governments has led to economic and legal frameworks gradually serving the needs of large corporations. While society still has some options, the power and influence of corporations makes major decisions beyond the scope of the discussion of the average individual. This situation limits the decision-making power of individuals, while large corporations are able to dominate the economic and political landscape by using their power and resources. Therefore, the realization of a fair and equal society requires a re-evaluation and adjustment of the relationship between companies and individuals.