"Free" Enterprise and the 2012 Election

America's Economic System 

and the Presidential Race

A brief background:

Free enterprise is the heart of American economics, and has been since the founding our founding, but though our love of the idea behind free enterprise has remained the same, our love for its applicability have not.  When originally defined, free enterprise was an economic system in which the government has very little power over private businesses, and is only capable of intervening when the public interest is at stake.  This allowed for poor people and small businesses to achieve success through the means of hard work, which many did, and thus our economy grew strong and we became a world power.

Just 5 years ago in 2007 the top one percent of Americans owned  33.8% of the wealth while the bottom fifty percent owned only 2.5%, and these figures have only gotten more extreme today.  This presents a difficult question: does free enterprise still work, or does it need to be changed to fit a modern society.  

The 2012 Election:

In his campaign for reelection, President Barack Obama has embraced the philosophy that free enterprise does not work, at least not on its own.  Obama believes that free enterprise can work, but in order to do so the poor need to be helped, and the government needs to be the one to help them.  He argues that if the poor are not helped, they cannot achieve their potential or fulfill their American Dreams.  


Alternatively, Mitt Romney has decided that free enterprise does work, and that it only needs to grow for the poor to be able to succeed.  He bases his thinking on the fact that free enterprise on its own created an even distribution of wealth, and the belief that it can do it again.   

Obama and Scholarships:

In his acceptance speech for presidential nominee at the DNC, President Obama spoke about how important the average American person is to those who are poor.  He listed several examples on how through the people's funding of collegiate scholarships, people who wouldn't have been able to go to a college now have that chance, saying, 

"We believe the little girl who's offered an escape from poverty by a great teacher or a grant for college could become the next Steve Jobs or the scientist who cures cancer or the president of the United States, and it is in our power to give her that chance."

Though Obama himself was not a little girl, his words still tell his story: young minority child, who was raised by his retired grandparents, and through scholarships was able to first attend a private school for 5th through 12 grades, and then later Columbia University, and then finally become the President of the United States of America.

Obama with his grandparents

Though probably intended for guys
trying to get a date, the hat's words
still apply to a more general audience

Obama believes that without that help he would not be where he is today, and he's probably correct: without affirmative action the percentage of black students in selective schools such as Columbia would drop down to only 2% of the student body, and students such as Obama might not get in.  Because the less fortunate would be deprived of their opportunities to compete against the more fortunate without help from the government, free enterprise is essentially broken.



Citizenship:

Obama's belief that Americans must help each other derives from his perception of the word 'citizenship.'  In his acceptance speech he said, "this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations," and "that a freedom which asks only, what's in it for me... is unworthy of our founding ideals."  


This, however, is what our modern society has come down to.  Studies have shown that the upper class, the class that owns a third of the wealth in the U.S. is also the most selfish.  It is this selfishness that prevents the lower class from acquiring more wealth and success, and thus Obama feels that the upper class must act unselfishly, for the good of the country, and help the poor get on their feet.  Otherwise free enterprise will only apply to the wealthy, and free enterprise will not work as a system for social growth, the way it once was.  


Glengarry Glen Ross:

When David Mamet wrote Glengarry Glen Ross in 1984, he called into questioned the reality of free enterprise.  He proposed that free enterprise was not as free as everyone thought, and rather that success through this system was restricted to those who had already made it, i.e. the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  The main demonstration of this in GGR is in the leads, where only the top closers get the good leads.  When Williamson tells Levene that the other closers will get good leads once they pass a certain mark, Levene responds by asking,

"Then how do they come up above that mark?  With dreck . . . ?  That's nonsense" (20).

How are the lower classes supposed to catch up to the rich when they start off with so much less?  This is the same argument that the President has made for the failure of free enterprise.  Obama's opponent Mitt Romney might assert that Levene is simply part of the 47%, a group of people who feel entitled to benefits and will not work for their living, but Levene counters this when he says,

"Do I want charity?  Do I want pity?  I want sits.  I want leads don't come right out of a phone book" (22).

All that Levene wants is an equal opportunity to compete with the other workers, but he cannot get this through the current system.  Levene then becomes so desperate that he decides to rob the office for some of the good leads, but this backfires on him when he is found out and arrested.  Through this chain of events Mamet shows that the poor are helpless to their fate, and that they need outside help if they are to survive.

Right before Levene is arrested it seems as though Roma is this outside help, and that Levene is going to be alright, but as soon as Roma knows Levene's fate he asks for half of Levene's commissions.  Roma is wealthy and successful, but is greedy and selfish, and it is this that prevents him from offering any real help to Levene.
 By showing the greed of the wealthy, Mamet possibly offers a warning towards people such as Mitt Romney, who, though they promise help and relief, intend to do this in ways that could help further their own wealth.