Socialism to the rescue

SkyWriting said:

Privatize the winners and socialize the losers?

Click to expand...

The mega corporations make a killing, and that’s wonderful for them all the profit goes to them. But if they lose their shirt and are in trouble it’s “Too big to fail” and the government bails them out with our taxes, so we eat the bill, socialized losses but all the gains are privatized. Not how it’s supposed to work in Capitalism. In Capitalism if you overextend, get too risky, etc, and you go belly up you do not get saved by government, instead more responsible companies absorb your resources and they rise up and succeed.

Capitalism also is a gauge of what society wants the most. If certain sectors start to fail it’s because the free market forces want other resources more. When governments favor, and carry sections of the economy it’s no longer free market capitalism. However as I said earlier, total extremes are bad. You do need some amount of government protected resources.

I think one of the worst parts about
Laisse-Faire Capitalism is workers having no rights! Government protections for workers is huge, hence why this continual merging between the corporations and governments really freaks me out. So I am for Capitalism with protections for the little guy. Republicans seem to leave that part out a lot, how powerful corporations in Capitalism can squash the little guy without protections in place.

Al Touthentop said:

So, there's no excuse for you to blame economic issues on only republicans.

Click to expand...

No, our woes are the result of both parties actions. But republicans just seem a little more efficient and cold hearted at it. And with the current crop I'd add, blatant.

Yarddog said:

Tariffs are what they meant to be but they are a tax on imported goods. It hits the consumers the hardest.

Click to expand...

The idea is the consumer is supposed to support the tariff by finding other sources. But in the me-me-me world, that's not gonna work.

SkyWriting said:

Privatize the winners and socialize the losers?

Click to expand...

Privatize winners and blame socialists for losers

SkyWriting said:

Except for these programs:

"D"

• Debt and Claims Management Center
• Defense Acquisition University
• Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
• Defense Commissary Agency
• Defense Contract Audit Agency
• Defense Contract Management Agency
• Defense Department (DOD)
• Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)
• Defense Finance and Accounting Service Debt and Claims Management Center
• Defense Health Agency
• Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)
• Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
• Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)
• Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
• Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA)
• Defense Security Service
• Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)
• Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)
• Delaware River Basin Commission
• Delta Regional Authority
• Denali Commission
• Department of Agriculture (USDA)
• Department of Commerce (DOC)
• Department of Defense (DOD)
• Department of Education (ED)
• Department of Energy (DOE)
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
• Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
• Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
• Department of Justice (DOJ)
• Department of Labor (DOL)
• Department of State (DOS)
• Department of the Interior (DOI)
• Department of the Treasury
• Department of Transportation (DOT)
• Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
• Director of National Intelligence, Office of
• Disability Employment Policy, Office of (ODEP)
• Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)

Click to expand...

The fire department, the police department, the street department....

Jok said:

The mega corporations make a killing, and that’s wonderful for them all the profit goes to them. But if they lose their shirt and are in trouble it’s “Too big to fail” and the government bails them out with our taxes, so we eat the bill, socialized losses but all the gains are privatized. Not how it’s supposed to work in Capitalism. In Capitalism if you overextend, get too risky, etc, and you go belly up you do not get saved by government, instead more responsible companies absorb your resources and they rise up and succeed.

Capitalism also is a gauge of what society wants the most. If certain sectors start to fail it’s because the free market forces want other resources more. When governments favor, and carry sections of the economy it’s no longer free market capitalism. However as I said earlier, total extremes are bad. You do need some amount of government protected resources.

I think one of the worst parts about
Laisse-Faire Capitalism is workers having no rights! Government protections for workers is huge, hence why this continual merging between the corporations and governments really freaks me out. So I am for Capitalism with protections for the little guy. Republicans seem to leave that part out a lot, how powerful corporations in Capitalism can squash the little guy without protections in place.

Click to expand...

The big corporations are the ones with lots of employees. I agree government should support all people in ways that allows them to change jobs easily and abandon any company without a healthy soul.

When a company is evil, the healthy people in it should have life protections so they can leave and let the toxic managers die with no workers.

Ricky M said:

Then why is it every Republican president since Roosevelt has left office in a recession? And why is it every time a Democrat takes over in a recession, it's followed by robust economic expansion?

Click to expand...

"Followed by" as in "fostered by the Republican administration that followed it?"

Yarddog said:

I've been seeing Republicans posting anti-Socialism memes on Facebook and other sites but what amazes me is that Capitalism always turns to Socialism to get it out of economic recessions. At some point, Capitalists need to know that they need Socialism to thrive.

Click to expand...

You mean like the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, or Venezuela, Italy and Denmark?
National emergencies like war or a virus pose risks. The government's purpose to to protect its citizens, their rights and their property. It is quite different to bail out businesses and its citizens who arw innocent of their failings due to the closures than to bail out wealthy banks or corps for screwing up as in the last recession.

Yarddog said:

The idea is that the prices on imports go up so the domestic products can compete.

Click to expand...

Yes, that would hopefully be the new source

Yarddog said:

Nope, like much of what has been occurring here since we began this country.

It is still Socialism.

Click to expand...

A bail out would not be my personal choice. Think of it, can we as a country offer this $1 trillion bail out next year and the year after ... because their will more viruses and now we are setting a standard as to how to deal with them.
2.3 million die every year - we accept that. 650k from heart disease, another 600k from cancer another 150k from accidents, etc. So the answer to this question is NO, we can't afford a bail out every time this happens.
The thing I'm angry about is that it may have been released on purpose. There is a virology biomedical research lab in Wuhan a few miles away from the market where the first cases surfaced. They have been doing research on bat coronavirus. Coincidance? I also heard SARS came from the same lab. ??? Xi wouldn't just release the virus in the states - we would be suspicious of that, but why not disguise the scheme and release it down the street, then bring it here? He doesnt care about losing a few thousand Chinese - heck they have been cremating people still alive in the body bags. They could lose 100 million and that probably would be okay for him. Who knows, this is speculation. But now that he knows we will respond this way, and our economy will go south, he can easily do it again. Of course the argument would be that it is hurting their economy too. He is not affected by any of it, he is a dictator.