I remember some pundit writing some column about how calling the Democrats socialists was technically incorrect, and how those of us who called Obama and his merry band of looters on the Potomac socialist were sadly mistaken.
These days, no one believes in socialism — defined by the late,
left-wing economist Robert Heilbroner as “a centrally planned economy
in which the government controls all means of production.” A socialist
wouldn’t favor government aid to the automakers or the banks. He’d
propose that the government take them over and run them for the benefit
of society. But you haven’t heard Obama or anyone else suggest that.
With all due respect, Mr. Chapman, that’s probably one of the most short-sighted and stupid statements you can possibly make. As I stated in the comments section of this article, “When
the government gives a bank or a corporation money, whom do you think
the bank or corporation becomes accountable to? By pouring funds into
the coffers of banks or auto makers, the government IS, in fact,
gaining control of said means of production or financial institution.
It’s a minor change from straight nationalization, but the idea is the
same, especially if the government purchases shares and becomes, in
essence, part owner”
This is as it should be. If I invest my money in an enterprise, I expect that enterprise to be at least somewhat accountable to me. Government bailouts are no different. Logic demands if a company receives a gargantuan handout from the government to the tune of billions, the government then has the right to exert its influence and control on said enterprise. This was to be expected.
U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., introduced legislation Friday
afternoon that will cap compensation for employees of any private
company that accepts federal dollars because of the economic downturn.
Employees would not be able to make more than the president —
$400,000 — until the company no longer relies on federal assistance
from the $700 billion bailout of the financial sector, McCaskill’s
The cap would include salary, bonuses and stock options.
Demanding fiscal responsibility from companies that receive money from the taxpayers is right and just. I’m not blaming McCaskill for introducing this bill. After all, the taxpayers shelled out billions, and they now have a right to make demands. What I AM excoriating is the very idea of government bailouts!
And what I AM saying is that those who offhand dismiss claims that those in power aren’t exercising control over the companies whom they “help” when they rightfully make demands on how the companies operate, what salaries they pay and how they are run are either stupid or naive. And what is socialism, if not government control of the means of production?
Still think this isn’t socialism, Mr. Chapman?