Interesting take on Obama & markets

[sickboy]

From The Freeman:
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/tgif...tate-business/
No Marxist He
If we don’t get the analysis right, we won’t get the response right. Despite what some popular right-wing talk-show hosts claim, Obama is not pushing Marxism, revolutionary or otherwise. The threat is not from socialism in the sense of State ownership of the means of production, much less a proletarian uprising. Rather, he’s pushing good old American progressive-corporate elitism, or corporatism. (Some would simply call it capitalism.) It is anti-free market, but not anti-business.
By that I mean business people, especially those who run big well-connected incumbent firms, love this sort of thing. Why take chances and risk market share in the unpredictable free market when I can get government to keep things orderly? (Translation: tame the competitive process.) Laissez faire is so unrefined. Would the bankers want it? Better yet, let’s have government buy — or require/encourage others to buy — my products. Remember that in Atlas Shrugged Ayn Rand warned of the approaching corporate-state alliance.

 

[stdreb27]

I dunno, he did quote hayak. Not many people even know who that is. But seriously the proof is in the pudding. And between nationalizing GM, Chrysler, student loans, propping up fanny and freddy (nationalized home mortgages), trying to nationalise health care, I think we have ourselves a pretty decent little fascist.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3220053
I dunno, he did quote hayak. Not many people even know who that is. But seriously the proof is in the pudding. And between nationalizing GM, Chrysler, student loans, propping up fanny and freddy (nationalized home mortgages), trying to nationalise health care, I think we have ourselves a pretty decent little fascist.
But, student loans, fanny & freddy were already gov't entities, or partly gov't entities long before Obama came. They were when Bush & Clinton were in office as well. GM & Chrysler I believe will be divested soon (hopefully). The only thing that would really point to Obama himself taking over an industry is healthcare, and under the plan that is currently put forward, that wouldn't even be the situation.
I just found it interesting that they (a free market magazine) is calling Obama a regular capitalist president who is basically anti-free markets.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3220099
But, student loans, fanny & freddy were already gov't entities, or partly gov't entities long before Obama came. They were when Bush & Clinton were in office as well. GM & Chrysler I believe will be divested soon (hopefully). The only thing that would really point to Obama himself taking over an industry is healthcare, and under the plan that is currently put forward, that wouldn't even be the situation.
I just found it interesting that they (a free market magazine) is calling Obama a regular capitalist president who is basically anti-free markets.
What they did to GM and Chrysler was Marxist, government taking over even though they did hand Chrysler to the Unions. What he is trying to do with the banks if more Fascist.

 

[beaslbob]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3219938
From The Freeman:
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/tgif...tate-business/
No Marxist He
If we don’t get the analysis right, we won’t get the response right. Despite what some popular right-wing talk-show hosts claim, Obama is not pushing Marxism, revolutionary or otherwise.
...
Then the Dems and Obama should just stop collecting taxes until the same amount of tarp, stimulus, jobs bills money have not been sent to the governement. And let the private citizens determine how that money is spent. Anything less is maxism/socialism/facism/communism. At least to anyone who has read the communist manifesto.
my .02

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3220099
But, student loans, fanny & freddy were already gov't entities, or partly gov't entities long before Obama came. They were when Bush & Clinton were in office as well. GM & Chrysler I believe will be divested soon (hopefully). The only thing that would really point to Obama himself taking over an industry is healthcare, and under the plan that is currently put forward, that wouldn't even be the situation.
I just found it interesting that they (a free market magazine) is calling Obama a regular capitalist president who is basically anti-free markets.
What so (taking your accepted industries) trying to nationalize 1/6 of the economy even if it is in steps isn't enough to get you labeled a fascist?

 

[beaslbob]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3220592
What so (taking your accepted industries) trying to nationalize 1/6 of the economy even if it is in steps isn't enough to get you labeled a fascist?
I think one would first have to define a fascist.

 

[uneverno]

It's at this point where the difference between Fascism and Communism breaks down for me.
Both systems are totalitarian: Fascism is Corporate controlled Government. Communism is Government controlled Corporations.
Isn't the end result the same - practically speaking - for the Individual?

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3221035
It's at this point where the difference between Fascism and Communism breaks down for me.
Both systems are totalitarian: Fascism is Corporate controlled Government. Communism is Government controlled Corporations.
Isn't the end result the same - practically speaking - for the Individual?
when you have government leaders bought off by unions, and the government running major industry, what should we call that? Obama-ism?