Guess I'm a "Socialist" now...OH NOOOEs!!!

[Duke Newcombe]

I find myself, after the litany of revelations of corporate greed, and nominative blackmail by companies that are so intertwined with the infrastructure of the nation that "they're too big to fail", that the idea of nationalization of certain businesses, or even whole sectors of our economy is no longer an unthinkable idea to me. This is a radical change from even one year ago for me.

I'm definitely of the sentiment that the more a company or a material product or service is intertwined with vital national security interests, or the more important it is to our infrastructure (energy, information technology components, telecommunications), the greater the case can be made for extreme regulation and government oversight, if not outright nationalization of that company or sector. Where am I going wrong with this line of thinking?

[HowHasItComeToThis]

1. I WOULD SAY YOU ARE A PATRIOT

[cliffordu]

2. I agree completely. K&R!!

[Confusious]

3. Abso-tootingly

Nothing.

Its about time it happened.

[jdadd]

4. I agree!!!!!!

Recommend and Kick....:kick:

[alterfurz]

5. recently seen bumpersticker:

"Socialism: if it's good enough for the bankers, it's good enough for the rest of us!"

[FatDave]

6. We need to remove the profit motive from industries that exist for the betterment of our citizens.

See my journal for a lengthier diatribe.

But I don't think saying this kind of thing makes you or me a socialist. It's just that the right has redefined the term "socialist" to mean anything short of Ferengi capitalism. They called Obama socialist for promising to help the people, for fuck's sake.

[lostinacause]

8. Look at the types of countries that have the highest standard of living indexes.

They are almost all market based. Sure certain key industries are often owned nationally but there is usually an economic justification for this. The key is not a lack of markets and profit motive, rather having the incentives of individuals match the benefits they give to society.

[FatDave]

9. That's what I'm saying.

I'm not sure whether you were agreeing or disagreeing with me, so I'll clarify. Clarification is never a bad thing.

Markets and profit motives are great for most things. TV's, computers, cars, soda-pop, detergents and refrigerators. Profit is great.

But when it comes to things like health care, you don't really want a corporation refusing to treat a condition in order to save money. You don't want people inspecting the containers coming off of cargo ships cutting corners in order to maximize profits. You want them spending their entire budget.

Basically, all I'm advocating is well-regulated capitalism. Like Canada and most of Europe have. They seem to do economically OK.

Here's what I said about it a few weeks back. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4901026

[lostinacause]

10. Then we are in agreement. -nt

[cilla4progress]

7. Same here

I've always maintained with as much wealth as the American economy has (uh, maybe no longer accurate?..) 4 things ought to be free, or in other words, nationalized/socialized: education, housing, medical care, and food. The rest can go the way of capitalism: TVs, luxury condos, fancy cars - whatever the greedheads think they need.

I like the idea of a nationalized bank and an optional private banking system alongside it. Just like with healthcare: appendectomy - gov't paid; facelift - you will have to save and scrimp for this one!

[ms liberty]

11. You get to embrace the label once you take it on, or so I've found, lol! n/t

[hope1954]

12. Neocon Propaganda

Neocons can also be considered socialist for their ties to big oil