American Capitalism Gone With A Whimper

I'm only terrified that anyone would pay heed to such poorly written, transparently anti-American, homophobic blither.

sue,

GA from me. I am not American and I have to say that I do agree with some of the things to which he alludes, but this kind of homophobic blather full of half truths stated as "The Truth" is very dangerous. My favourite bit of bad English for the article is "come hither go dither"

What is this from? I can't make sense of it.

I'm just a simple old country engineer, but I care a lot less about who owns GM or who runs it than I do about the fact that I can't buy a decent diode or the fact that I have to go to a used bookstore to get a bearing catalog.

I'm no expert in these matters, but isn't the pure ideal of free market capitalism already violated by the billion dollar bailout?

Secondly, money invested in private companies under ordinary rules of capitalism, would ordinarily confer some degree of say-so about company operations. Should public bailout money (your tax dollars) be any different?

While the bailouts apparently didn't follow the ordinary rules of investment (too bad), the government has to respond somehow to the use of the "magic money" bailout to give millions of dollars in bonuses to the executives who screwed up in the first place...

Now hold on a goddamn minute. We normally don't do politics on here, but when you say I don't appreciate freedom or that my response is sad, you're over the line. If you want to debate the difference between a Social Democrat and a Communist, I'm happy to do that, but not here. In the meantime, knock off the personal attacks!

My response was purely political science. if you don't like my politics, you're entitled. If you feel personally attacked, I am sorry but that is your problem. I would have made the same comment regardless of who said/implied that "it doesn't matter whether gov't or the private sector owns the means of production." In fact, one other person made very nearly the same point.

Which I thought was sad, and said so.

The difference between capitalism and communism rests on who owns the means of production, pure and simple.

emc_c

You are entitled to your opinion. But, you need to learn how to attack the argument instead of the arguer. State your belief. Give your evidence. Don't use comments like "Americans" which implies you think we really aren't. Man up to your misstep and stop passing it off as my problem.

emc-c

Thanks for the long post explaining your perspective. I don't have any emotional investment in these issues or any stake in defending a position on capitalism vs communism, but I wanted to point out that you have misread me.

You've paraphrased "What's the difference between private and public investment in a firm?" This really is not the point of my comment: I''m aware of the difference between communism, socialism and capitalism.

The case in point is that public money has been paid out to private interests by the government. The actions of private interests who received bailout money were immediately irresponsible (big bonuses, private jets in the news and provoking public anger). The only difference between this and the "thugs who break down your door and take your property" is that the property (your tax dollars) has been taken by the usual beurocratic method, ostensibly for public benefit, and then used to fund a private party for the rich. IMHO you cannot give public money away without some expectation of public benefit. A standard investment process would have provided the framework for this - the bailout did not. Scream "socialism" if you like, I don't care what you call it. The free market model would have allowed those irresponsible corporations to go down. If you're going to violate that principle with huge public handouts to its richest "citizens", the expectation of a return on your "investment" surely has to be part of the package.

BTW, the communists don't have a monopoly on thugs who break down your door. In the "democracies" we have corporate thugs who let themselves in with a key to crush competition. We have organized crime thugs who prey on the poor (not the guy with the nicest house) as slaves, to service the demand of the wealthy for vice, tissues and organs. The ideal of "no taxation without representation" has eroded to the slippery slope where representation is, instead of equal, proportional to the amount of taxation obtained. That puts corporations at the top of the political food chain, at everyone else's expense.

The objective of "guaranteeing as much freedom as possible for its citizens" was intended for human citizens, and for all citizens. Neither for the poor at the expense of the wealthy, nor for the wealthy at the expense of the poor. The "corporate citizen" of our day did not exist. By legal definition in their constituting articles, these corporate "citizens" are driven by the sole purpose of profit, and lack the internal checks and balances of flesh and blood citizens with normal psychological profiles. The irresponsibility of the human citizens on the corporate bus is tied to the capacity to escape personal liability under corporate law.

You don't have to be an "altruistic saint" to see that something has gone awry, and that the ideals of freedom and justice are challenged by the present state of affairs.

I must apologize. I would never have spoken sharply had I known you to be a newcomer.

Welcome to America. I hope you're comfortable here. We have only a few rules that everyone should follow:

1. Drive on the right;

2. Pay your taxes;

3. Don't close dance with women who have a big Adam's apple.

Otherwise, have a good time.

I suspect you might fear we would be critical since your family failed to create a free nation back in your old country and had to come over here instead, but, no, we're all for giving folks a chance to learn, so just sit back and watch how we've been doing it for more than 400 years.

And, after four or five generations, we might impose on you to ask how you think we're doing. We'll let you know, hear?

I really don't want to get involved in a discussion of such a controversial nature, but after reading your post, I can see that you are an educated person with a good command of the English language. To be effective in life, the skill of communication makes the difference between being able to get your point across or not and for that I applaud you. I can see no better skill than language. If you can't express yourself, there is no message.

We normally don't do politics on here

Correct this is current events; reality today and history tomorrow. Thank you for your point of view now that you're paying attention; nothing personal.

Negatory, good buddy. The question about GM is current events. Implying my opinion is commie is politics.

My point of view, and you will see it over and over again in all my posts, is concern for the US manufacturing sector to survive. If GM goes down the toilet, it's not just a loss to the UAW and Chevy dealers and so on. There is a huge vertical integration of manufacturing and services, principally in the midwest but also across the US. When you absolutely have to go to Kolkata to find a foundry rather than Cleveland then we have crippled US manufacturing, at least in the time-to-market area. When you can no longer get gears made in Michigan, but must go to Guangdong, then we have added a thirty-few day delay in our supply chain.

I accept globalization, but I want to retain a share of manufacturing here in the US. We can't all be baristas. I see the threat to Flint, Akron, Solon, Erie, Gary, etc as far greater than the threat to capitalism. If that makes me a socialist (I'm not even exactly sure what that means), so be it. I'm not much on politics, but I do know I'll take the Gary Works over Wall Street every day of the week.

I meant no affront to you nor have I read any untoward statements referring to you whatsoever. Also I've not read any judgemental statements regarding any one's political position. The intent of this thread is awareness only.

Thank you for expanding upon your view I agree with you, I do not believe you are a socialist.

This is about recognizing a shift (change) occurring before our eyes seemingly without any flap over that which will (not can or may) usher out capitalism and replace with fascism. That's the point. It's not just that government officials have broken the law in order to fund the bailouts which actually paid off the inscrupulous individuals responsible for the debacle. It is the fact that had the money been given to the people; such action is legal, greater return would have resulted.

When a free market economy exists, the government is a by stander. When the government controls both production and marketing communism is the correct description. However what we're experiencing our government doing is termed fascism.

I recall listening to our history of learned men, engineers and businessmen whom created a free society by being critical of government to the point of declaring independence. But we aren't paying attention, curious.

"What's the difference between private and public investment in a firm?" The difference is capitalism vs. communism.

Actually the difference is capitalism vs. fascism

emc_c,

Thank you. I really don't talk about politics that much, but I take in a lot. I think you are right on with your points.

Much of what is going on, esp. in the scientific community has evoked the posting of my signature quote.

Mike

When I tried to connect to (read&weep) the message came that it was not possible.

"Can't connect to Pravda Server", something like that.

Hey, Ben Franklin was a Scientist, and he didn't shy away from talking about politics, so why should we?

I read the thread, and think bwire and emc_c have pretty much resolved their dust up.

It would be good, in my opinion, if Russia and the US merged their car companies.

I am in fact for getting Russia to be a State in the US, like Texas, or Mississippi, but so far have not had success.

Of course I have a South Korean car. My wife drives that. It was pretty cheap, but has an automatic transmission.

I drive the Honda.

Last time I got weepy, it was because one of our cats died.

My friend Del was sympathetic.

When I start weeping over cars, I think I might really need counseling.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-1/

• James Freeman Clarke -- "A politician thinks about the next elections — the stateman thinks about the next generations."
• Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statesman"

thanks bwire, I was able to read the article.

Last I knew the Car manufacturing industry in Russia was pretty much being operated by the Russian Nation in a fashion very similar to what is transpiring in the US.

Last time I saw a Lada, was in the 80s, when I was in Canada.

Politics aside, this has some big implications for those folks who make their living building things other people want to buy.

A big shock to me was the way the Government shafted the secured and senior creditors of Chrysler and GM. By rights and (if I understand it correctly) the bankruptcy code, this was an illegal seizure of assets by the Government.

As if things weren't bad enough, this is going to tighten up the business credit market even more. Let's say I loan a company $1 million. They then file Chapter 11 stating $10 million in liabilities and $1 million in assets. I had darn well better get 10% of the equity in the reorganized company, more or less depending on secured vs unsecured debt, senior vs subordinated debt, etc.

Now, let's say the Government, who had given this company an unsecured bailout loan, grabs 60% of the equity in the reorganized company, and hands another 15% over to the employees' pension fund. And when the other debt holders and I cry foul, the Government threatens to blacken our names in the press and accuse us of trying to sink the company and throw all the employees out of work.

Now, if you are a financier, do you want to loan money to any company that has taken a Government bailout? Didn't think so.

Now let's say I own a small business that wants to become a big business (which I do.) My biggest competitor is a corporate dinosaur that can't build products their customers want at a price they can afford. But, the Government has declared them "too big to fail" and so they step in an subsidize their failed business model.

My company, on the other hand, gets taxed to pay for my competitor's bailout.

BOHICA.