QE hurts the elderly

[Ricter]

Quote from Maverick74:

Huh? That makes no sense. The whole essence of capitalism is the free flow of capital. What we have now is the very opposite of that. Why not just call it communism 2.0 then? I mean seriously, you can't just make stuff up.

The whole essence of socialism is public ownership.

And you could call it anything 2.0, if you are going to argue that even though a core tenet has been abandoned it is still the original concept.

 

[Maverick74]

Quote from Ricter:

The whole essence of socialism is public ownership.

And you could call it anything 2.0, if you are going to argue that even though a core tenet has been abandoned it is still the original concept.

Didn't the public own GM? Didn't the public own Citigroup? Aren't we headed in that direction?

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Maverick74:

Didn't the public own GM? Didn't the public own Citigroup? Aren't we headed in that direction?

You could well be on to something here. All taxpayers own GMs liabilities, for a time, to save it. But later, after it's saved, do all taxpayers get a share of GM's profits? Perhaps. But it's highly differential; I suspect the river is choked to a creek by the time all the diversions have been made.

 

[Maverick74]

Quote from Ricter:

You could well be on to something here. All taxpayers own GMs liabilities, for a time, to save it. But later, after it's saved, do all taxpayers get a share of GM's profits? Perhaps. But it's highly differential; I suspect the river is choked to a creek by the time all the diversions have been made.

But you see what I'm getting at here right? Citigroup is our nations largest bank. And GM is our largest manufacturer. These are not little companies. And I've heard rumblings about the government taking over the airlines. And then throw in green energy. The government for all practical purposes owns that industry. They own the defense industry. I mean what's left? We're getting there man.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Ricter:

By the same argument you could call it capitalism 2.0.

Not really

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Maverick74:

But you see what I'm getting at here right? Citigroup is our nations largest bank. And GM is our largest manufacturer. These are not little companies. And I've heard rumblings about the government taking over the airlines. And then throw in green energy. The government for all practical purposes owns that industry. They own the defense industry. I mean what's left? We're getting there man.

What I'm saying is that we're not getting there, if we're both talking about socialism still, if only the costs are being given to the taxpayers.

 

[Maverick74]

Quote from Ricter:

What I'm saying is that we're not getting there, if we're both talking about socialism still, if only the costs are being given to the taxpayers.

No...you're not listening. The tax payers are getting the distribution as well, just not the middle class. The rich are getting the inflation and the poor are getting the subsidy. You're not seeing this? Really?

 

[denner]

Quote from Maverick74:

No dude, you are talking about the socialism of the 20th century. This is a new form of hybrid socialism where the government distributes to both the very top and bottom. All the money at the top is tied to the government in one form or another. We don't have a manufacturing or agriculture economy anymore so the government is not going to control the means of production. This is socialism 2.0.

Yes, it's definitely a hybrid of crony capitalism/kleptocracy at the upper echelons of government/conglomerates bridged together thru the lobbyist network. To appease the masses (wards of the state), generous social welfare programs are expanded and extended. Likewise, public sector unions are given generous pay packages and benefits, with mandatory raises, etc...

 

[denner]

Quote from Ricter:

You could well be on to something here. All taxpayers own GMs liabilities, for a time, to save it. But later, after it's saved, do all taxpayers get a share of GM's profits? Perhaps. But it's highly differential; I suspect the river is choked to a creek by the time all the diversions have been made.

Hence the expression "socialize the losses, privatize the profits." It's been dead on accurate.

 

[trendlover]

Quote from Ricter:

By the same argument you could call it capitalism 2.0.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.cfr.org/industrial-policy/evolving-structure-american-economy-employment-challenge/p24366

"They note that the American economy has seen the lower and middle components of the value-added chain moving to the rapidly growing markets abroad and warn that soon higher-paying jobs may follow low-paying jobs in leaving the United States. The actions of the free market have made goods less expensive for Americans, but the free flow of labor and capital has also diminished the employment opportunities available in the United States and will, the authors warn, continue to do so at all levels of society.