Your observation of democratic socialism and loopy thinking brings to mind UT Professors Galbrath's book that identifies
the problem as the market, which has not been honestly informing us, and replacing with it with gov't., resulting in the same, just rewarding different favorites. I'm sure the outcomes will not reward efficiencies or effort that actuates into meaningful growth. This will have an impact on social mobility to the negative for decades if not permanently. This may be an outcome that Prof. Galbraith prefers if he is of the same mind as his Stalinist antecedent.
Your argument for our Constitution makes for a candidacy of a Bob Barr type, though less dogmatic, in 2012 if Obama reinforces the statism that has bloomed under the guidance and acquiescence of the current Administration and Congress. Is it advisable for the incoming Administration to tweak, prod and reward individuals and companies to invest, save or focus effort on some demonstrably positive economic actions? The answer is yes if makes for efficiencies, stability, growth and rewards the efforts of those that do endeavor. This latest and possibly largest intervention by the gov't. in our economy was touted as a transitory not permanent. Let us pray that Prof. Galbraith and his fellow wise men do not have or get the ear of our new president for if they do all of the evils they have decried will surely be practiced by them once they control the pie.
David O. Farrell
- 1
- 2
TARP and ADD
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
With the leg bone connected
to the knee bone,
And the knee bone connected
to the thigh bone,
And the thigh bone connected
to the hip bone.
Oh mercy how they scare!
Detroit is connected to the auto-parts suppliers, those suppliers are connected to the truckers who haul the parts, and the truckers are connected to Ralph and Madge's Bar and Grill out by the interstate, and oh mercy! if one goes, they all will go. Maybe. No one knows. It is true but inadequate to say that the government has not known what it has been doing since March, when it said that the contagion afflicting Bear Stearns required federal intervention lest the entire financial system be infected. Actually, the government cannot know what it is doing, for two reasons.
First, the government is operating in an environment without rules, or—what is much the same—in an environment of constantly changing rules. Second, constant, fog-shrouded improvisation is one consequence of operating without reliable prices. Prices are information; markets are information-generating mechanisms. Government has plunged into allocating wealth and opportunity even though proper prices for important assets cannot be known because markets are not functioning. When prices are arbitrary, which they must be when not set by markets, you have the essence of socialism. The results must be irrationality and, eventually, corruption. Socialism is not merely susceptible to corruption; it is corruption—the allocation of wealth and opportunity by political favoritism. Under democratic socialism, such favoritism is then rewarded by financial support, by those favored, of the dispensers of favors.
Because a Republican administration began the bailouts, many Republicans have endorsed them—grudgingly, queasily and with uneasy consciences. It is, however, probable that some Democrats relish this eruption of government into finance and industry. It serves the left's agenda of expanding the scope of politics by multiplying the forms of dependency on government. Hence liberalism's enthusiasm for enriching the menu of entitlements; hence liberalism's promotion of equality by making more groups and entities equally dependent on government.
A Republican revival requires both Democratic blunders and Republican talent to refute them. The occurrence of the former is certain because of the enthusiasm for bailouts; the appearance of the latter is less so, but will be encouraged by the former.
© 2008
- 1
- 2
Discuss