tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6912640518439940624.post8509511093561396778..comments2023-03-25T02:06:46.508-06:00Comments on Travels with Charley: Social Democracy?JBinford-Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14293248281473648182noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6912640518439940624.post-60458964358439806122009-07-08T23:38:09.742-06:002009-07-08T23:38:09.742-06:00Sadly we have no real choice but to vote for capit...Sadly we have no real choice but to vote for capitalism in whatever guise it appears.<br />I speak as a democratic socialist.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01097990715636294118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6912640518439940624.post-48893565782310308862009-07-06T18:48:29.734-06:002009-07-06T18:48:29.734-06:00"Capitalists cannot be permitted to run riot ..."Capitalists cannot be permitted to run riot any more than the masses can be allowed to riot in the streets. Both extremes are anarchy. The question then becomes where to draw the line in the sand. I propose we do not know."<br /><br />So trueAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6912640518439940624.post-52025988647239555822009-07-06T13:06:44.324-06:002009-07-06T13:06:44.324-06:00I frankly, whatever we call it from Reagonomics on...I frankly, whatever we call it from Reagonomics on down, and not for giving more power to the people. They have proven time and time again in country after country and business after business (from Enron to Exxon to Bank of America to GM) that they are not able to do it. And labor unions are no better. The common folk on the automobile assembly lines are as greedy as the CEO's with insane benefit bonuses even when they bankrupt the economy.<br /><br />Frankly at times I'm not sure we should let everyone even vote. I like Thomas Jefferson's concept of landowners only. Might throw in those that have earned a college degree. But any population that would consider Sarah Palin should not be allowed to vote.<br /><br />Boy will I get comments about thatJBinford-Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14293248281473648182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6912640518439940624.post-75287820717128236672009-07-06T12:10:48.878-06:002009-07-06T12:10:48.878-06:00While there were many problems with the Bush admin...While there were many problems with the Bush administration, excessive reliance on free markets was not one of them. We have not had anywhere near a free market in labor or goods in a very long time in the US. We have not even come close to a Laissez-faire system, let alone a free market.<br /><br />While neither a free market nor a more rational Laissez-faire one is perfect, a market closer to that model would be far better than the Keynesian model the Federal government is basing its decisions on today. Of course, we have used Keynesian principles before -- some would even say Keynesianism and excessive regulation are what brought about the current economic situation. I'm not going to go that far (I blame lots of interventionist tactics and a lack of transparency). Look at the California budget woes to see where the US as a whole is headed. Neither you nor I nor the government can spend and spend and somehow reduce our debt by doing so. We can make progress through true investment, but only if that investment leads to increased income growth: roads to nowhere won't do it.<br /><br />If you are interested in economics and how freer markets have helped and are helping developing countries and the poor worldwide, check out www.flowidealism.com. It is an alternative political philosophy that appeals to many who are disillusioned with the present parties. It is also to some extent a new version of "power to the people".Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07719394461984895842noreply@blogger.com