John Petro
George Will: American Socialism Is Not New
On ABC's This Week With George Stephenopoulus, George Will had this to say about Sarah Palin's campaign trail attacks on Barack Obama's "socailist" economic policies:
"Ninety-five percent of what the government does is redistribute wealth. It operates on the principle of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. Case in point: we have sugar subsidies. Costs the American people billions of dollars but they don't notice it it's in such small increments. But the few sugar growers get very rich out of this. Now we have socialism for the strong - that is the well-represented and organized in Washington like the sugar growers. But it's socialism none the less and it's not new."
I'm not sure if I would call sugar subsidies socialism (these subsidies have been decried by conservatives and libertarians), but it does represent the redistribution of wealth and it surely goes against free market principles. But where socialism seeks to create a more equal distribution of wealth, these subsidies concentrate wealth into the hands of a few Florida growers. Mr. Will's example does, however, exemplify why the American people are fleeing the Conservative mantra of "what's good for corporate America is good for the people" and the trickle down economics of tax cuts for the wealthy and lax regulation.
Americans are still waiting for the prosperity to trickle down. Or, rather, they've given up waiting. By examining the burnt out husk of our financial system it's become pretty apparent that corporate interests aren't just selfish interests, but they're also self-defeating. That is why there is a positive role for the state to play. In order to correct market failures, the government redistributes wealth in a way that is good for the collective whole, thereby making the country stronger.
Mr. Obama is seeking a more equal distribution of wealth. I think some conservatives need to stop and ask themselves why Mr. Obama - and based on the polls, a majority of the American people - think we need some sort of wealth redistribution. Instead of seeing it as "taking my money," they should realize that a more equitable America is a stronger America. America isn't strong when the personal savings rate is negative. America isn't strong when its people can't access health care. By changing the way our tax dollars flow, we can make America stronger.
John Petro: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 8:55 AM, Oct 27, 2008 in Economy | Election 2008
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (2)
Comments
This comment by George Will does not surprise me. Years ago George Will wrote a column for Newsweek saying that it was time for a bit of TORY SOCIALISM (trickle down). I remember because I wrote a response (not published) saying that money was likely to trickle sideways (luxury goods, etc) and to raise prices for everyone given the anchoring effect of new high end prices.
It didn't work then and it still doesn't work. But as he implies all tax policy and handouts are a form of "Socialism" if one chooses to define it that way. I wish Biden had thought of asking the "Marxist" questioning news person which form of Marxism she was talking about Tory Socialism, State Socialism (owning the means of production) or Redistribution of Wealth Socialism that effectively wipes out the upper class. The answer has to be none of them since they don't really look or quack like the Marxist/Socialist Duck.
I wish everyone would read Adam Smith again and see the enlightened capitalism he suggested, where the workers are cherished for their ability to produce and paid in accordance with this respect. Under those conditions, everyone having money to spend, the free market can work. If people try to accumulate all the wealth there is no one left to participate in the market.
Given that all markets are skewed, no respect for workers, and the dominance of the greed factor,we should regulate, tax and regulate some more. We can't trust the market to keep markets alive (spread the wealth) so we have got to do it ourselves.
Posted by: Mel Goldstein | October 28, 2008 11:45 AM
These are two very silly posts.
"America isn't strong when the personal savings rate is negative." Of course not. You think that's a fault of capitalism?
"Americans are still waiting for the prosperity to trickle down. Or, rather, they've given up waiting." You don't think that Americans have prospered? The economic crisis of the last two years came after YEARS of monstrous prosperity--prosperity that would have continued had it not been for government intervention that led to sub-prime mortgage defaults.
"America isn't strong when its people can't access health care." Health care is expensive because governments intervene! How is it that the poor of our country have access to amazing cell phones, amazing televisions, amazing cars, and yet we struggle to find access to affordable health care? Open the market! Give us competition! Let us buy insurance from one state to the next! The lack of interstate health care allows for monopolies, which leads insurance providers to jack up their prices!
"If people try to accumulate all the wealth there is no one left to participate in the market." What??? The moment ANYONE has something to offer (supply) that ANYONE ELSE wants (demand), there is a place for them in the market.
Have either of you changed your minds after seeing the last year of government arrogance and insanity?
Posted by: Aaron Hardy | September 14, 2009 12:31 AM