In response to:

Socialist or Fascist

jim39 Wrote: Jun 12, 2012 10:30 PM
This is how I see it: Aboma thinks he can "invest" government money in ventures like Solyndra. If Solyndra were to make a profit, the government could pick and choose where to spend the money. Not much different than using someone else's money to gamble - and when you win, you get to keep the profit. Lose, and the person lending you the money loses. This is kind of what Dr. Sowell is saying. The auto-bailiout, in addition to being a sop to unions, was a Socialist takeover. the companies were basically nationalized. When Aboma feels like he can fire automobile dealers and executives? That's nationalization. Same with financial institutions. I think the useful term for Aboma is "Totatilitarian." And Aboma is an abomination.
It bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a "socialist." He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.

What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they...