A Little Diatribe
October 5th, 2005 by GoldFalcon
I wrote the following in response to some European friends of mine in a discussion we were having on socialism as practiced in Europe and the definition of socialism here in the US, where it is a dirty word on the order of communism.
Well, socialism isn’t quite communism by my definition, but they are separate branches of the same tree. I would do a quick definition by saying that communism is state controlled industry while socialism is state wealth redistribution.
In other words, in a communist society the government owns the steel mill and should, in theory, distribute the wealth equally from the steel mill to all citizens.
In a socialist society the government regulates the privately owned steel mill and seizes a portion of it’s wealth to redistribute to the poorest members of the society. It will also control the amount the private company pays its workers and sets the price at which it can sell steel.
As a free market capitalist I oppose both. I believe that –in a pure free market system– the market will regulate itself and that competitive pressures and the desire and ability to make as much money as one can will result in the best conditions and wages for the laborers, the best profit margin for the companies, and the best prices for the consumers.
Unfortunately the market is manipulated by both sides. Governments subsidize and set price caps, private companies form monopolies. Both of these are bad for everybody. That being said, free markets are the best model to strive for.
Socialism is particularly odious to me because it puts the government in the position to make value judgments, something no government should do. How do we define enough wealth? Who gets to say that at “X” point someone is now wealthy enough to justify governmental theft in the form of taxes that they will redistribute to those with less wealth? What is inherently wrong with being wealthy?
I have no problem with the thing that spurred the last 100 years of anti-capitalist progressive politics: conspicuous consumption. I like rich people, wouldn’t mind being rich myself, and understand that to get rich one doesn’t have to take from the poor. It isn’t a zero sum game. There isn’t a limited amount of national wealth to be distributed, so that rich guy isn’t taking from that poor guy. It just doesn’t work that way.
I am opposed to governmental social programs that take money from the wealthy to redistribute to the poor –be that in the form of health care, welfare, social security, or a graduated income tax. I don’t believe in price controls or other market restraints. I don’t believe that poverty is a national crisis. I believe that taking care of the poor is first the responsibility of the family, then the churches, then the population at large through non-governmental means.
Let me give an example of how the American system is broken due to governmental meddling that has caused an interdependence that is fatal to free markets.
If we as Americans decide that we want universal health care then we should create it. What we shouldn’t do is create it as a governmental entitlement, but rather as a private corporation funded voluntarily by those that wish to participate. If that funding isn’t sufficient then the program doesn’t have the popular will to exist.
Unfortunately this isn’t possible since governmental regulation in the insurance, pharmaceutical, and medical industries has driven the price of medical care far beyond the means of all but the wealthiest Americans and the hypothetical private company from above could not collect the needed funds to pay the costs of even a few dozen catastrophic care cases. Most Americans –the wealthiest nation on earth, per capita– cannot afford to pay for a single trip to the emergency room out of pocket. This is not due to a greedy medical industry or pharmaceutical companies, but rather by governmental meddling in the markets.
Thus the government has now created a problem –unfordable health care– that can only be fixed by government. That is what the founders knew: that government is a self perpetuating parasitic illness that is only good at creating the need for itself and nothing else. That’s why they limited it from the outset. The greatest folly of Liberalism is in assuming that they know better than the founders and allowing government to gain a foothold.
Now oppressive government (from standing federal armies, to over taxation, to over regulation, to intrusive legislation, to hyper vigilance in areas of personal freedoms and choices) are the norm. Congrats Liberals! You have played the role of the sorcerer’s apprentice to perfection. If you don’t mind though, I would like to try and get some of these crazy mops over on that fire.
Did you get through to them? Direct them to the writings of Mises and Hayek.
Some still havn’t learned that government regulation is synonimous with price increases. Deregulation of the airline industry is a prime example.
But I have a question: What roll do we then place the corporate lobbyist that buy off the government that passes the laws that increase governmental manipulation. Your medical industry example is ripe for this…the pharmaceutical companies charge 3x the cost of the same drug in this country as they do in our nearest neighbor…same drugs…different prices and different markups.
So in short…is that governments fault? Or is it the fault of the founding fathers of this country who didn’t ever contemplate that political science would be a major in college…or that lobbyist would be the only way to effect change…and the inroad for turning our “Democracy” into corporate sponsored and controlled government?
So…I just feel that the problem is not “government” so much as it is the notion that money is free-speech…which it doesn’t take a genius to figure out means that those that have the money control the government. And since it’s corporate America that has the money…they get what they want…which equates to a medical industry and a pharmaceutical industry that insures it’s price margin stays in place irregardless of the actual economic situation in this country.
CL
The lobbyists aren’t the problem, they are nothing more than paid advocates. If there are corrupt politicians taking bribes that is another matter entirely, but lobbying in itself is just an extension of representative Democracy. Think of it like a class action appeal to the representative.
Don’t be so sure the founding fathers didn’t know about the corruption of politics. Don’t forget that President Lincoln said of one of his cabinet members that “He is so corrupt, the only thing he would not steal is a red hot stove”.
The reason Mexico and Canada pay less is because their government’s place artificial caps on the amount that can be charged. Since the Pharmaceutical companies can’t charge what they need (or want) to there or in Europe (where prices are capped as well) we get overcharged here to make up the difference.
But money is speech. Try to buy a commercial spot or newspaper ad without it. We should realize that speach in this country is not limited to individual speech. Not only that individual speech isn’t really the kind that the founders would have been most concerned with. Group speech is far more effective and what is meant to be protected by free speech and free press. Group speech takes money, thus money is speech.
I simply don’t believe that the government is controlled by corporate interests. If it were no bases would ever be closed, no projects would ever be cut, the little guy would never win, the outsider would never get elected, monopolies wouldn’t be persecuted, Enron, WorldCOm, and Tyco officers would not be going to jail.
Certainly there is pork. Certainly there is corporate influence, but why shouldn’t there be? Are corporations not part of AMerica whith their own needs? Why shouldn’t they have the right to petition their representatives the same as a private citizen would?
Ayn Rand would be pleased to hear that some of her ideas still have traction. I recall mentioning to a French lady on an airplane that I was a “capitalist.” She looked at me like I was a leper. She really did say to me, ” Wow, I have never met one before.” Know what? I think she wasn’t kidding either.
I liked that post. It will be interesting with the avian flu situation and flu shots. Remember the last year and wailing and gnashing of teeth around flu shots? The flu serum was in scarce supply. And why was this? Because in the mid 90’s President Clinton signed a directive which gave government control of the serum to the government and took it away from the MD’s. We’re talking price controls and supply controls. Hence, no pharma companies are manufacturing the serum so the USA has to rely on foreign companies. Also, there’s no real profit for MD’s hence the MD’s don’t order the serum.
Another thing is that we Americans are paying for that price differential to Pharma companies because of Canadian and Euro prescription price controls. Pharma companies are “for profit” organizations and if they sell to a price controlled government someone has to make up the slack for that loss in profit!
For Medical coverage I found out the difference of available health plans when moving from MN to TN. MN is controlled by 5 major HMO’s, this was mandated by the state back in the 70’s. It’s interesting cause MN now has “non-profit” hmo’s/ppo’s where the CEO’s are making in the hundreds of millions in salary and bonus while it is not possible to get an individual medical plan without paying a high cost. That’s because all the insurance companies have left the state. I got a plan in TN for a third of the cost of continuing my cobra coverage from MN (which the plan was out of network too) and a more robust medical plan.
My basic concepts are
While a Conservative Govervbment “can” be Totalitarian
A Socialist Government “must” be.
It is about whether Society is controlled from the Top
down for the “Good of All” by an elite intelligetsia or
whether the individual assumes their own Responsibility
Rights and Libertys.
As a Socialist State progresses it must gather more and more control, power and ownership to itself, control begets a need for greater control.
In the end it owns the citizen. and all are Slaves of the State.
WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams