The old corporate welfare model socialized losses and privatized profits. That was the racket. Trump is not nationalizing industry or turning factories into politburo offices. He is forcing companies that receive public backing to give the public a return. No board control. No production quotas. No government commissars deciding wages, prices, or supply chains. Just a paid counterparty instead of an unpaid sucker. Critics screaming “socialism” are defending the worst kind of crony capitalism: taxpayer risk with private-only reward. Trump is not socializing production. He is de-socializing corporate losses.
Obama’s Solyndra pipe-dream business, filed for bankruptcy on September 1, 2011, after receiving a $535 million U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantee in 2009. The company struggled to compete with conventional crystalline silicon solar panel manufacturers and was unable to sustain operations. It was a money laundering scheme in my estimation. Much like the Minnesota madness.
"Banks charge interest, shareholders take dividends, and lawyers, consultants, and bankers collect their fees, and there is no principled reason at all why the taxpayer, alone among everyone at the table, must be required to accept a return of zero. The public was already a partner in these ventures. It just happened to be the partner that supplied capital, absorbed risk, guaranteed demand, and received nothing. Trump has not made the taxpayer an owner of American industry. He has made the taxpayer a paid counterparty instead of an unpaid one, which is the difference between a market economy and a very expensive charity. He is not socializing production. He is de-socializing corporate losses, and it is about time somebody did."
Great writing that won't win you any broadcast media time or a Wall Street sinecure. Thank you.
All of what you describe is anathema to the Federal Reserve / Davos / Globalist folly of the last 30+ years. The Fed has caused boom and bust cycles for decades, acted like a scorned woman for decades, and it's time the Fed was put back in a tight box. We elect the Executive and have no say over the Fed - and SCOTUS agreed the Fed is untouchable. Fine, the Executive can finally act like a CEO on behalf of the Americans who cast ballots and put him in office - three times.
This article is directionally accurate but your definition of socialism is not shared by Mises, or anyone else. Socialism is "ownership of the means of production."
The difference between socialism and totalitarianism/fascism is all about control. While a socialist society owns the means of production, a totalitarian society needs not own anything at all, because it controls everything. This is why totalitarianism and communism constantly get inflated: with no private property, how can a private director challenge/reverse any directive from the totalitarian overseers?
So, for instance, the US health care system, which spends far more federal and state money, per capita than any other country, is not socialist. The federal government does not own the hospitals and doctors. Our US system is totalitarian: the hospitals and doctors can make very few decisions without the approval of the Swamp bureaucracy that signs their checks and adjudicates the lawsuits.
Love your work, but I'm correct on this. Check it out.
Government ownership is great until an "investment" goes sour. Then the temptation is to double down and support a loser, and that's when it becomes socialism.
I completely agree with you Alexander. If corporations are to be handed taxpayer monies, then in my opinion this should either be a loan, guaranteed and backed with stock held by the company and repaid with interest, or outright ownership of the stock. They can always buy back the shares. The C-suites should consider themselves fortunate.
Why should for-profit companies be given a free ride?
Yes, and back during the financial meltdown of 2008 when the federal government was busy giving away free money to big banks that were too big to fail, it was also busy destroying my business by refusing to pay my invoices (claiming formatting errors) and creating impossible working conditions for my employees so bad that I had to default or lose even more money before the job was finished, which was never going to happen because government inspectors were falsifying documents and committing fraud to make sure we failed. In a meeting with the CO and COR the COR remarked that we were the fifth contractor to default on this project and the CO told her to shut up, that they would discuss that outside of the meeting. The final piece of evidence arrived in the mail a year later when the government informed me that it had completed our project using government employees and done it without exceeding our contract amount. In other words, the CO was intentionally forcing one private company after another to default and go out of business so that she could prove to her boss that government employees could do the job for less money than private industry. Care to guess where this happened? I’ll give you a hint. The State name begins with an O and ends with an n. I’ve hated the federal government ever since.
This…….is wisdom. Thank you for sharing this.
The old corporate welfare model socialized losses and privatized profits. That was the racket. Trump is not nationalizing industry or turning factories into politburo offices. He is forcing companies that receive public backing to give the public a return. No board control. No production quotas. No government commissars deciding wages, prices, or supply chains. Just a paid counterparty instead of an unpaid sucker. Critics screaming “socialism” are defending the worst kind of crony capitalism: taxpayer risk with private-only reward. Trump is not socializing production. He is de-socializing corporate losses.
Obama’s Solyndra pipe-dream business, filed for bankruptcy on September 1, 2011, after receiving a $535 million U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantee in 2009. The company struggled to compete with conventional crystalline silicon solar panel manufacturers and was unable to sustain operations. It was a money laundering scheme in my estimation. Much like the Minnesota madness.
Great analysis, as always.
"Banks charge interest, shareholders take dividends, and lawyers, consultants, and bankers collect their fees, and there is no principled reason at all why the taxpayer, alone among everyone at the table, must be required to accept a return of zero. The public was already a partner in these ventures. It just happened to be the partner that supplied capital, absorbed risk, guaranteed demand, and received nothing. Trump has not made the taxpayer an owner of American industry. He has made the taxpayer a paid counterparty instead of an unpaid one, which is the difference between a market economy and a very expensive charity. He is not socializing production. He is de-socializing corporate losses, and it is about time somebody did."
Great writing that won't win you any broadcast media time or a Wall Street sinecure. Thank you.
All of what you describe is anathema to the Federal Reserve / Davos / Globalist folly of the last 30+ years. The Fed has caused boom and bust cycles for decades, acted like a scorned woman for decades, and it's time the Fed was put back in a tight box. We elect the Executive and have no say over the Fed - and SCOTUS agreed the Fed is untouchable. Fine, the Executive can finally act like a CEO on behalf of the Americans who cast ballots and put him in office - three times.
This article is directionally accurate but your definition of socialism is not shared by Mises, or anyone else. Socialism is "ownership of the means of production."
The difference between socialism and totalitarianism/fascism is all about control. While a socialist society owns the means of production, a totalitarian society needs not own anything at all, because it controls everything. This is why totalitarianism and communism constantly get inflated: with no private property, how can a private director challenge/reverse any directive from the totalitarian overseers?
So, for instance, the US health care system, which spends far more federal and state money, per capita than any other country, is not socialist. The federal government does not own the hospitals and doctors. Our US system is totalitarian: the hospitals and doctors can make very few decisions without the approval of the Swamp bureaucracy that signs their checks and adjudicates the lawsuits.
Love your work, but I'm correct on this. Check it out.
Or, uhh, we should let failing businesses fail.
Government ownership is great until an "investment" goes sour. Then the temptation is to double down and support a loser, and that's when it becomes socialism.
Answering the questions we have so effectively! Thank you, this is really useful information.
I completely agree with you Alexander. If corporations are to be handed taxpayer monies, then in my opinion this should either be a loan, guaranteed and backed with stock held by the company and repaid with interest, or outright ownership of the stock. They can always buy back the shares. The C-suites should consider themselves fortunate.
Why should for-profit companies be given a free ride?
👍👍👍
Yes, and back during the financial meltdown of 2008 when the federal government was busy giving away free money to big banks that were too big to fail, it was also busy destroying my business by refusing to pay my invoices (claiming formatting errors) and creating impossible working conditions for my employees so bad that I had to default or lose even more money before the job was finished, which was never going to happen because government inspectors were falsifying documents and committing fraud to make sure we failed. In a meeting with the CO and COR the COR remarked that we were the fifth contractor to default on this project and the CO told her to shut up, that they would discuss that outside of the meeting. The final piece of evidence arrived in the mail a year later when the government informed me that it had completed our project using government employees and done it without exceeding our contract amount. In other words, the CO was intentionally forcing one private company after another to default and go out of business so that she could prove to her boss that government employees could do the job for less money than private industry. Care to guess where this happened? I’ll give you a hint. The State name begins with an O and ends with an n. I’ve hated the federal government ever since.
$31 billion in paper gains. Let me know when we’ve sold our 10% stake and realized the profits.