Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Support a Mixed Economy.

Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 11, 2011, 2:02 a.m. EST by PatheriaE (5)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Hello all,

Watch this video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJcVvEs0bz4

I believe that the current financial crisis requires the economic policy of market regulated capitalism in the U.S. to have enhanced government supervision, as current policies on debt and lending are inadequate and lead to fiscal unaccountability. However, a very state controlled socialist approach would remove these financial instruments, subsequently constraining economic growth and sustainability. As the United States pursues recovery and sustainability following this financial crisis, mechanisms of socialism and market regulated capitalism must complement each other. Who's with me? We need to define in a very specific way how economic policy should be changed. Join this discussion.

9 Comments

9 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

I think the OP refers to the Nordic model.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

[-] 2 points by PatheriaE (5) 12 years ago

Hello. Yes, an insightful remark, I was in fact referring to a similar model for our nation as the Nordic model, but of course it must be adapted to American standards. Seeing as the Nordic model advances egalitarian policy, we should encourage such reform in America. However perhaps a slightly disputable feature of the Nordic model are its high tax rates, 51.1% of GDP in Sweden, and 43.3% in Finland, compared to 34.7% in Germany, 33.5% in Canada, and 23.6% in the U.S. I feel even if societal benefits would come of such increased tax, a general trust needs to develop between the government and the citizens. Currently, I am not trusting enough of the American government to moderate corporate lobbying to ensure the effective application of an increased tax burden. Your thoughts?

[-] 1 points by TheRoot (305) from New York, NY 12 years ago

What is there to support? It's been in flight for generations here in the US and we've been living the consequences of it- the ebb and flow of misery; and, we've been going through the motions it requires- packs of people forcing their views on other packs of people through legislation and the others countering with their own legislation, etc., etc. You have a mixed economy already. What you're saying is that you want to define very specific ways how you can get in on it. Have you ever imagined another alternative?

[-] 1 points by PatheriaE (5) 12 years ago

I have considered the socialist alternative but I believe it simply wouldn't work. Socialism doesn’t submit to fundamental characteristics of successful economies such as supply and demand, which stimulate innovation and entrepreneurship. In this manner, a capitalist economy, with necessary state regulation when suitable (such as in the case of the manipulation of derivative markets) would be favorable. Perhaps we need to increase government regulation and suppress corporate influence.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 12 years ago

Every functioning economy is part capitalist part socialist. Countries with no functioning government are close to pure capitalism --------like Congo. Countries that attempt pure socialism like Myanmar are also a mess. The problem with America's socialism right now is that it's socialism for billionaires. Our biggest social programs in the past decade give our tax money to oil companies, genetically modified corn growers, and wall street gambling addicts. The same group who gives that tax money away to billionaires is fighting as hard as they can to bring down middle class wages and benefits. It's pretty awful that our bankruptcy system is used to steal pension funds and rob small investors (American Airlines) and give the money to billionaire bond holders. Our small business people and small investors are the capitalists out there and they are having their pockets picked daily by the socialist billionaires.

[-] 1 points by PatheriaE (5) 12 years ago

I couldn't agree more. Societal benefits a new mixed american economy must be to the benefit of the broader society. For example the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which was passed in 2000 deregulated derivatives. When I describe a mixed economy I am attempting to adapt legislature to be more socialist for the benefit of the community. An example of such would be similar to Obama's Universal Healthcare bill.

[-] 2 points by demcapitalist (977) 12 years ago

It's a question of finding a good balance and then finding it again next year. In our "free market" heath care system doctors ,hospitals and pharmaceutical companies make money from selling you tests and procedures. Insurance companies make money by not providing care to sick people. There's no one in our system who is motivated by a patients health. In our welfare banking system there was another law passed in 2005 that puts derivative payoffs in a priority position in a bankruptcy. In other words AIG was allowed to sell a bunch of toxic highly leveraged derivative CDS due to the 2000 law, the 2005 law put the outcome of those risky bets ahead of citizens life, car, home insurance policies and annuity policies. Having a Goldman exec as treasury secretary who got his hands on hundreds of billions in no questions asked taxpayer funds insured that the gamblers who bought the swaps got paid 100% for their winning bets. Welfare for billionaire gamblers with middle class taxpayer funds held hostage that is our current banking system. It has not changed since 2008

[-] 1 points by PatheriaE (5) 12 years ago

Coalescing capitalist and socialist ideals would institute a self corrective economy, whose governance would solicit regulation to moderate corporate malignance and advance egalitarian entrepreneurial opportunities. Legislature would sustain economic growth by restricting corporate control of the market but simultaneously operate it as a free enterprise system. Such a protective measure could involve state published loan issuance protocol, to constrain improper loans, and its scrutiny thereof; generally governments should take evaluative measures on actions of financial institutions to propose relevant legislation.