Trump’s brand of US capitalism faces ‘socialist’ backlash from conservatives

Comments

• Lovstuhagen@hilariouschaos.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  There are certainly aspects of a planned economy, which I think is a more accurate way of describing it without calling it socialist.

  Protectionism and government ownership of strategic economic assets all make sense, and they are certainly not capitalist in nature.

  I support these policies, by the way. They seem necessary.

  I also wish that the left was more open to the fact that right wing populism should be cooperated with on some fiscal issues, if only in a limited capacity.

  source

  • Amoxtli@thelemmy.club ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Planned economies are not efficient. The problem is using money to prop up a failing company. Why does a failing company get propped up while others who have better products get less help? This is anti-meritocratic, and would be considered corrupt as we see in other economies. Intel is not strategic, it is a failing company with inferior products. Capitalism is the survival of the fittest.

    source

    • Lovstuhagen@hilariouschaos.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      I think this is all really complicated, though. We have to also consider that most countries practice protectionism and have subsidies and other benefits given to their companies to try to enable them to gain some kind of competitive edge. This is not only because they want to profit from the hard cash inflow of successful industry and major commercial endeavors, but also simply because of the fact that they benefit very much from having greater amounts of their people employed.

      One of the ironies about this, too, is how a lot of formerly Communist/Socialist states benefited immensely from their period under a planned economy by having a centralized force bring in the industry and infrastructure necessary to have a superior private market.

      I am not saying Capitalism is wrong, per se, I think their descriptions of the free market are generally good… I am just saying that socialism actually also makes a lot of sense for the developing world and for nations that do not have the edge to be competitive internationally.

      That’s why you see it everywhere and there really is no such thing as a ‘free market,’ and so designing your economy around a free market is just shooting yourself in the foot.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  I’m glad we’re nationalizing companies that would benefit from competition and privatizing those that can’t.

  source

  • Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    We aren’t. They bought shares in the company with chip money. This isn’t nationalizing a company. Obama did the same thing with bailout money. It’s how we secure the loan.

    source
  • Amoxtli@thelemmy.club ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Intel is losing to competition. Other companies produce better chips.

    source

    • Chucklestheclown@hilariouschaos.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Intels problems are self defeating inflicted. That’s why Intel keeps losing

      source
    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Intel has a good process and good-enough packaging tech. They have good IP to combine.

      They have all the pieces they need to be alright if they can just stop the internal corporate Game of Thrones, and stop footgunning themselves.

      source

      • -> View More Comments