Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gib Bogle who wrote (4627)	3/2/2006 4:45:46 PM
From: energyplay	Respond to of 218705

Yes, what would be centrist in much of the world, especailly Europe, is classified as leftist in the US. ** a crude definition A leftist in the US is someone who wants the government to do something that can be done by the private sector, other than a limited number of items enumerated in the Constitution, such as national defense, value of currency, criminal justice, etc. Doesn't matter if the private sector cost 5 times as much, or excludes certain people. Which is pretty much where most political active Americans (read: well-off people who donate to political campaigns) want it to be. *now , a whole bunch of exceptions to the above rule Crisp definitions would be difficult, as the US runs a - -large national security apparatus -modest, expensive, and peicemeal welfare state -a huge heavily subsidized educational sector -has private charities fund various cultural & philantropic activities at about 1.2 % of GDP -advances technology and conducts a low key industrial policy coordinated by the military and intelligence communities - DARPA, etc. -Achieves social policy goals indirectly by modifying the environment instead of acting directly. ALL the above activities tend to generate exceptions to the ideal of little or no government intervention in the economy, an dlow government ownership. Housing being the best example - very large tax deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes. Govenrment loan guarantees to banks with FHA and VA loans. Lower interst rates for home loans arranged by FannieMae and FreddieMac. What gets LOTS of political criticism is directly paying peoples rent, like Section 8 housing. The rationale: In the first sceanario, people with initiative and hustle who make money find it easier to buy and pay for a house. That becomes their private property asset, aliging their interests with othe rproperty owners to some degree. After the mortgage is paid off, the subsidies effectively stop. In the second, the person is dependent on govenrment forever, thier interests are aligned with the dependent class (some would say parasitic class). There is no asset ownership. Many subsidized housing builings have rules that will kick you out for even a minor drug violation. That is much harder with home ownership, you usually need to be moving quatities of drugs to lose your house (this differs by state and locale) So the virtues of independence, self-reliance, capital accumulation, hard work, etc. are reinforced in the first, and damaged in the second. In terms of the Seven deadly sins, US policy is to harness GREED to fight SLOTH. So TVA is socialist and bad, Comsat and IntelSat (both originally government sponsored companies) advance technology and are good. Again, major national goals - say a transcontiental railroad - are achieved by heavily subsidizing independent, sometimes competitive companies, instead of a single national railroad. (Union Pacific, Southern Pacific, Burlington Northern, Santa Fe railroads all competed to a degree, and most recieve giant land grants) Historically, there was only ONE working class person who was a leader in the Revolutionary War : Paul Revere, a silversmith, and he employed a number of assistants. Every other leader was essentially a rich yuppie type. Labor and the working class has a minor role in US history textbooks - considerably smaller than the reality. * So a leftist in the US is someone who wants the government to do something that can be done badly (in their view) by the private sector, and a non-leftist is someone who doesn't won't to have their taxes pay for the government to do incompetently what probably should not be done in the first place. **** Also, most US citizens who aren't at the political edges rarely think of foreign countries as having useful models for the US. The UK's National Health Service is not regarded as much of a model, and even the Canadian health system is not seen as appropriate for the US. Lots of conservatives do like Hong Kong's Tax policies. Germany's vocational and technical education system is admired in some knowledgable groups. Also their autobahn speed limits ;-) The other big dimnesion in US politics is libertarianism VS. community / morality. That's anohter topic....