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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (428571)	10/20/2008 3:14:20 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570492

For most people we are talking less and we're not talking socialism. Socialism might be some crazy administration nationalizing huge mortgage companies, investment banks and insurance companies like they do in Russia. That could never happen in this country, Republicans like Bush would never allow it. They haven't "nationalized" anything. I'm not happy about what they've done, but that is not socialism. Obama's plan to take money from the oil companies and give it to the poor is far closer to nationalizing production than anything the Democrats & Republicans in Congress have done (oh, you forgot the Dems in control of Congress drafted that legislation. How convenient.) The key components of socialism? The belief that capitalism is unfair and results in a concentration of wealth amongst a small segment, and the advocacy of wealth redistribution. Sound familiar? It should. That's Obama's entire economic platform. Nationalization is a central component of socialism, no doubt -- but Bush was obviously not attempting to move toward socialism, he was trying to solve a problem (although for the Democratically controlled congress, could be socialism is more of a motivation...). If you think Obama isn't a socialist you have to ignorant or stupid. Your choice.