According to the Council of Economic Advisors, which should be renamed the Council of Political Propagandists, Jesus would be a socialist. Didn't he say do unto others as you would that others do unto you, and it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.
As for per capita income, that's an average. If you have an economy with two people in it, one who earns a billion dollars a year and the other nothing, the average per capita income is $500 million. Far fewer Scandinavian citizens live in poverty than Americans and and life expectancy is about 3 1/2 years higher. Which would you rather have, a cheaper pickup truck or 3 1/2 years of extra life.
The dishonesty of the CEA (CPP) is mind boggling.
14
The White House Council of Economic Advisers - no longer a supposedly 'non partisan' group; now a purely propaganda outlet. Incredible how quickly the old norms are being destroyed.
5
Using the price of a pickup truck to make the U.S. look superior to Scandinavian countries is as flawed as everything else in this pile of propaganda. Are the vehicles similarly equipped? Do dealerships in Scandinavian countries have the same practice we do here of bait and switch pricing, where vehicles are advertised as costing half as much as they do when features and options are added? Note that the figures also including "operating costs" that are defined as the cost of gasoline to drive 1,000 miles a month. Do Scandinavian drivers have to travel as far as U.S. pickup owners? I doubt they do, given the price they pay for gas is approximately double the price in the States. Also noted that the White House Report based its calculation on the number of hours a family would have to work based on a single-earner household. How many of those still exist?
8
The stock market is crashing as we speak, in economic times that Trump is taking 100% credit for. What will he say if it gets much worse? If the Dems win any of Congress back, he’ll certainly be thankful to shift the blame onto them.
2
Largest single day point increase of Dow Jones:
Trump March 26 2018 up 2.8%
Obama March 23 2009 up 6.8%
Obama for the win!
Largest single day point drop of Dow Jones:
Trump owns 5 of the top 10 with the top 3 worst days by Trump
Obama has none in the top 10
Obama for the win!
Overall performance of Dow Jones since inauguration:
Trump up 23%
Obama up 39%
Obama for the win!
So much winning! Come on, Fox News, why aren't you sharing this wonderful news with your viewers?
16
The CEA used to be an institution that foreign economists looked up to, for topical and influential analysis by some of the world's best economists.
How low have they sunk.
9
Have the Republicans failed to watch the stock market this month? It's down again today, wiping out all gains for 2018.
It could well go down much farther.
The economy is doing well based on Mr. Obama's work, bailing out failing companies in a mess that happened when Mr. Bush II was in office. Mr Trump is happy to take credit for that, but it isn't his doing. The paltry tax cut did nothing for everyday people, which is why Republicans are foolishly promising another one after the election.
A country cannot run on fumes nor on huge debt. We've seen that in Europe where several countries have been in financial trouble over the past few years. Yet Republicans keep pushing tax cuts, even at the cost of human welfare and human rights.
It's not about socialism. It's about what every Libertarian claims we should be doing: taking care of each other. In very large groups, such as a country, we need to institute a middleman, in this case the government, to make sure that the poor and vulnerable are not forgotten. That's what Sanders is trying to do.
13
Projection! Again! As the stock markets sink in the October Swoon, wiping out all of 2018's gains, the Republicans need to find someone to blame for the problems they created. Such as the surge in interest rates their ill-considered tax cut spawned as the government steps up its borrowing to cover the ballooning deficit.
4
It looks as if the CEA under Trump has been taken over by some unbalanced idealogues from the Reagan era. What is the point of this report? Who spent time researching and writing this? For what purpose?
Meanwhile, the earth is running headlong into events that will have a devastating impact on economies across the world-climate change. Not a peep. I'm glad to know the President's CEA is on the job.
7
Hardly anyone I know can afford a pick up truck even if its used. So presently this economy isn't delivering pick up trucks around here either.
7
When the president is this nation's single biggest destabilizing force and the markets are tanking, what do dishonest advisors do?
Why they do as Trump does! Deflect, lie, protect the gangster administration a Congress at all costs. Conjure up the red scare, if need be, as long as America continues to believe there's absolutely no robbery in progress.
America, you're being robbed of your savings and your future, as well as your cherished freedoms.
--
'Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking' https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2ZW
11
"Socialists???"
No, the cause of the stock market crash is republicans.
3
The market has just tanked, losing all its gains for 2018. Why is trump not trumpeting how the economy is booming and the market is at its all time time?
We all saw this coming. The nation’s unstable chief executive is reflected in the behavior of the market.
Try hard to remember that with all his bluster, his casinos failed. What are the odds?
A loser from day one of his administration, he contaminated the country, which now is also a loser of its dignity, international esteem, and of that once welcoming feeling of returning to America from abroad. Now, it’s just another place on the globe.
6
Have they checked the stock market lately? The capitalists aren’t doing so well.
3
Stock market down big time again today, 6th day in a row. Most of the blame is going to tariffs, trade war uncertainties, and geopolitical climate. I think near a record drop for NASDAQ in one day.
Today's Markets U.S. Markets Closed.
DJIA
-608.01 (-2.41%)
24,583.42
NASDAQ
-329.14 (-4.43%)
7,108.40
S&P 500
-84.59 (-3.09%)
2,656.10
4
Back in the 1960s and 70s when the top tax rate was 70% and the corporate rate was 50%, average growth was over 3.5% and peak growth was 8%.
Decades later both rates are less than half of what they were then, and growth now averages less than 2%, with peak growth 5.1%.
My numbers are easy to check. Google tax rates by year since WWII, and GDP growth by year since WWII. Find the years when the tax rate as 70%, add up the annual growth rates, and divide by the number of years.
We had higher growth under stagflation than we have under supply side economics. Forty years of tax cuts and deregulation has cut average economic growth by over 40%, from 3.5% to 2%. ((2%-3.5%)/3.5% = 40%)
In all of the times that taxes were cut, it never increased growth enough to raise revenue. Even though Reagan had a ten percent cut in interest rates to help his tax cuts, he was still forced to raise taxes, just like Kansas was forced to raise taxes.
And in the 60s and 70s, we could afford to invest in humans.
Texas got telephone lines because of Johnson's "socialist" policies.
The GI Bill was sending hundreds of thousands of veterans to college for free, and millions more were going to state colleges for little more than the cost of books.
We were building the interstate highway system and numerous dams, rebuilding Europe and Japan, and funding large amounts of basic research, that companies turned to practical research to make into products.
Tax the global rich to invest in the USA!
16
Unbelievable that there can be so much canted ignorance in a state as influential as the US.
8
Here's that "missing" argument for the Democrats! That the Republicans are ready to feed Americans with any lie only to achieve their partisan objectives. And this point mixed with the right (and righteous!) indignation has to be repeated by the Democrats daily till November 6. That's how the Republicans had achieved the infamous "shellacking" in 2010. Only they lied that, in particular, the Government will take out "your Medicare" and send "death panels" to your elders, and the Democrats don't have to lie now - only to explain that Republicans' arguments are lies manufactured with a sole purpose to inject the "fear itself" into our public life.
6
I believe the issue of socialism will be a big issue in the 2020 elections. First, it appears the Republicans will maintain control or increase control of the Senate. The Democrats will probably take or control of the House, but by a thin margin. This will enrage the left wing of the Democrat Party and strengthen Ocasio and Sanders. They will drown out any apparent moderates in the Democrat party. It will be interesting.
1
Tradition, norms; why would one expect this from Trump’s Council of Economic Advisors (CEA)? Their latest 72-page report is one more distraction and deflection from meaningful policy analysis. There’s no way to honestly present good or even hopeful news about the outlook for the economy. The so-called two years of Trump boom is myth.
The vast majority of workers continue not to share in any gain from the economy’s performance. Those gains are mostly momentum from Obama’s presidency and the Fed in that period. Trump trade and Trump -Republican tax policies are now showing evidence of degrading the economy’s performance, as predicted. Debt is increasing and the labor pool is tapped out. The jitters of the stock market are too little, too late. Trump is criticizing the Fed acting responsibly. Trump’s CEA has its head buried in socialist sand instead of presenting meaningful policy alternatives. Our next best chance of that may follow the 2018 elections.
4
The new ministry of Propaganda.
13
@David Underwood So they are taking over from Fox?
Who are the members of the CEA? I could not find via the WH site.
NYT should provide, if only online.
4
Brought to you by the New Nationalist Republican Party, apparatchiks.
8
The stock market is undergoing a major crash and the GOP has control of all 3 branches of the government. Current policy is pro unfettered capitalism with no rules to stop polluters, predatory lenders and drug price gouging. Socialists? Sounds like Joe McCarthy looking under beds to me.
6
This is really getting out of hand.
2
I am originally from Sweden and I would suggest that our debate at times incorrectly mixes up the term “democratic socialism” with the similar term “social democratic”.
So when the author in the section about Sweden writes “when liberals speak fondly of democratic socialism” it should really read “when liberals speak fondly of social democratic countries”.
There is a difference between the words “socialism” and “democracy” in the two terms that deals with the form of government the two words represent and a difference between the words “social” and “socialism” in the terms where one deals with government services and the other does not.
The difference between the two terms some would say was worked out politically in Scandinavia and Europe in the 20s and defended and upheld in the 60s and the implementation of the word “social” was started in the 30s and while possibly now under stress continues to this day.
Our current debate often shortens the terms into the shorter “socialism”. This is deliberately done to confuse and to infect a valid discussion about ‘serving the citizens well’ with the negative and universally rejected concept of ‘oppressive government’. The details can be discussed but one does not go with the other. They are different.
In short:
I wish NYT uses the term “social democratic” more.
It may be of little help to him at this point but I wish Bernie start to refer to himself as “social democrat”.
There are no socialist countries in Scandinavia.
12
@Peter, I agree with you. And I also agree that Bernie, whom I much admire, should not be calling himself a "democratic socialist". When he does that he is identifying himself as a sub-type of socialist and alienating a lot of people who otherwise would support him as a "social democrat". If he were ever to be on the Democratic line for President, the Republicans would simply call him a socialist, which would quickly morph to communist. Wake up Bernie; we need you.
2
GDP growth in the 3rd quarter is down by (a median estimate of) a full point from Q2. The market is down by 6% in the last month. Is this the economic miracle that is going to keep Republicans in power after Nov 6?
4
Gosh, I have read the report which is no more than a McCarthy-like ploy just in time for the election. That the writers should have no professional reputation after issuing such a ploy is what I will remember.
Yuck.
6
Yes socialist protection measures like tariffs will crash the economy.
1
Chairman Mao warned never to go into a rainstorm without an umbrella. So did my mother. Maybe she's a closet communist.
6
The White House is just propagating propaganda now. Think that no one should lose their home because they get cancer? Suddenly you might as well be a Stalinist. Its nothing but incendiary rhetoric and its dangerous. Vote Blue.
16
Do these "economists ever read history? During the post "17 Civil War both Red & White armies confiscated peasant produce, especially in the Ukraine "bread basket" Post-Civil War, Lenin adopted the New Economic Program to coax farmers to sell or trade their produce. He died with the NEP policy still in place. Stalin forcibly collectivized agriculture and went to war with the "kulaks" (owners of more than single cows) to provide a subsidy for the First Five Year plan in 1929. He drove village based farmers off their plots, killing many and transferring a large number to his work camps--the infamous "gulags." Large state farms & collectives ("kolkhozes") frequently didn't work because the promised industrial machinery (tractors, reapers, rakes) never arrived.) this was politics not economics. Fake history .
2
Who are the authors of the document? I search the White House pages, and other sources and could not get a list of the professionals forming part of the Council of Economic advisors. In particular, I searched for economists in the group. A reasonable inquiry, since I never met a professor presenting the material in such a way.
5
Reading the article and as much of the 72 page report as I could stomach brought to mind a distant memory: the 72 page report was a sophmore’s attempt at a poorly informed term paper.
5
The WH is speaking to his uneducated & Fox News... the dems could counter back with "Nationalists" are destroying our economy and list what has happened in the last 22 months
2
Who paid for this ridiculous study? I guess we all did.
8
What country was really communist? The term is used very Russia was a Stalinist dictatorship.
1
The Council of Economic Advisors?
More like the Council of Oligarchian Lickspittals.
6
A spectre is haunting the White House.
3
We have an wildly inflated defense budget that swelled to over $750 BILLION this year, corporate welfare at its finest.
When Republicans ask "where will the money come from for Medicare for All" I say the defense budget is a good place to start.
People are funny. Republicans are hilarious. They yell and scream that they are against socialist programs, but they also yell, scream and warn the government not to mess with their Medicare and Social Security. Guess what folks. That's socialism.
Do you like to drive on Interstate highways? Like the idea of a Federal Law Enforcement Agency? Army or Navy?
Please. Here's a hilarious thought: An uninformed electorate will be duped (again) by the Con-Man-In-Chief presently sitting in the Oval Office. At some point, even his red meat supporters will have to figure out that he is a pathological liar.
8
Supply-sider and Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon used propaganda to pass his tax-cut-for-the-wealthy during the period of 1924-6, about four years before the economy collapsed. He quickly became the most hated man in America. Manipulated workers rushed to Congress, encouraging their representatives to "free up capital" of the wealthy. Five years later, they were out of work and destitute. Only "socialism" saved the poor, the farmers and the workingman, after the failures of capitalism.
2
Why don't we clear the confusion about the correct definition of the term socialism? We, economists, define socialism as "the collective ownership of the means of production". The discussion in this country is not about socialism but about the intervention of the Government in the economy. Even Adam Smith accepted it.
4
there is absolutely NO limit to the perversity of the current GOP. what will the Democrats do in response to this besides crying foul? how about detailing the history of the GOP being against EVERY social program that benefits our people, like Social Security? Use the quotes from that debate and the vote in Congress at the time to hammer home the point that the GOP stands against social justice and only for Plutocrats. why not ALWAYS refer to the GOP as Grand Old Plutocrats?
1
@edward murphy' Actually: Greedy Oligarchical Panderers
1
The greatest success of socialism has been in the health care system. This article from Vox explains why the report gets it wrong on health care.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/23/18014026/trump-social...
White House anti-socialism report inadvertently makes a case for single-payer
The Trump administration says this chart is a case against single-payer. Actually, it’s a case for it.
By Sarah Kliff
Vox
Oct 23, 2018
The chart compares wait times for seniors in countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States. It purports to show that seniors in single-payer countries wait much longer than those here in the United States.
Except, here’s the key thing it leaves out: America’s seniors are essentially in a single-payer system.
2
In August, Trish Regan on Fox News listed some "bad" things about Denmark and used Venuzuela as the logical end point for all socialist countries. Despite Sarah Huckabee's efforts, this idea did not seem to gain much traction. A new story has emerged where Sweden is praised for having turned back the socialist tide, introduced education vouchers and pursued pro-business policies. So Trish Regan was wrong and Nordic countries are not socialist after all? The object seems to be to portray Bernie Sanders and others as not being satisfied with the Nordic model; they want real socialism which (unlike Denmark and Sweden) would be really, really scary.
1
The people who watch Hannity and Carlson just need to hear that there are Middle East Terrorists infiltrating Honduran refugees once and that's enough. A retraction or a "Well I don't really have any proof" doesn't mean anything. The fear has been instilled.
Without any logic or proof, placing Mr. Sanders and Chairman Mao in the same sentence is enough for people who only want their opinions from Limbaugh and the Fox news entertainment shows.
Finally, Mao's tactics are reflected much more in Trumps war on culture and science. Someone should sue these liars for their massively funded barrage of false propaganda.
2
What is needed in the US is Social Justice.
Those who have to file W2 forms and/or who earn less than 300k should vote for the Dems. Maybe the fascination with guns, abortion or race prevent them from doing so. They really need to focus on the lousy salaries paid to the average worker in the US, who cannot afford more than bare necessities, decent health care, a home of their own or a secure retirement.
In addition, many of the under 50 year olds have college debt that crushes them. These people really need to vote out ALL of the GOP representatives on Nov 6.
3
This portrayal of the glorious success of capitalism last century leaves out a few things called slavery, colonialism, and wage slavery - the foundations that created capitalism and are now sowing its demise.
4
@Michael
As we see here there are still real believers in socialism among the NYT readers and probably among democrats candidates. So is it wrong then to simply state that they want socialism?
1
What is the matter with these people? There is such cherry picking of facts that it makes my head spin. There is no mention of the difference in infant mortality rates, educational excellence in primary grades, or the extremely progressive income tax rates in the U.S. during the post WWII era. No trickle down economics at work then or ever, I might add - it's fiction!
Really - this is another example of the disgraceful approach this administration takes to advance themselves and denigrate anyone who differs from of their viewpoint. Shame on you.
5
Well, we now see that, should the Dems gain control of the House, the GOP will blame the Dems for the much predicted drastic stock market “correction” next August.
3
@John Brews ..✅✅i The correction is happening right now, at this very moment, while the GOP is running the show.
The GOP is killing the economy by making the Fed raise rates to quell inflation caused by asset run ups from the tax cut to the rich and corporations. The middle class got nothing except higher mortgage rates and so now the middle class will have to reign in spending....nice job GOP! Government of Putin.
3
Perhaps the NYT could spend a little print exploring the differences between socialism and social democracy. I find almost no Americans I talk to understand the difference yet it is absolutely crucial. Trump couldn’t spin his lies if the distinction were well understood.
3
New York Times: why are you running so a ridiculous headline?
I have many progressive friends and absolutely none of them think socialism is the way to go. C'mon, you are just supporting the idiots in the white house and congress, who we desperately need to vote out.
8
The CEA is a bit over-the-top here, but some of its points will resonate with average middle class or hoping-to-be-middle class folks. Most Americans accept the tradeoff of less taxes = fewer government services. I personally favor some form of national health insurance, but I would prefer to pay for it with cuts in other areas of government spending. Anyway, there's no question that Sanders is a socialist and Warren at least a quasi-socialist, and that implementation of their agenda would adversely affect not just the rich, but middle class families as well. Democrats can run on the Sanders-Warren agenda forever, and keep losing forever. And it looks like they just might do so.
BTW, NYT readers: the price of a pickup truck is very important in a place like rural Vermont. If the Democrats aren't careful, even this bluest of blue states could turn red someday.
@Jon Harrison, Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist, so where's the big surprise? BTW, do you know the definition of "quasi"? If Warren is this type of socialist, what is she?
@cdd: quasi: partly or almost.
Yes, if we don’t continue shoveling money to the wealthy, things will change.
4
The one truth about Democrats: Elizabeth Warren is a limited knowledge lawyer. Proof: She thinks corporations pay taxes and hence proves that she cannot read a financial statement which proves that those taxes are just another cost and will always be 100% paid for by the company’s customers who in the end of the production cycle are always, and I mean always, the consumers.
The one truth about Republicans: The taxation system is out of control and we must reduce taxes today. The governments must be downsized in order to not bankrupt the nation in the next decade. Hence, the governments must get out of the national roadway system and follow Michigan’s approach and let the roads fall apart because then we could go back to the good old days and use the horse and carriage methods for getting around.
Well, there are a lot more truths which I can highlight but when will this nation be ready to actually fix our governments via a new voting system where the taxpayers will make all the choices for their government programs using a simple straight tax system where they are made aware of the real costs for every government program? Neither party wants this as they would lose their powers as well!
1
@David Gage Corporations (at least in theory) pay taxes on PROFITS. Since profits happen BEFORE the tax rate is applied, consumers have already purchased the products of the company and so cannot be paying the taxes that come after the fact of the profits made from sales.
@David Gage
Too bad your claim has no basis in economic reality. Evidently you are a limited knowledge commenter.
And spare us the supply-side nonsense. It's been debunked too many times to count.
@steven
20-30 years post-WW II is an economic period that’s a good model for a well performing economy for all.
Interesting comparisions. Not many people would bye a mentioned pickup here. Probably many people preferred some Japanese. Price would be lower, fuel comsumption less etc. And if you use the car in business the VAT is sent back to you, so the price would be 25% lower concerning the car mentioned and maybe 40% less when buying japanese car. You should expand this to other comparisions.
Then, the college and university education is not free here, students are paid for their studies 200€-300€ a month. And if you need loan the government guarantees it. And of course you get some compensation for your rent. Well, this is not socialism, here everybody really has a chance.
6
I will keep repeating this until I'm dead or until we get single-payer health-care or something close to that. Employers(especially big ones) want employees who are beholden to them for their healthcare. This keeps handcuffs on them.
Single-payer will liberate employee's financially to pursue their own dreams. They will become free-agents, entrepreneurs, etc. For example: a blue-collar worker could work two jobs; one for 20 hours that pays them $35 and hour and another for 20 hours that pays them $20. They and America will prosper. Just not company’s and their owners as much.
It will also be a great life lesson for Americans.
10
Socialism works great! Socialism is wonderful! Socialism is absolutely necessary for the economy!
Just ask any pro sports team owner, any banker, any real estate developer, any pharmaceutical executive, any executive relocating a facility, any farmer or rancher. They all will tell you that socialism is the best thing since sliced bread.
Pro sports: Socialism builds stadiums and arenas.
Bankers: Socialism pays for bailouts.
Real estate: Socialism provides all the development subsidies. Tiny Trump can tell you all about it! In detail!
Pharma: Socialism pays for R&D (see: Bayh-Dole Act).
Relocations: Socialism give tax abatements and direct subsidies.
Farmers and ranchers: Socialism gives subsidized land, subsidized water, subsidized grazing, subsidized loans, subsidized crop insurance, to name a few.
Yes, socialism is wonderful! But just not for the bottom 90 percent.
41
I didn't see it called out in this article, but I'm sure the report references the super high taxes needed to support Medicare for All. I've seen it in many articles lately from both left leaning and right leaning authors. What I rarely see mentioned is the fact that, yes, your taxes may go up by, say, $2000 per year, but you will no longer pay health insurance premiums and co-pays which are almost always way more - due to increased overhead, salaries for executives of all of the different insurance companies and profits needed for these companies. That should be included EVERYTIME increased taxes are mentioned.
41
The report leaves out that people in Scandinavian countries actually have enough money to buy pickups if they want to. Why? Well, free health care (in some cases also free dental), free college tuitions, and free or strongly subsidised child day care leaves you a lot of leftover disposable income. Try it - you might like it!
64
There is no 'free' in socialism. Someone always pays. It's just dispersed differently.
@Gary
The report also fails to acknowledge that those Socialist Scandanavian countries live safely under the Nuclear blanket that is paid fir by the American Taxpayers.
If the Socialist Scandanavians had to pay for their own defense, their Spcialist regimes would collapse.
@Jim Jones
Defense against what? Donald says Putin's his friend, so where's the threat? We're the ones spending billions on weapons that either don't work as promised or we don't really need; you want them to help foot the bill?
It seems a thought needs to be completed:
“Congressional Democrats Want to Take Money From Hardworking Americans to Fund Failed Socialist Policies
whereas Congressional Republicans Want to Take Money From Hardworking Americans to Fund Failed Trickle Down Policies.”
For Republicans socialism is not taking from the poor and middle and giving to the wealthy and corporations.
Socialism is not giving wealthy farmers subsidies or paying them not to plant their fields.
Socialism is not bailing out the financial industry with tax payer dollars.
Socialism is not providing that the class of people called real estate developers are specifically supported under the new tax codes.
Nor is socialism funneling money from the wealthier areas of the country and providing it to the poorer areas that, can you imagine, happen to vote Republican.
29
This report is encouraging in how it shows our friends in the Republican party are so scared of rising Socialist sentiment they have to relate Sanders to Lenin, Mao and Marx, instead of FDR.
13
We all know it is nothing but lies and the shameless Republicans are tools of the corporatocracy. The issue is by what means can we get voters to understand that.
19
I give them credit for having an idea what "communism" is and isn't. I don't think even one in 10 Trump supporters do. On the other hand "everything we don't like is socialism" is very strong here.
And sure, the US has greater average per-capita income, but lower median per-capita income - meaning the average guy is poorer. The average wealth of a Billionaire and 999 beggars is still more than a million - the median wealth is near zero.
Article after article shows a significant portion of the US population don't have 1000 dollars in savings for a medical emergency. Income may be high and taxes low, but after healthcare, education and rent are taken into account the US is still worse off.
42
A lot of our poor people are poor due to lifelong bad decisions. Buying on time with huge interest rates, gambling etc. Socialism tempers bad decisions by forcing policies on the irresponsible ones like social security savings. But this comes at a cost.
If you're productive and responsible, you'll be better off in the USA. If not, you'll be better off in a socialistic country.
Old trick, define the terms at play in the worst possible light and then rail against them. Your opponents are then forced to backtrack to “definitions” while you cry havoc.
9
"The word “socialism” appears 144 times — on average, twice a page." Meaning that it reads like a leftist screed of the past with the word "imperialism", whether it was the Daily Worker or some New Left rag. We used to mock the hard core lefties by counting the number of times the "I" word was used in a given article. After the tally was done, one of us would announce "a new record! 'Imperialism' appears 144 times in this story. Good job, guys!"
Now we have the hard core righties running things in DC and there's nothing funny about this report. The follow-up is even more cynical with their "hard working Americans' pandering as if they really care about the tiers below the top 10%. Again, welcome to the emerging American banana republic.
7
Well, it is difficult to add anything to this article except to point out that it well illustrates the blatant dishonesty, ignorance, and outright stupidity of Republican economists and, indeed, of the Republican party's position on economics.
For example, how can they oppose a system of healthcare that has delivered better care at much, much lower cost in other countries? One would expect a real conservative to support an efficient system, but these folk's only aim is to support their enablers, the Rich who have bought them lock, stock, and barrel.
17
This is exactly why I said over and over that Sanders would never have won the election against Trump had he won the Democratic nomination in reply to all those who commented "Sanders would have beat Trump if only Hillary hadn't cheated".
He would have been tarred as an extremist, a socialist, and Trump would have easily won. Nor was he cheated.
5
The European Union currently being bashed by this administration has benefitted from democratic socialism to the extent of unions and free healthcare and affordable education for all. Why doesn't the Council of Economic Advisors mention them?
Because they are wedded to the wolves of Wall St--that's why. Historically these speculative capitalists have deployed our diplomatic and militaristic might to squelch any democratic socialist movement wherever it appears. In Latin America, Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East, they are like vultures ready to strike.
Obviously a spark of democratic socialism is growing in America today. We must vote and make it glow.
11
The socialists are coming and they are in a caravan,they hate america,the flag,baseball,apple pie,video games,micky mouse and every t hinges that made america great. I am twisting my Maga bumper sticker in revulsion and anger.
3
Socialists and Democrats
are two of the same kind of cats;
they may start to purr
but they will transfer
your property into their own hats!
Ah, good old fashioned red baiting. We also know that "Democrats create bombs. Republicans create jobs." If a Blue Wave gets pulled down by a Red Undertow, could a revival of the House Un-American Activities Committee be in the offing?
5
Is anyone still giving any credence to reports and press releases coming out of the White House? Is the White House our best source for news?
7
@Lynn
No, it's our best source for late-night comedy.
1
I am also glad this report was published.
To me it's a bad attempt to scare the wits out of folk.
In essence it seems to support big and biggest business as a good thing for most folk.
What it doesn't talk about is how big business behavior had a severe negative impact on the public and employees and gave the leaders and owners a luxurious life.
The abuses of business was how the government got involved in regulation and mandatory guidelines for the working class.
It's transparent to me what it's saying.
Pickup trucks really Right!!!
3
Few people understand the difference between a Social Democracy and a Socialist government. Socialism advocates for no private property ownership or private business ownership. Absolutely no one is suggesting the United States embrace that form of government regardless of what the White House says or what Republicans claim. It's absurd and will never happen short of a collapse of government and a bloody revolution wherein every small business, large corporation and homeowner agrees to part ways with their wealth and homes.
As with all things Republican, the idea is ridiculous.
27
@Robert Westwind writes, " Socialism advocates for no private property ownership or private business ownership."
This is not the usual definition. Socialism advocates to ownership of the major means of production by the government or the workers. It thus applies to steel mills, but not to mom and pop groceries.
Communism advocates for no private property ownership or private business ownership.
5
@Len Charlap
In the UK, where doctors often refer to themselves as "proud socialist," the National Health Service provides almost complete health care free, but patients also have the choice of going to private doctors.
Controversially, the Thatcher administration tried contracting out NHS services to private suppliers, but in my understanding, it didn't save any money or deliver any better services.
Wealthier people in England tell me that they get supplemental health insurance, usually through their employers, but readers who know more than me can explain that.
The UK is a good laboratory of socialism vs. free market. Thatcher and her party privatized many industries, but most of them did worse. When they privatized the water system, everybody's water bills went up. When they privatized the rail system, the railroads discontinued lines that weren't used often enough to be profitable.
So, basically, they want to get rid of Social Security, Medicare, free public education, and throw up told in every freeway? Cool.
1
I don't understand why socialism, or a modified form of socialism, should cause our booming economy to falter. We would still have the same number of people buying all the things we buy today. Those goods and services would continue to be supplied as they are today. The only difference is that there would be no billionaires, and the money that these billionaires effectively remove from the economy would be distributed to the people. Everything would continue as it does today except everyone except the billionaires would have more money.
5
@Jim Tagley
Socialism would redistribute things. For example, the $20 billion that we spend on the health insurance industry would no longer be necessary, and the people who fill out insurance forms and argue with policy holders all day would have to find new jobs.
Perhaps they could be retrained to provide actual health services, like occupational therapy, or patient education, or physician assistants, or social workers. They could go back to school.
Would you rather spend your life filling out forms, or teaching elderly stoke patients how to do the activities of daily living again?
Remember, the health insurance industry as we know it doesn't exist in Canada, and they get along fine.
12
Why skip sround a definition. Socialism is where government owns the means of production. Medicare is a government insurance program, not ownership of medical care.
5
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but the economy isn't booming.
A booming economy is one the continues to climb and if you look at ours it's going up and down and not in a small way.
The current administration's trade war and tariffs are destabilizing the market and that's not good for anyone.
32
@BTO: When I hear politicians and crowing over the state of the economy, I remember back to 2006. We had seen tax cuts and deregulation. We saw lower unemployment, record corporate profits and booming stock and real estate markets. What could possibly go wrong? Well for one, higher interest rates were slowing housing sales (sound familiar?) and a couple of years later we all know how things turned out.
4
I’ll take socialism over the plutocracy we have now.
59
I'm glad this report came out.