We are seeing what happens when government abdicates its role as regulator allowing catpialism to become completely predatory. Its called neoliberalism and it has been in effect for half a century and the damage is proportionate and exponential.
>>"We are seeing what happens when government abdicates its role as regulator..."
Robert, I believe this "regulatory role of the government" was never intended to actually regulate capitalism (or serve the interests of proletariats and lumperproletariats) - not even when the US constitution was written. The government and corporations are mixed together like salt-and-water. The regulation that does happen is a farce. But its more than that. Government regulation has come to mean "how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class (power elite, oligarchs, bourgeoisie)?"
I think you're white washing regulations that have been good. It's the same type of white washing when the advocates of Privatizing public works - claim it will be more efficient and lead to a better outcome - when it has been well documented to rarely be the case.
This blind belief that any kind of regulatory control must be bad - and government by default is bad - is hogwash. There are plenty of examples throughout the world where a country and its citizens are thriving because government plays a key role. For example UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE - which the right-wing with all the anti-government rhetoric has been vociferously against now my ENTIRE FUCKING LIFE here in the United States. And ordinary Americans should be sick of this continuing ideological garbage - paid for by the obscenely rich. Americans deserve a Universal Health Care system and fuck anti-government half-truth white washing bullshit.
Jamenta - again you are engaging in emotional rants instead of attempting to understand what is actually being said.
Let me expand and explain how government works in conjunction with private multi-national corporations & entities to subvert support for the common man and democracy. (and how "regulation" fits into this framework). Maybe that will help you understand my comment above:
Quotes:
(1) "The federal government is replete with supportive programs—subsidies, research, promotional, contracts, tax privileges, protections from competition—which flow regularly into the corporate mission of profit and sales maximization." - RALPH NADER (Introduction to Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen, America, Inc. (New York: Dial Press, 1971)
(2) "Both welfare spending and warfare spending have a two-fold nature: the welfare system not only politically contains the surplus population but also expands demand and domestic markets. And the warfare system not only keeps foreign rivals at bay and inhibits the development of world revolution (thus keeping labor power, raw materials and markets in the capitalist orbit) but also helps to stave off economic stagnation at home." - JAMES O’CONNOR (Fiscal Crisis of the Stale (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1973))
State-supported capitalism has been imperfectly labeled by many popular terms which, while containing particles of truth, conceal the genuine nature of the new business-government relationships: “state capitalism,” “welfare state,” “warfare-welfare state,” and “mixed economy.” The power of the concept “state capitalism” (or “state monopoly capitalism”) is that it stresses the alliance of powerful capitalist forces with the state. But it greatly underestimates the extent to which big business operates on its own, both without the state and beyond the reach of the state. In no country of advanced capitalism is business completely controlled by the state; the state, rather, is subject to business control, although not completely. The relationship is more that of a business-government partnership, with business often serving as the senior, although sometimes silent, partner.
In a broader sense, the “welfare state” idea is fundamentally misleading. The welfare provided is not the general well-being of the people. It is welfare, rather, in the narrow and restrictive sense of public assistance to the poor and other programs (usually financed by the lower and middle classes themselves) to take the rough edge off capitalist exploitation, promote docility among the exploited, and thereby help form a more perfect capitalism.
Very often, Big Welfare (i.e. by the Government) gives handouts to Big Business from the normal peacetime activities of the capitalist state. Although it is perfectly true, as conservative economists insist, that “there are no free lunches,” there are scores of corporate “free lunchers” who manage to get other people—via government intervention—to pick up all or part of the bill. (i.e. socialism for the rich and unknowingly supported by the working class people). Here are some examples from the US:
• The Federal Reserve system, which supports bankers by maintaining high interest rates and bailing out bank failures.
• The nominally progressive federal tax system, which has become a labyrinth of special loopholes that provide many billions of “tax expenditures” (indirect subsidies) for specific companies or groups.
• The Treasury Department, which maintains huge interest-free deposits in large banks while at the same time paying the bank’s interest on money lent to the government.
• Billions in direct subsidies that are paid to airlines, the merchant marine, agribusiness and others.
• Federal expenditures for scientific research and development, which have subsidized the growth of capitalism’s technological reserve.
• Government guarantees that protect many billions of bank mortgages and foreign investments against losses.
(X) • Government regulations that give the large banks control over the investment of the pension funds of most labor unions.
(X) • So-called regulatory commissions, which help maintain the oligarchic power of the communication media, public utilities, and major transportation interests.
• Government forays into wage-price controls, or “incomes policy,” which are used to keep wages down or squeeze out business competitors.
Again, in terms of "regulation", pay special attention to the points above marked by "X".
So jamenta - you land up making all these assumptions and hurling accusations without understanding the depths and nuances of "how the regulatory system works" in the US.
Also, you continue making strawman arguments like "blind belief that any kind of regulatory control must be bad" and "government by default is bad" and then continue on your emotional and expletive laden rant.
jamenta - I don't know if you are having a bad day or something, but maybe spend some time understanding what is being said rather than imagining things in your mind and then argueing against those imaginations?
Dude I don't have time really to argue over such right-wing bullshit like what you said in your original post: "The regulation that does happen is a farce."
"how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class"
Which is a perverted, pseudo-intellectual take on governmental regulations and their actual intent.
You want me to engage with your long winded anti-regulation rant here that goes on and on about how bad the government is with its regulatory control - pretending that nothing good has ever come out of regulations. Or your implied nothing good can come out of it - which is intellectual garbage.
And I suppose then you want me to counter your argument with a long list of my own demonstrating some of the obvious benefits of regulation. Like maybe quote Upton Sinclair on meat industry regulation. Or cite Standard Oil for monopoly regulation. Or perhaps you want me to discuss rules in congress regarding Filibuster "regulations". Or maybe you want me to cite use of public land regulations. Or maybe talk about regulations of machine guns or ownership of M1 Tanks. Or maybe we should talk about regulations on price fixing, or automobile safety. Or maybe I should bring up how drinkable the water is in Flint Michigan. Or maybe we really should talk about regulations of billionaire sponsored think tanks with the assholes that are hired to pervert social media. Or maybe we should talk about rules (laws) regulations of the deep state to stop them from torturing some folks, and spying on everyone. Because it sure the fuck isn't going to happen spontaneously with corporations or the rich - they'll just spy on us more Mr. shithead Chang.
Or maybe, maybe you can fuck all the way off with your pseudo-intellectual anti-government, anti-regulation spewing that shows a complete lack of objectivity because you are indoctrinated up to your ass with your right-wing propaganda bullshit - hook, line and sinker.
jamenta - you're missing the point (by a large extent) - and I have been trying to explain to you about some of the nuanced perspectives needed to understand the "role" and "implementation" of regulation by US organizations (either public or private. It seems that for a multitude of reasons, we are unable to communicate on the topic. (And in case you still don't get where I'm coming from - we are on the same side).
Maybe I need to explain things better, and hope that it will help in clearing up the confusion:
(1) Regulation is needed (and in fact is essential) for the proper functioning of any decently sized social structure.
(2) Without adequate regulation, there would be chaos - and we would have a system of social darwinism - i.e. "might is right".
Such a "might-is-right" system - in the absence of regulation - will collapse under its own weight - regardless of the political system (i.e. regulation is needed in capitalism, communism, socialism, and any other isms you can think off).
(3) The point of contention is NOT that regulation is needed and required - it is that the "kind of regulation" implemented is of paramount importance. Also, who is doing the regulating? Who are the overseers? Who is responsible for designing these regulations? What are the motives and who are the beneficiaries of the policies enacted? The devil is in the details.
(4) Regulation is needed in protecting the rights and interests of the 98% from the inbuilt systemic abuses of the 2% in our current capitalistic society. BUT - the kind of regulation implemented is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. A large part of the regulatory mechanism of the US Government has been co-opted by the "power elite" (oligarchs, billionaires, etc.) as a successful strategy of maintaining the status quo.
My statement "regulation that does happen is a farce" is indicative of ineffective and inadequate regulation. Not only is there an "under-regulation" problem in the US, there is a "wrong kind of regulation" problem. Many of the regulatory policies are designed to serve the interests of the "power elite". Such regulatory policies need to be re-worked to serve the interests of the 98%. i.e. there is a "regulatory capture" issue in the US.
My statement >>Government regulation has come to mean "how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class (power elite, oligarchs, bourgeoisie)?" means exactly that - that Government regulation has been co-opted by the interests of the 2% (based on the ineffective and inadequate regulation policies enacted by the US Government).
So what are some of the possible solutions?:
(1) More regulation - but not just any kind of regulation - it needs to be the right kind.
(2) Disallow "self-regulation" - which is a farce, a subterfuge, a trick - perpetrated so as to circumvent the "real benefits of regulation".
Many others, but this is not the place to elaborate on them...
We are on the same side. The sad part is that your emotional reactions are preventing you from digging deeper into the nuances of "regulation", instead prefering to bask in the comfort of simplistic black/white thinking about regulation/no regulation.
If you are interested in gaining a better understanding of "regulation" (that both you and I agree are indispensable for the proper functioning of society), then I suggest checking out resources (and books) on pros-and-cons of different methods of regulation (in the US) instead of arguing against a point that no one is making.
We are seeing what happens when government abdicates its role as regulator allowing catpialism to become completely predatory. Its called neoliberalism and it has been in effect for half a century and the damage is proportionate and exponential.
For anyone who wants to follow up on Robert's point:
Ben Norton
https://www.youtube.com/@GeopoliticalEconomyReport
Richard Wolff
https://www.youtube.com/@democracyatwrk
Aaron Good
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDAi0NdlN8hNArLl765PXe8tsTKmOciGL
Michael Hudson
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDAi0NdlN8hMl9DkPLikDDGccibhYHnDP
Thanks John, great links to follow!
>>"We are seeing what happens when government abdicates its role as regulator..."
Robert, I believe this "regulatory role of the government" was never intended to actually regulate capitalism (or serve the interests of proletariats and lumperproletariats) - not even when the US constitution was written. The government and corporations are mixed together like salt-and-water. The regulation that does happen is a farce. But its more than that. Government regulation has come to mean "how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class (power elite, oligarchs, bourgeoisie)?"
I think you're white washing regulations that have been good. It's the same type of white washing when the advocates of Privatizing public works - claim it will be more efficient and lead to a better outcome - when it has been well documented to rarely be the case.
This blind belief that any kind of regulatory control must be bad - and government by default is bad - is hogwash. There are plenty of examples throughout the world where a country and its citizens are thriving because government plays a key role. For example UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE - which the right-wing with all the anti-government rhetoric has been vociferously against now my ENTIRE FUCKING LIFE here in the United States. And ordinary Americans should be sick of this continuing ideological garbage - paid for by the obscenely rich. Americans deserve a Universal Health Care system and fuck anti-government half-truth white washing bullshit.
Jamenta - again you are engaging in emotional rants instead of attempting to understand what is actually being said.
Let me expand and explain how government works in conjunction with private multi-national corporations & entities to subvert support for the common man and democracy. (and how "regulation" fits into this framework). Maybe that will help you understand my comment above:
Quotes:
(1) "The federal government is replete with supportive programs—subsidies, research, promotional, contracts, tax privileges, protections from competition—which flow regularly into the corporate mission of profit and sales maximization." - RALPH NADER (Introduction to Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen, America, Inc. (New York: Dial Press, 1971)
(2) "Both welfare spending and warfare spending have a two-fold nature: the welfare system not only politically contains the surplus population but also expands demand and domestic markets. And the warfare system not only keeps foreign rivals at bay and inhibits the development of world revolution (thus keeping labor power, raw materials and markets in the capitalist orbit) but also helps to stave off economic stagnation at home." - JAMES O’CONNOR (Fiscal Crisis of the Stale (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1973))
State-supported capitalism has been imperfectly labeled by many popular terms which, while containing particles of truth, conceal the genuine nature of the new business-government relationships: “state capitalism,” “welfare state,” “warfare-welfare state,” and “mixed economy.” The power of the concept “state capitalism” (or “state monopoly capitalism”) is that it stresses the alliance of powerful capitalist forces with the state. But it greatly underestimates the extent to which big business operates on its own, both without the state and beyond the reach of the state. In no country of advanced capitalism is business completely controlled by the state; the state, rather, is subject to business control, although not completely. The relationship is more that of a business-government partnership, with business often serving as the senior, although sometimes silent, partner.
In a broader sense, the “welfare state” idea is fundamentally misleading. The welfare provided is not the general well-being of the people. It is welfare, rather, in the narrow and restrictive sense of public assistance to the poor and other programs (usually financed by the lower and middle classes themselves) to take the rough edge off capitalist exploitation, promote docility among the exploited, and thereby help form a more perfect capitalism.
Very often, Big Welfare (i.e. by the Government) gives handouts to Big Business from the normal peacetime activities of the capitalist state. Although it is perfectly true, as conservative economists insist, that “there are no free lunches,” there are scores of corporate “free lunchers” who manage to get other people—via government intervention—to pick up all or part of the bill. (i.e. socialism for the rich and unknowingly supported by the working class people). Here are some examples from the US:
• The Federal Reserve system, which supports bankers by maintaining high interest rates and bailing out bank failures.
• The nominally progressive federal tax system, which has become a labyrinth of special loopholes that provide many billions of “tax expenditures” (indirect subsidies) for specific companies or groups.
• The Treasury Department, which maintains huge interest-free deposits in large banks while at the same time paying the bank’s interest on money lent to the government.
• Billions in direct subsidies that are paid to airlines, the merchant marine, agribusiness and others.
• Federal expenditures for scientific research and development, which have subsidized the growth of capitalism’s technological reserve.
• Government guarantees that protect many billions of bank mortgages and foreign investments against losses.
(X) • Government regulations that give the large banks control over the investment of the pension funds of most labor unions.
(X) • So-called regulatory commissions, which help maintain the oligarchic power of the communication media, public utilities, and major transportation interests.
• Government forays into wage-price controls, or “incomes policy,” which are used to keep wages down or squeeze out business competitors.
Again, in terms of "regulation", pay special attention to the points above marked by "X".
So jamenta - you land up making all these assumptions and hurling accusations without understanding the depths and nuances of "how the regulatory system works" in the US.
Also, you continue making strawman arguments like "blind belief that any kind of regulatory control must be bad" and "government by default is bad" and then continue on your emotional and expletive laden rant.
jamenta - I don't know if you are having a bad day or something, but maybe spend some time understanding what is being said rather than imagining things in your mind and then argueing against those imaginations?
Dude I don't have time really to argue over such right-wing bullshit like what you said in your original post: "The regulation that does happen is a farce."
"how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class"
Which is a perverted, pseudo-intellectual take on governmental regulations and their actual intent.
You want me to engage with your long winded anti-regulation rant here that goes on and on about how bad the government is with its regulatory control - pretending that nothing good has ever come out of regulations. Or your implied nothing good can come out of it - which is intellectual garbage.
And I suppose then you want me to counter your argument with a long list of my own demonstrating some of the obvious benefits of regulation. Like maybe quote Upton Sinclair on meat industry regulation. Or cite Standard Oil for monopoly regulation. Or perhaps you want me to discuss rules in congress regarding Filibuster "regulations". Or maybe you want me to cite use of public land regulations. Or maybe talk about regulations of machine guns or ownership of M1 Tanks. Or maybe we should talk about regulations on price fixing, or automobile safety. Or maybe I should bring up how drinkable the water is in Flint Michigan. Or maybe we really should talk about regulations of billionaire sponsored think tanks with the assholes that are hired to pervert social media. Or maybe we should talk about rules (laws) regulations of the deep state to stop them from torturing some folks, and spying on everyone. Because it sure the fuck isn't going to happen spontaneously with corporations or the rich - they'll just spy on us more Mr. shithead Chang.
Or maybe, maybe you can fuck all the way off with your pseudo-intellectual anti-government, anti-regulation spewing that shows a complete lack of objectivity because you are indoctrinated up to your ass with your right-wing propaganda bullshit - hook, line and sinker.
jamenta - you're missing the point (by a large extent) - and I have been trying to explain to you about some of the nuanced perspectives needed to understand the "role" and "implementation" of regulation by US organizations (either public or private. It seems that for a multitude of reasons, we are unable to communicate on the topic. (And in case you still don't get where I'm coming from - we are on the same side).
Maybe I need to explain things better, and hope that it will help in clearing up the confusion:
(1) Regulation is needed (and in fact is essential) for the proper functioning of any decently sized social structure.
(2) Without adequate regulation, there would be chaos - and we would have a system of social darwinism - i.e. "might is right".
Such a "might-is-right" system - in the absence of regulation - will collapse under its own weight - regardless of the political system (i.e. regulation is needed in capitalism, communism, socialism, and any other isms you can think off).
(3) The point of contention is NOT that regulation is needed and required - it is that the "kind of regulation" implemented is of paramount importance. Also, who is doing the regulating? Who are the overseers? Who is responsible for designing these regulations? What are the motives and who are the beneficiaries of the policies enacted? The devil is in the details.
(4) Regulation is needed in protecting the rights and interests of the 98% from the inbuilt systemic abuses of the 2% in our current capitalistic society. BUT - the kind of regulation implemented is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. A large part of the regulatory mechanism of the US Government has been co-opted by the "power elite" (oligarchs, billionaires, etc.) as a successful strategy of maintaining the status quo.
My statement "regulation that does happen is a farce" is indicative of ineffective and inadequate regulation. Not only is there an "under-regulation" problem in the US, there is a "wrong kind of regulation" problem. Many of the regulatory policies are designed to serve the interests of the "power elite". Such regulatory policies need to be re-worked to serve the interests of the 98%. i.e. there is a "regulatory capture" issue in the US.
My statement >>Government regulation has come to mean "how do you regulate a population whose interests are diametrically opposed to the interests of the capital class (power elite, oligarchs, bourgeoisie)?" means exactly that - that Government regulation has been co-opted by the interests of the 2% (based on the ineffective and inadequate regulation policies enacted by the US Government).
So what are some of the possible solutions?:
(1) More regulation - but not just any kind of regulation - it needs to be the right kind.
(2) Disallow "self-regulation" - which is a farce, a subterfuge, a trick - perpetrated so as to circumvent the "real benefits of regulation".
Many others, but this is not the place to elaborate on them...
We are on the same side. The sad part is that your emotional reactions are preventing you from digging deeper into the nuances of "regulation", instead prefering to bask in the comfort of simplistic black/white thinking about regulation/no regulation.
If you are interested in gaining a better understanding of "regulation" (that both you and I agree are indispensable for the proper functioning of society), then I suggest checking out resources (and books) on pros-and-cons of different methods of regulation (in the US) instead of arguing against a point that no one is making.
I'm not missing anything here.
It's always the same fucking debate with know-it-all (Libertarian loving) assholes like you Chang. Taxes, Regulation and Anti-Government.
It's never about Endless War, the Filthy Rich, and the Working Poor.
Fuck off.
I suspect "fascism" would be better ... but
- I don't know anything about neoliberalism;
- see "Why You Should Stop Using the Concepts "Left-wing" and "Right-wing"".
https://whatdoino.substack.com/p/why-you-should-stop-using-the-concepts-a49
Neoliberalism is economic fascism
Thank you!
(It seems a remarkably inappropriate name for it)!
An excellent article.
A companion piece to Snowden's article on Apophenia
https://edwardsnowden.substack.com/p/conspiracy-pt2
Sadly snowden hasn't been writing since 2021
Thanks for the support and the link.
:-)