Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

From Gun Control to Socialism - Bill Barr is a Problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • From Gun Control to Socialism - Bill Barr is a Problem

    During his State of the Union address last week, President Donald Trump repeatedly invoked the specter of socialism—it "destroys nations," he warned.

    But by the end of the week, one of the highest-ranking officials in the Trump administration was openly suggesting that America should engage in one of the hallmarks of socialism: a state takeover of a private company.

    In a speech last Thursday, Attorney General Bill Barr floated the idea that the United States could purchase a majority stake in tech companies like Sweden-based Ericsson or Finland-based Nokia as a way to counter the growing prominence of China's Huawei as the world's leading provider of fifth generation (5G) mobile internet hardware.

    "Putting our large market and financial muscle behind one or both of these firms would make it a more formidable competitor and eliminate concerns over its staying power," Barr said. "We and our closest allies certainly need to be actively considering this approach."

    He even wrapped his idea in socialist language, saying that the United States must "act collectively" to stand up to China's rising economic power and technological developments. He might not have been calling for a Marxist-style seize-the-means-of-production uprising, but Barr's pitch for some kind of techno-corporate socialism is still shocking—even by the standards of an administration that has embraced central industrial planning as an anti-China strategy. It was all the more so because it came during in a prepared, formal speech, not as an off-the-cuff remark that later needed to be walked back.
    https://reason.com/2020/02/12/corpor...a-or-ericsson/

    My hope is that Barr gets replaced in a reelection. He has already proven to be untrustworthy on the 2ndA and now this.
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

  • #2
    Gun Control? Socialism?
    No wonder he was so popular in D.C. .... until the minute he was appointed to something by the current president.

    Eh, Boomer?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Phaing View Post
      Gun Control? Socialism?
      No wonder he was so popular in D.C. .... until the minute he was appointed to something by the current president.

      Eh, Boomer?
      I know how to click links. That aside, the Trump admin has shown how bias can corrupt judgement. On the surface, we have an admin that democrats, for the most part should like. At least partially. Instead, it is one of the most despised and vilified admins in recent history, and for all the wrong reasons. This has not been a radical far-right admin, it has been center-left more than anything.

      The troublesome part is two-fold. One, how far left do the democrats want to go if Barr isn't someone they like. Two, how far left can the republican party go if individuals like Barr are allowed to go unchecked.

      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
      - Benjamin Franklin

      The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

        https://reason.com/2020/02/12/corpor...a-or-ericsson/

        My hope is that Barr gets replaced in a reelection. He has already proven to be untrustworthy on the 2ndA and now this.
        I don't see anything "socialist" at all in an economic objective like this. Do you also object when foreign manufacturers get involved in our businesses?

        You're getting desperate for things to complain about, aren't you?
        Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

          I don't see anything "socialist" at all in an economic objective like this. Do you also object when foreign manufacturers get involved in our businesses?

          You're getting desperate for things to complain about, aren't you?

          Here we see the same problem with bias, referenced earlier, just in the opposite direction. Nothing can corrupt the mind more than one's personal biases. Again highlighting the dangers of leftist ideology seeping into the republican platform. People like MM will support it so long as it's attached to an R.

          In fairness to Trump, Mike Pence said the following in response to Barr's plan: "U.S. government is not in the business of buying companies, whether they're domestic or foreign,"

          Good to hear that Barr's plan will not be considered by Trump, but given his track record so far, he still needs to go.

          "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
          - Benjamin Franklin

          The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
            In fairness to Trump, Mike Pence said the following in response to Barr's plan: "U.S. government is not in the business of buying companies, whether they're domestic or foreign,"
            Okay, the sky is not falling down.

            "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

            Comment


            • #7
              What are you talking about? you make a statement and give no link, am I supposed to guess?
              Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
                What are you talking about? you make a statement and give no link, am I supposed to guess?
                Who are you referring to? There's a link in the OP.
                "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                - Benjamin Franklin

                The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                  https://reason.com/2020/02/12/corpor...a-or-ericsson/

                  My hope is that Barr gets replaced in a reelection. He has already proven to be untrustworthy on the 2ndA and now this.
                  And what about Amtrak ? Also something socialist ?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                    Instead, it is one of the most despised and vilified admins in recent history, and for all the wrong reasons. This has not been a radical far-right admin, it has been center-left more than anything.
                    It's in line with Trump's campaign though, there was nothing really economically "right" about it.

                    A 1000 billion government spending plan, tariffs on foreign imports, subsidies for local production etc.

                    Coupled with nationalist, and anti-migration tendencies - it's the political trend of the last decade, the glory days of the free-market are some time behind us, banking crisis and reaction to it broke the dream for many….

                    It will be interesting to see the reaction of your electorate..
                    Last edited by Snowygerry; 14 Feb 20, 09:06.
                    Major Atticus Finch - ACW Rainbow Game.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Tarifs on foreign imports are not left neither right : all US administrations have used tarifs; subsidies for local production : the same . To subsidize local productions is to buy votes .
                      Helms and Thurmond were protectionists, but, AFAICS, not left wingers .
                      Total free market( including free market on foreign issues ) is globalism and capitulation for the anti American forces .
                      Total free market exists nowhere .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Bill Barr is not the problem. There are other more pressing difficulties that need to be addressed.
                        ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
                        IN MARE IN COELO

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

                          It's in line with Trump's campaign though, there was nothing really economically "right" about it.

                          A 1000 billion government spending plan, tariffs on foreign imports, subsidies for local production etc.

                          Coupled with nationalist, and anti-migration tendencies - it's the political trend of the last decade, the glory days of the free-market are some time behind us, banking crisis and reaction to it broke the dream for many….

                          It will be interesting to see the reaction of your electorate..


                          TRump's tariffs have been limited to chinese goods.
                          They is in retaliation to chinese limts on our access to their markets as well as their outright theft of our intellectual property.
                          Trump's tariffs might not be a good thing, but they can hardly be viewed in a vaccuum or the start of the problem.

                          Spending is a problem, but as TAG has noted elsewhere, most of the US spending is mandatory on income redistribution policies. I think that number is in excess of 60% of the US budget. I'm not excusing trump for failing to address spending, just pointing out it isn't really his spending that is the problem.

                          Trump's "anti- immigration" policies are entirely consistent with US law. He is enforcing US laws that previous administrations have ignored. He is "pro law enforcement".
                          These are the same laws that Obama enforced just not as effectively. The "pro- immigration" party made no effort to change immigration laws when it had complete control of the government. Obama explicitly declined to address that issue.
                          If the "pro" party didn't ever try to change the laws they now screech about, I don't think that it is reasonable to criticize the enforcement of the actual law. It is his job to enforce existing laws.

                          If it weren't enforcement of actual laws, the "Sanctuary cities and states" wouldn't exist., They are refusing to enforce existing law, not illegal ones.

                          Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                          Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                            These are the same laws that Obama enforced just not as effectively.
                            That's kind of the point isn't it.

                            Obama's policies where almost uniformely regarded as Left here on the ACG, yet Trump's policies are considered Right.

                            See also the quote I replied to :

                            This has not been a radical far-right admin, it has been center-left more than anything.
                            And I agree, in your anger with classic Republicans you elected a "Leftist", I'm interested to see if you will elect him again
                            Major Atticus Finch - ACW Rainbow Game.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The irony is that you need a powerful central government because as John Rockefeller put it "competition is a sin" .

                              In the 19th century the U.S. has an economic depression every few years. In a rather primitive, largely agrarian, and somewhat self sufficient society economic disruptions did not cause mass unrest. Today people are dependent on a complex and fragile distribution system. Capitalism has adapted to this new reality.

                              Proposals such as Barr's are designed to meet immediate threads. Over the short run command economies are hard to compete with. The problem has always been that once government has stepped in it never finds it's way out. The failure to adapt is the hallmark of big government. Big government creates dependency that the intellectually "elite" do not have the brain power to deal with.

                              The Roman republic followed almost exactly the same path. Once it became a bureaucratic state it became dysfunctional. As long as small land holders were the moral center of Roman society it avoided the worst of the corruption that unavoidably follows from democracy.
                              Last edited by wolfhnd; 14 Feb 20, 10:55. Reason: Phone adds odd bits
                              We hunt the hunters

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X