Fascist Corporatism

[PoliticalChic]

As the view of the proper role of government is a regular topic on the board, I wonder if any who read this article in today's WSJ find this campaign by the Obama adminstration appropriate...

...and how it applies to the question of where, on the political spectrum, this government fits.

1."Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius ...latest attack, on the CEO of Forest Laboratories,...HHS this month sent a letter to 83-year-old Forest Labs CEO Howard Solomon, announcing it would henceforth refuse to do business with him. What earned Mr. Solomon the blackball? Well, nothing that he did—as admitted even by HHS.

2. ... allegations were among a rash of government suits claiming that marketing to doctors common among drug companies amounted to fraud against Medicare and Medicaid. The charges were odd given their implication that major companies would be dumb enough to try to hoodwink their biggest customer. The charges also had a political flavor as an attempt to blame drug companies, rather than the fee-for-service design of the federal programs, for runaway costs.

3. The feds have rarely invoked this awesome power, given the potential for coercive abuse. But Mrs. Sebelius seems bent on making it more common policy and says she can employ it even against executives who had no knowledge of an employee's misconduct. A year ago Mrs. Sebelius used it to dismiss the CEO of a small drugmaker in St. Louis.

4. Losing the federal government as a customer is potentially crippling to a drug company.
HHS says its action is about holding corporate CEOs accountable, but it looks more like the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare. This is the same agency that has threatened insurers with exclusion from new state-run health exchanges if they raise their premiums more than Mrs. Sebelius wants, or if they spread what she deems to be "misinformation" about the President's health bill.

5. The hammer on Forest Labs "reinforces everybody's worst fears—that this Administration won't do business with anybody that doesn't completely agree with its policy initiatives. Not only will it refuse to even have the argument, it will actively destroy these people," says Peter Pitts, a former Food and Drug Administration official who now runs the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest. "
Review & Outlook: Kathleen Spitzer - WSJ.com


"Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

 

[JBeukema]

Wait, you oppose fascism now? When did this happen?

 

[VaYank5150]

4. Losing the federal government as a customer is potentially crippling to a drug company.
HHS says its action is about holding corporate CEOs accountable, but it looks more like the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare. This is the same agency that has threatened insurers with exclusion from new state-run health exchanges if they raise their premiums more than Mrs. Sebelius wants, or if they spread what she deems to be "misinformation" about the President's health bill.

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

4. Losing the federal government as a customer is potentially crippling to a drug company.
HHS says its action is about holding corporate CEOs accountable, but it looks more like the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare. This is the same agency that has threatened insurers with exclusion from new state-run health exchanges if they raise their premiums more than Mrs. Sebelius wants, or if they spread what she deems to be "misinformation" about the President's health bill.

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

No.

 

[VaYank5150]

4. Losing the federal government as a customer is potentially crippling to a drug company.
HHS says its action is about holding corporate CEOs accountable, but it looks more like the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare. This is the same agency that has threatened insurers with exclusion from new state-run health exchanges if they raise their premiums more than Mrs. Sebelius wants, or if they spread what she deems to be "misinformation" about the President's health bill.

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

No.

So, private companies being propped up by our tax dollars is a GOOD thing?

 

[Wiseacre]

IMHO, if the gov't can prove illegal actions were taken by a company, then they should prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. I would be in favor of stiffer penalties if a conviction results, and I would hold the execs at the top accountable. BUT - no conviction means not proven guilty, and therefore no punitve action should be taken against the company or it's execs. I think the gov't has overstepped it's bounds here.

 

[The Rabbi]

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

No.

So, private comapnies being propped up by our tax dollars is a GOOD thing?

I know you're not actually this stupid in real life.
Even you can understand that the Fed Gov must buy goods and services somewhere. As such there is a bidding process that usually takes place, with many providers competing for a sale. That is legitimate.
Socialism occurs when there is one bidder and/or the bid is rigged not to deliver at the best price but to fulfill some other political or social agenda. Like when the U.S. government takes over an auto maker, dictating who the CEO is, how much they can spend on advertising, and what kinds of cars they can produce.
Got it, chief?

 

[Vanquish]

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

No.

So, private comapnies being propped up by our tax dollars is a GOOD thing?

Exactly. What happened to the free (gag me) market? If you can't exist without one particular customer - then you better keep them happy or suffer the market consequences.

A better argument would be that as a government representing the people, that it's unfair for the government to treat any particular company differently than another. Oh wait...that wouldnt work either. Parties should be able to freely contract.

Oh well, bullshit debunked. Why does the right always try to get people to feel sorry for the rich?

 

[Foxfyre]

I agree that any business that puts all its eggs into the government contract basket is taking a risk that their business will cease if funding is cut for a given program or project. That risk should be theirs and theirs alone.

Ideology, however, should play no part in who gets government contracts that should always go to the lowest bidder who can guarantee to provide a product according to government specifications. The only criteria for refusing to allow a company to bid is:

1. The business is not a U.S. business.
2. The business is under indictment for illegal activities.
3. The business has defaulted on other contracts and is not reliable.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No.

So, private comapnies being propped up by our tax dollars is a GOOD thing?

Exactly. What happened to the free (gag me) market? If you can't exist without one particular customer - then you better keep them happy or suffer the market consequences.

A better argument would be that as a government representing the people, that it's unfair for the government to treat any particular company differently than another. Oh wait...that wouldnt work either. Parties should be able to freely contract.

Oh well, bullshit debunked. Why does the right always try to get people to feel sorry for the rich?

You are an ignorant fellow, quishy...

Let's begin your remediation, or as you put it, "gagging you' with this:

1. "Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the “common good.”

But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes."
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006


2. Now, once you are able to provide proof that you comprehend and have incorpated the information in the above quote, we can proceed...

...and that means that the full weight of the federal government used to dictate "... the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare," is straying a far piece from free-market capitalism, and has entered the realm of socialism.

3. If you would be happier in a nation that lives via a command-and-control central economy, even though there are numerous examples that show that said economies produce shortages, poor quality and poverty, there are several current nations you might choose in which to reside....but most Americans like it right here.
BTW, if you like kimchee, I know of one that may be just right for you!

4. So, just to be sure I understand your preference vis-a-vis the article in the OP, quishy, you approve of governments that intimidate 'private' businesses to the tune of dictating who the management is, and censor any criticism of administration policies....
...did I correctly characterize your progressive views, quishy?

...and you stand foursquare behind crony capitalism and corporatism, as well?
Good boy!

I'll bet you look really, really sharp in that brown uniform!

 

[PoliticalChic]

4. Losing the federal government as a customer is potentially crippling to a drug company.
HHS says its action is about holding corporate CEOs accountable, but it looks more like the Administration's latest bid to intimidate the health-care industry into doing its bidding on prices, regulations and political support for ObamaCare. This is the same agency that has threatened insurers with exclusion from new state-run health exchanges if they raise their premiums more than Mrs. Sebelius wants, or if they spread what she deems to be "misinformation" about the President's health bill.

Private companies depending on our Federal Government for money and/or contracts is viewed as "Socialism", right?

No, you silly thing!

The prob is when government uses it's powers to dictate not only the details of how the private business decides what is in its best interests and those of its stockholders, right down to management and price structure, and then bullies the business into silence, that's pretty much government ownership.

And if you go back and re-read the article, you will be as incensed as I - at leat I hope you have the good judgement to be- as to how the gov did it:
first they claimed an infraction in business practice, which the company decided to accept as not being worth the litigation to fight....
...then, once the company threw in the towel on that, HHS pulled another statute out that allowed the gov to throw out management or lose the business of the government.

 

[Nic_Driver]

The customer can choose the vendor in a free market system. This is an absolute truth to capitalism. Any variation would not be a free market by definition.

1. "Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished,

Like we have now? Wow, Rev. Robert A. Sirico was right about this one here but he's wrong about the economic system that will bring it about.


BTW, do you think a speech from some random person, a Reverend no less, would suffice as some kind of proof of something?

You do realize Christ was a socialist AND a bleeding heart liberal to boot...don't you?

 

[Nic_Driver]

The prob is when government uses it's powers to dictate not only the details of how the private business decides what is in its best interests and those of its stockholders, right down to management and price structure, and then bullies the business into silence, that's pretty much government ownership.

No silly, it's a customer holding their supplier accountable and well within the free market system.

Have you ever heard of a boycott? Do you now or have you ever refused to purchase from a company because of their policies?

 

[Foxfyre]

The prob is when government uses it's powers to dictate not only the details of how the private business decides what is in its best interests and those of its stockholders, right down to management and price structure, and then bullies the business into silence, that's pretty much government ownership.

No silly, it's a customer holding their supplier accountable and well within the free market system.

Have you ever heard of a boycott? Do you now or have you ever refused to purchase from a company because of their policies?

The government can write requirements of equal opportunity and other constitutional or legally mandated criteria into the specifications in its contracts.

It is entirely inappropriate for the government to write ideology into its contracts or boycott anybody. Do you honestly want your government to have the power to punish you because of your political, religious, or socioeconomic beliefs? Who do you trust enough to give total power over your economic or physical well being?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The customer can choose the vendor in a free market system. This is an absolute truth to capitalism. Any variation would not be a free market by definition.

1. "Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished,

Like we have now? Wow, Rev. Robert A. Sirico was right about this one here but he's wrong about the economic system that will bring it about.


BTW, do you think a speech from some random person, a Reverend no less, would suffice as some kind of proof of something?

You do realize Christ was a socialist AND a bleeding heart liberal to boot...don't you?

"BTW, do you think a speech from some random person, a Reverend no less, would suffice as some kind of proof of something?"

Nah, Niccy....I was waiting for your pearls of wisdom so that I'd know what to think!


Rev. Robert A. Sirico received his Master of Divinity degree from the Catholic University of America, following undergraduate study at the University of Southern California and the University of London.
His writings on religious, political, economic, and social matters are published in a variety of journals, including: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, the London Financial Times, the Washington Times, the Detroit News, and National Review. Fr. Sirico is often called upon by members of the broadcast media for statements regarding economics, civil rights, and issues of religious concern, and has provided commentary for CNN, ABC, the BBC, NPR, and CBS' 60 Minutes, among others.Staff Profile: Rev. Robert A. Sirico | Acton Institute


Geez, who the heck is this guy next to you, Niccy???
After all, Niccy was the recipient of the award for "Best Performance In A Police Dash-Cam Video."

Weren't you also the runner-up for the "Self-Esteem is More Important Than Achievement" award?

 

[Foxfyre]

Every time I hear that engineered statement "Christ was a socialist and a liberal" line I just shake my head and wonder whether we will survive the modern education system that produces so many numbnuts who don't have a clue what socialism is among other things.

One of my favorite Siroco quotations however is this:
"I don’t think capitalism is a natural enemy of Christianity. Capitalism is really an inadequate word; it only describes one dimension of what is really human freedom and choice in the economic sphere. Choice is morally neutral. It’s the chooser who can be moral or immoral, not the ability to make the choice."--the Rev. Robert A. Siroco

 

[Nic_Driver]

It is entirely inappropriate for the government to write ideology into its contracts or boycott anybody. Do you honestly want your government to have the power to punish you because of your political, religious, or socioeconomic beliefs?

Really? Stem cell research, abortion funding, same sex marriage and the list goes on and on.

I guess it's all about which fight you want them to have and which you don't but they pass moral judgment when spending our money and they do it all the time.

 

[Nic_Driver]

His writings on religious, political, economic, and social matters are published in a variety of journals

Cool, I can counter that with someone elses writings, still his opinion and not useful in debate.

Do you want to address the social/economic climate that has the "haves" and the "have not’s" in our capitalistic society? His statement about communism that's proven true in capitalism?

Do you or Rev. Sirco believe that there has ever been an example of a truly Marxist government in history?

With so much of his material published, it must be even more uncomfortable for you/him when he's shown to be wrong.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Every time I hear that engineered statement "Christ was a socialist and a liberal" line I just shake my head and wonder whether we will survive the modern education system that produces so many numbnuts who don't have a clue what socialism is among other things.

Every time I hear someone speak about Christ without any knowledge of him or the tenants of Christianity I have to shake my head and wonder if it will always be possible to fool some of the people all of the time.

I guess that's what keep Fox Noise at the top of the ratings.

 

[Nic_Driver]

The customer can choose the vendor in a free market system. This is an absolute truth to capitalism. Any variation would not be a free market by definition.

1. "Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished,

Like we have now? Wow, Rev. Robert A. Sirico was right about this one here but he's wrong about the economic system that will bring it about.


BTW, do you think a speech from some random person, a Reverend no less, would suffice as some kind of proof of something?

You do realize Christ was a socialist AND a bleeding heart liberal to boot...don't you?

"BTW, do you think a speech from some random person, a Reverend no less, would suffice as some kind of proof of something?"

Nah, Niccy....I was waiting for your pearls of wisdom so that I'd know what to think!


Rev. Robert A. Sirico received his Master of Divinity degree from the Catholic University of America, following undergraduate study at the University of Southern California and the University of London.
His writings on religious, political, economic, and social matters are published in a variety of journals, including: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, the London Financial Times, the Washington Times, the Detroit News, and National Review. Fr. Sirico is often called upon by members of the broadcast media for statements regarding economics, civil rights, and issues of religious concern, and has provided commentary for CNN, ABC, the BBC, NPR, and CBS' 60 Minutes, among others.Staff Profile: Rev. Robert A. Sirico | Acton Institute


Geez, who the heck is this guy next to you, Niccy???
After all, Niccy was the recipient of the award for "Best Performance In A Police Dash-Cam Video."

Weren't you also the runner-up for the "Self-Esteem is More Important Than Achievement" award?

So any thought about the original statement or are you happy to show your ignorance of this topic too?

Any customer can choose the vendor in a free market system. This is an absolute truth to capitalism. Any variation would not be a free market by definition.