11-06-2017, 04:37 PM
(11-06-2017, 03:46 PM)Dill Wrote: So you are defining socialism as "interfering" with business decisions--not public ownership of the means of production? I just don't see any analytical advantage to defining socialism that way.
No, I'm pointing out you don't have to actually call the shots to control how business is done. I'm saying the far end of taxes and regulation is indistinguishable from socialism. As you move further down that spectrum, you are moving toward socialism whether you intend to actually own the business or not.
Same way a Board doesn't have to call the day-to-day shots to largely determine the direction of a business. Or alternatively you can call the shots yourself OR you can create incentives (or disincentives) to have the "right" decisions made.
Do you think single payer is not socialism just because the govt isn't telling a business how to operate day-to-day? Do you honestly believe when the govt is both regulator and sole buyer that the industry is still effectively "private"?
--------------------------------------------------------
