Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Dunedan
I understand the bailouts just fine. The Federal Gov't, in exchange for partial ownership of (and control over) the Corporations in question, "loaned" them (or outright gave them) incredible sums of stolen/printed money in order to keep them afloat. As a result, the Federal Gov't now owns shares of (ie State ownership of means of production) a significant number of banks, General Motors, Chrysler, etc. As a result, we see the Obama Regime throwing out CEOs, breaking contract law in the matter of pension funds and stock priority, forcing various degrees and types of product-modification (especially for car-makers) onto the Corporations in question, etc.
State ownership (share-holdership) + State control (see above) = Socialism, by Socialists' own definition.
|
You're exaggerating and misrepresenting. The "partial ownership" you describe isn't ownership at all, but a small amount of influence for an insane amount of money. The CEO I'm assuming you're referring to, Rick Wagoner,
resigned. It was not a "throwing out" of a CEO, but a request. He resigned before the money even reached GM. Why do you think it is you have to distort the truth in order to make your case?