Skip to comments.The Three Faces of Cronyism
Posted on 08/02/2014 8:32:07 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
There has been a lot said in recent years by Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and other conservatives about crony capitalism or if you prefer, crony socialism, crony government, corporatism or just plain cronyism. Whatever you call it, this conversation is increasingly vital as government grows and continues to pervert markets by picking winners and losers as a way to obtain wealth for powerful lawmakers and their fund-raisers and friends.
This rampant cronyism is one of the most insidious outgrowths of a government gone wild, and has become a swirling vortex of self sustaining and systemic corruption. Thus, the focus on cronyism is necessary -- but missing from the conversation seems to be a distinction among the three very different genres of cronyism. And there are at least three very different varieties.
I submit there is too much focus on what Ill call the first type, that of tax breaks and other incentives for big industrial plants, or professional stadia expansion projects and the like. Government should not be involved in these issues, but at least there is a potentially redeeming cost/benefit outcome for the taxpayers.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The GE/Jeff Immelt model deserves the top billing. Especially when it involves a complicit media enterprise.
Because none of this cronyism has ever been brought to trial and punished appropriately, it will only spread like a disease.
It is the mark of a 3rd world country.
It is Fascism... which is like Socialism only a little different..
Still MOB Rule by mobsters but including the Rich People..
by the way.... Democracy is the base of Mob Rule by mobsters..
Democracy always results in socialism or fascism......
Socialisn and Fascism is like a Queer couple.. its still SODOMY.. no matter whos on top..
yeah, the GE/Immelt model is pretty malignant.
Yeah, in recent years Limbaugh has spoken out since his listeners have made noise. Prior to that there was silence about it as well as about illegal immigrants invading our country.
Would you consider the use of tariffs bad? Like the use of such from Reagan to aid Harley Davidson in the early 80’s?
In general, I would be against - but that’s not 100%. Case by case basis ..I do not remember enough about the Harley case to comment. I would also require a business, or industry, to shed all of their costly liberalism (unions, high tax locations, etc) before any other help would be granted.
There’s a lot more of it in recent years too ..the entire Solyndra thing, and the GE thing, have come about largely in the last 5 years.
IIRC, the constitution saw tariffs as the major means of funding the government. It was a pay to play notion, and as such it is not about cronyism. If another nation wanted access to America’s markets then they paid the tariff. It was standard practice, so American exports were likewise taxed in countries where we wished to sell. I’m not sure if that held for raw materials like cotton, wood, etc.
Reagan’s tariff on Japanese motorcycles really had to do with Japan’s decision to dump merchandise on the US while charging extremely high tariffs on American goods in their own country. The US still allows that with Japan, China, Korea...Asia in general.
And for our ‘open markets’ we’ve lost leadership in autos, electronics, textiles, etc.....factory build consumer items. And our unemployment numbers show how wonderful these free trade agreements have been for us.
Texas has lower taxes than New York. Rick Perry likes to raid companies from New York. To prevent that, rather than simply lower their taxes, New York has been advertising special rates they’ll give to businesses for 10 years. That strikes me as good old fashioned competition and not as cronyism.
Bumping can be so much fun
That’s why I brought it up. Tariffs once funded large portions of .gov.