Socialism showing well in Venezuela!

Over the next few years, the Ford car portfolio in North America will transition to two vehicles — the best-selling Mustang and the all-new Focus Active crossover coming out next year," the statement reads. "The company is also exploring new 'white space' vehicle silhouettes that combine the best attributes of cars and utilities, such as higher ride height, space and versatility."

By 2020, Ford says 90 percent of its portfolio in North America will be trucks, SUVs and commercial vehicles. This move is due to consumer demand and product profitability.

Your last sentence is spot on.     The Ford Focus is not profitable with the tariff.   

 

Directly from Ford's CEO -

""The impact to our future sales is expected to be marginal," Ford North America president Kumar Galhotra told Automotive News. "Our viewpoint is that, given the tariffs, our costs would be substantially higher. Our resources could be better deployed at this stage.""

 

 

 

So lets sum it all  up.   You really dont have a problem when Donny Socialist picks winners and losers in our free market economy.   In fact, you do cartwheels to rationalize it.    

He didn't say that.  Ford on its own is getting out of the sedan business, since it makes more money with trucks & SUVs & is choosing not to produce the Ford Active in China.

He didn't say that?  oh. 

 

I guess Automotive News must be part of that whole "liberal media" conspiracy now too.    They're making up quotes and all.   I'm glad Tom's around to let us know.

 

In addition, Trump's tariff's on steel have cost the company 1 Billion dollars (unless you think FOX is liberal media too).

Even more impacts to car companies from tariffs !

 

Did this not happen too?   Let us know Tom !

Edited on May 2, 2019 11:06am

Poor old DonDiego is having trouble understanding much of anything within this thread.

 

Socialism : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

 

Capitalism :  an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state

 

DonDiego understands how Government interference within any economic system can and does have consequences; but that doesn't mean any-an-all Government regulation is "socialism".  

I will try and explain it. There is no country that is purely capitalistic or purely socialistic. For example, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, France and other Western European countries utilize a mix of Socialism and Capitalism. The United States also utilizes a mix of Socialism and Capitalism. Things like public schools, roads, fire departments, police departments, social security, and Medicare are "Socialist" programs.

 

Someone with a similar perspective to mine believes there are more things that are currently run by the for-profit system in the U.S. that are better suited to the socialist model rather than hoping that the profit motive will produce adequate and affordable vital services such as health care. For example, expansion of electrical and telephone service to rural areas was only made possible by the use of a socialist system to fund the services as the private sector saw no profit in it. Another example would be Air Travel.  Modern countrywide air travel is only possible because of a socialist system that was created to build airports in smaller cities and rural areas. My current belief is that we are currently in a period of forced population migration to urban and suburban areas because the government is no longer willing to fund vital services in rural areas like they have in the past. (I will expand on this point if you desire)  

 

The bottom line is a lot of people (myself included) don't think our mix of Socialism and Capitalism is optimal here in the U.S.. I believe the mix needs to be more like it is in Western European countries.  In fact, I think we have created a really perverted mix of capitalism and socialism in the U.S.  Profits are strictly private but losses are often socialized. We have bailed out the auto industry twice now, the banking industry and the airline industry. Yet, collectively we don't share in the profits of these bailed out industries. The private U.S. healthcare system is currently subsidized by the Federal government with ever-increasing yearly costs to stave off market failure for just a little longer. Any business enterprise of any size nowadays thinks it is entitled to State and local tax dollars for simply locating their business in that locality.  I recall when people here bemoaned AOC opposing Amazon locating in Queens.  To me, that is the ultimate example of the perversion of capitalism in this country. How in any way shape or form is it capitalism to have the government spend ten million dollars to build the richest man in the country a private helipad?

 

In 2018 there were 60 fortune 500 companies in the U.S. that didn't pay any income taxes on $79 billion dollars in profit. Not only did they not pay but they collectively received $4.3 billion in tax rebates.  In other words, these freeloaders didn't pay a dime for the massive amount of government services they consume and in return for their freeloading, the government wrote them a check for $4.3 billion dollars.  What benefit does the taxpayer get for their forced investment in these private enterprises? Oh, that's right they get the obligation of covering their losses if they fail. Given all of this, do you think our system here is the U.S is a capitalistic system? 

 

 

 

 

Edited on May 2, 2019 11:22pm
Originally posted by: Don

Poor old DonDiego is having trouble understanding much of anything within this thread.

 

Socialism : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

 

Capitalism :  an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state

 

DonDiego understands how Government interference within any economic system can and does have consequences; but that doesn't mean any-an-all Government regulation is "socialism".  


I'm really having trouble understanding DonDiego's new found definition of Socialism. 

 

Because for 8 years DonDiego routinely referred to the subsidies from Obamcare to people buying private sector insurance "Socialism"  as well as those for people to buy the awful Chevy Volt.

 

And when Obama slapped tariffs on Chinese tires the entire conservative half of the country (including Trump's economic advisor, Larry Kudlow) called it "Socialism".

 

And the same is true when Obama slapped regulations on the banking sector with Dodd Frank...and Internet Service Providers with net neutrality.

 

So either (A) DonDiego and conservatives have completely evolved on their own defintion of Socialism and need to edit their rhetoric from the last 8 years ......or (B) the point I made earlier in this thread is true - Its only "Socialism" when Democrats do it.

 

(FYI - generally all of the above are attributes of "industrial socialism"  at least in of themselves.    And the media largely addresses it as such....example:  Business Insider  )

 

 

Originally posted by: Mark

I will try and explain it. There is no country that is purely capitalistic or purely socialistic. For example, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, France and other Western European countries utilize a mix of Socialism and Capitalism. The United States also utilizes a mix of Socialism and Capitalism. Things like public schools, roads, fire departments, police departments, social security, and Medicare are "Socialist" programs.

 

Someone with a similar perspective to mine believes there are more things that are currently run by the for-profit system in the U.S. that are better suited to the socialist model rather than hoping that the profit motive will produce adequate and affordable vital services such as health care. For example, expansion of electrical and telephone service to rural areas was only made possible by the use of a socialist system to fund the services as the private sector saw no profit in it. Another example would be Air Travel.  Modern countrywide air travel is only possible because of a socialist system that was created to build airports in smaller cities and rural areas. My current belief is that we are currently in a period of forced population migration to urban and suburban areas because the government is no longer willing to fund vital services in rural areas like they have in the past. (I will expand on this point if you desire)  

 

The bottom line is a lot of people (myself included) don't think our mix of Socialism and Capitalism is optimal here in the U.S.. I believe the mix needs to be more like it is in Western European countries.  In fact, I think we have created a really perverted mix of capitalism and socialism in the U.S.  Profits are strictly private but losses are often socialized. We have bailed out the auto industry twice now, the banking industry and the airline industry. Yet, collectively we don't share in the profits of these bailed out industries. The private U.S. healthcare system is currently subsidized by the Federal government with ever-increasing yearly costs to stave off market failure for just a little longer. Any business enterprise of any size nowadays thinks it is entitled to State and local tax dollars for simply locating their business in that locality.  I recall when people here bemoaned AOC opposing Amazon locating in Queens.  To me, that is the ultimate example of the perversion of capitalism in this country. How in any way shape or form is it capitalism to have the government spend ten million dollars to build the richest man in the country a private helipad?

 

In 2018 there were 60 fortune 500 companies in the U.S. that didn't pay any income taxes on $79 billion dollars in profit. Not only did they not pay but they collectively received $4.3 billion in tax rebates.  In other words, these freeloaders didn't pay a dime for the massive amount of government services they consume and in return for their freeloading, the government wrote them a check for $4.3 billion dollars.  What benefit does the taxpayer get for their forced investment in these private enterprises? Oh, that's right they get the obligation of covering their losses if they fail. Given all of this, do you think our system here is the U.S is a capitalistic system? 

 

 

 

 


Liberals never have and never will understand money...

 

noun: rebate; plural noun: rebates

/ˈrēˌbāt/

 

1.  a partial refund to someone who has paid too much money for tax, rent, or a utility.

 

 

...and to those who think Bernie is talking about European countries and not those to the south of us, this is a direct quote from his website about 8 years ago:

 

"These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, 

Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio 

Alger. Who's the banana republic now?"

 

 

Originally posted by: PJ Stroh

I'm really having trouble understanding DonDiego's new found definition of Socialism. 

 

Because for 8 years DonDiego routinely referred to the subsidies from Obamcare to people buying private sector insurance "Socialism"  as well as those for people to buy the awful Chevy Volt.

 

And when Obama slapped tariffs on Chinese tires the entire conservative half of the country (including Trump's economic advisor, Larry Kudlow) called it "Socialism".

 

And the same is true when Obama slapped regulations on the banking sector with Dodd Frank...and Internet Service Providers with net neutrality.

 

So either (A) DonDiego and conservatives have completely evolved on their own defintion of Socialism and need to edit their rhetoric from the last 8 years ......or (B) the point I made earlier in this thread is true - Its only "Socialism" when Democrats do it.

 

(FYI - generally all of the above are attributes of "industrial socialism"  at least in of themselves.    And the media largely addresses it as such....example:  Business Insider  )

 

 


DonDiego has understood the definitions of Socialism and Capitalism for many decades.

 

On occasion DonDiego has undoubtedly referred to certain US Government policies, which are inevitably found in Socialist Countries, as "socialist", . . . f'rinstance, things like income-redistribution and subsidizing purchase of "Government-preferred" goods, e.g. the Chevy Volt.

DonDiego apologizes for any misunderstanding of this "short-hand language".

 

DonDiego is pretty sure he would not have referred to tariffs as "Socialism"; generally DonDiego does not like the idea of tariffs, but he can understand the goal. 

 

DonDiego also understands that repeal of the Glass-Steagle Act under President Clinton had significant impact on the 2008 financial "collapse"; DonDiego doesn't recall criticism of subsequent Dodd-Frank regulations.

 

DonDiego does see potential Government-mischief within the net-neutrality regulations.  

  

. . . . . 

 

Oh !  Oh !  Immediately prior to PJStroh's post on 2 June at 11:11pm Mark posted a thoughtful consideration of  the mix of "socialism" and "capitalism" within countries around the world.  Mark and DonDiego likely disagree on the precise "mix" of socialism and capitalism which would be optimal within the United States, but understanding i. there is a mix and ii. Government is a lot about determining the appropriate mix, . . . is important. 

 

Whoa !   DonDIego's last paragpragh has just raised the colletive IQ of this board by 20 points.   

Perhaps the thoughtful debate should be about where to draw the line of socilaist vs capitalist policy....instead of crying "Venezuela !"  whenever someone offers to draw that line differently.

 

There may be hope for this board yet.

 

 

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now