Mixed Market Better Than Pure Capitalism Or Pure Socialism

[John Q. Citizen]

In case you want my opinion.


-edited for formatting

[fed_up_mother]

1. Agree 100%

[Barack4Ever]

2. yes yes yes!

ITA also.

[fulllib]

3. Interesting . . .

What a shocking statement of common sense and understanding. There is no place for this in the political discourse!!! (Sarcasm)

[applegrove]

4. U.S. is allready a mixed market economy. Most countries in the world are.

Why all this talk of socialism is ****!

[John Q. Citizen]

5. Socialism is great when applied to socialistic parts of human interaction.

The US used to be barely a mixed market. 25 years ago.

Where have you been the last 25 years?

[applegrove]

6. The pharmaceutical industry is given monopoly power for a time. Not to mention

all the stuff government does like running the military, medicare, medicaid, social security, emergency rooms, schools, police, etc. It isn't a pure market economy by a long shot.

[phantom power]

7. I agree, although it begs the very interesting question...

when does one transition private-sphere activities into the realm of govt-owned activities? What principles should be applied?

Lately, I've been thinking that the infamous phrase "too big to fail" might yield some clues. If some private-sphere business becomes critical to the functioning of society, that is a clue that maybe it should be socialized (or at least highly regulated).

For instance, the internet has rapidly moved from curiosity to luxury to critical infrastructure. I think that is a sign that the infrastructure should be considered as a candidate for socialization. Like water and sewer.

Similarly, if the credit markets are, really, "too big to fail" then maybe they ought to be socialized.

Discuss!