Re: [Marxism] Temporary nationalizations

[Bill O'Connor <billyoc@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Anthony Boynton" <anthony.boynton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> We do not know if there will be any more nationalizations, nor do we know if
> the nationalizations which have already taken place (e.g. Fannie and Freddy)
> will be temporary. Of course the capitalists intend them to be temporary,
> they are even afraid to call them nationalizations, the word burns their
> palattes and singes their tongues. But whether or not they will be temporary
> depends on how the criss unfolds and the class struggle develops.
>
> If we have anything to do with the outcome, unlikely as that may seem to
> many, the nationalizations should be permanent. Right?
>
> So what can we do to that end?

Perhaps  a demand  that no  re-privatizations be  allowed until  the tax
money used  for this bailout  is repaid in  full.  That should  at least
keep them  nationalized for a  good while.  I  can argue later  that the
treasury can't do without the profits from the healed enterprises.

I  remember that  the  state  of Massachusetts  promised  that the  toll
collection  on  the   Mass.  Turnpike  would  stop  when   the  cost  of
construction  of the  turnpike was  recovered.  But  once that  had been
done, the state simply said that they needed the revenue stream from the
toll  booths for  the general  fund.  That's  the sort  of  argument I'm
proposing for keeping the nationalized enterprises.

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu