Re: Sen. McGovern on income distribution

["Max B. Sawicky" <sawicky@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's not so outlandish.  We encounter this often.  We call it "tax and
transfer" liberalism.  The idea that a vigorous fisc (progressive taxation
and social-democratic spending) is fine but market regulation (especially in
re: trade and anything that smacks of industrial policy) is bad.  The logic
upheld to criticize regulation would also demolish liberal sentiments in
support of trade unionism, if applied consistently.





-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list [mailto:PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Devine
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 2:19 PM
To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Sen. McGovern on income distribution

On 5/24/06, Eugene Coyle <eugenecoyle@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is this piece (I'm wondering how much, in one way or another, he got
> paid for this) the demarcation of an epoch?
>
> I'm trying to imagine the world that might or will unfold if McGovern's
> analysis (for want of a better word) becomes the mainstream of USA
> politics.  We won't need, so much, "immigration reform" -- it will be
> nicer to remain in Oaxaca than to stroll across the desert after
> climbing the fence.
>
> How few will the numbers be, collecting the dividend checks?

McG is a "New Deal liberal" struggling to come to terms with
neoliberalism and its race to the bottom. In this era, it seems that
one has to either embrace neoliberalism (as he's moving toward) or go
for socialism. Barbarism or socialism, to coin a phrase. (Of course,
there's always socialist barbarism, as with various theocratic
collectivisms.)
--
Jim Devine / "Capitalism without bankruptcy is like Christianity
without hell." -- Frank Borman