The Libertarian, March 1, 1969
The way "private" enterprise works in our era of the neo-fascist corporate state is well shown in an article in the Wall St. Journal (Feb. 5) on the National Corporation for Housing Partnerships. The NCHP, created by President Johnson, but supposedly run along the Nixonian lines of rewing up the "engine of private enterprise", wants to raise $50 million from private industry to invest in lowrent housing projects which would eventually mount up to $2 billion of capital.
Praiseworthy? But wait. In order for the corporation to get started, there must be a substantial flow of Federal funds to subsidize rentals in the new projects. The NCHP wants $150 million from the Federal government for this year and next before it sets up business as a corporation. With this huge subsidy, "private enterprise" in the form of the NCHP would be willing to build 10,000 low-rent units in the first year, and hopefully move up to 60,000 units annually,
A particularly desired form of federal subsidy would be to pay a subsidy that would keep mortgage interest costs down to a near-zero sum of l%per year. With this kind of subsidy, a whole roster of the nation's largest corporations stand eager to do their great humanitarian work. This includes Kaiser Industries Corp, whose head, Edgar Kaiser, is the president of the NCHP, Westinghouse, Metropolitan Life, Deere and Co., and Ling-Temco-Vought. Many of the biggest
banks, such as Chase Manhattan, First National City, Bank of America, Mellon National, would be willing to lend the corporation money to launch its operations. Also, not surprisingly, a host of local realty firms would be happy to join in the bonanza. The big attraction, apart from humanitarianism, is a huge, guaranteed profit, or, as the Journal puts it, "a guaranteed, Government-supported market to attract profit-motivated private industry and investors." The estimated annual rate of profit for these investors would begin at over 24% and end at 17%. Pretty good returns for "helping the poor"
And you think we have problems now? Imagine more Washington help? Taxes make you property of the State no more no less.
There only true function is gatekeeper. Are there problems in the system, yes and Government cannot turn stones to bread either.
SEPTEMBER 25, 2009 Wall St. Journal
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stepped up her push for a publicly run health plan that has divided congressional Democrats, saying it could "save enormous amounts of money." Costs are at the center of the health-overhaul debate. House versions of a broad health bill would cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years, while a version being debated in the Senate Finance Committee this week falls slightly under President Barack Obama's proposed cap of $900 billion and doesn't include a public option.
Congressional aides said including a government-run plan for people under 65 in the health overhaul could save as much as $100 billion, if such a plan were to pay health-care providers the low rates used by Medicare, the federal health program for the elderly. The resulting savings would allow Democrats to keep robust subsidies and other provisions intended to help lower-income people buy health insurance.
The U.S. is expected to hit its $12.1 trillion debt ceiling later this fall. Mr. Geithner has asked lawmakers to raise that limit so the government can continue borrowing money to fund its obligations. The debate has been complicated by the independent overseers of the bailout, who have questioned both the success of the program and whether taxpayers will ever recover their investments. At a hearing Thursday, the special inspector general for TARP said the program has improved market stability but fallen short on broad goals, such as spurring lending. "It is extremely unlikely that the taxpayer will see a full return on its TARP investment," Neil Barofsky told the Senate Banking Committee.
They are incompetent to handle my money.
Christian economist William Anderson has exposed Wallis for what he is: an apologist for raw Federal power, a man who "decided that an expanded, violent state was just fine, provided it was aimed at people who actually produced something." He put it this way in 2004
I have never read an issue of Sojourners without finding at least one (and usually many more than one) demand to increase the power and scope of the state. Yes, for all of your claims that you take a jaundiced view of state power, there is no one in the world of organized Christianity who has championed Leviathan more than you. I have come to believe that you oppose U.S. conflicts not so much because they are immoral, but rather because they take resources away from the government's being able to wage war on productive people at home.
- 323-08192009Morin_slideshow_main_prod_affiliate_91.jpg (79.6 KiB) Viewed 994 times