←back to thread

Uncle Sam shouldn't own Intel stock

(www.wsj.com)
335 points aspenmayer | 2 comments | 24 Aug 25 21:40 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Animats ◴[24 Aug 25 22:07 UTC] No.45008237[source]▶
It's socialism, after all, for the Government to own an interest in a company.

Covered yesterday on YC.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44989773

replies(4): >>45008264 #>>45008266 #>>45008301 #>>45013221 #
aspenmayer ◴[24 Aug 25 22:12 UTC] No.45008264[source]▶
> It's socialism, after all, for the Government to own an interest in a company.

> Covered yesterday on YC.[1]

> [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44989773

The post from yesterday was news; this is commentary, as in, not a dupe.

To your point, it's arguably closer to state capitalism, which may be a distinction without a difference if you paint it with the same brush as socialism, but it's one worth mentioning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

The name of the (sub)site we're posting on is HN; YC is the host. :P

replies(2): >>45008334 #>>45008339 #
1. Animats ◴[24 Aug 25 22:23 UTC] No.45008334[source]▶
The phrase "lemon socialism" used to be applied to the UK. The Government had managed to acquire the steel industry, the railroad industry, and the auto industry - all dying industries in the UK. They became British Steel, British Rail, and British Leyland. The end result wasn't good. They turned into jobs programs.

Eventually those were privatized. Now, the railroads are being socialized again.

replies(1): >>45008543 #
2. aspenmayer ◴[24 Aug 25 22:55 UTC] No.45008543[source]▶
It's a pendulum effect, with nationalization on one end, and privatization on the other. If capitalism and money itself is the best organizing principle that works around the world, it does limit the opportunities for change and growth. Socialism doesn't have a counter to the market principle, so they can only incorporate it. The US has a branding problem; freedom ain't free, but nobody even votes, so we earned what we got.