I have already explained this in the difference between Stalinism and socialism (so called “neo-liberalism”). It is not that there is this ONE THING that hobbles and eventually consumes the economy (currently we collectively borrow/print 35 cents of every dollar our national government spends). It is that it opens the gate for EVERYONE to feel justified in ripping the meat off the public bone. Everyone has their little insignificant item that is soooo righteous and is no great imposition on the public weal. But it goes without saying that no one would choose to pay less in than they take out.
“The Government! what is it? where is it? what does it do? what ought it to do? […] Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.” ~ Frederick Bastiat, 1848
An approach to economics and social studies in which control of economic factors is shifted from the public sector to the private sector. Drawing upon principles of neoclassical economics, neoliberalism suggests that governments reduce deficit spending, limit subsidies, reform tax law to broaden the tax base, remove fixed exchange rates, open up markets to trade by limiting protectionism, privatize state-run businesses, allow private property and back deregulation.
Investopedia explains ‘Neoliberalism’
The use of the term “liberal” in economics is different from its use in politics. Liberalism in economics refers to “freeing up” the economy by removing barriers and restrictions to what actors can do. Neoliberalism’s policies seek to create a laissez-faire atmosphere for economic development.
Just because it has the word “liberal” in it doesn’t mean that it automatically equates to “socialism”
Rather than spend my time on a semantic debate, I’ve opted to use the terminology of the people here. Someone wants to call the American progressive tax and spending system “neo-liberal” so I’ve adopted that terminology. I’m not going to get sucked in to the self-definitions of “I’m progressive not liberal”. Don’t blame the messenger.
I hate misunderstandings
Hey, get these dead bodies off my racetrack!
And we cry out with joy as we drive through the rain
And our enemies claw from every goddamn side
Only losers take the bus
Only losers, only losers, only losers take the bus
I’m no loser, I’m a letch! Protect me! Protect me!
I’m not one of them, I’m not one of them, I’m not one of them
He has no idea what neo-liberalism, clearly. He sees the word “liberal” and thinks commie instead of thinking of classical liberalism, which is what neo-liberalism is a return to.
Can you quote someone who has used neo-liberalism in that manner? Neo-liberalism is most often associated with the late/post-Cold War shift to the right, economically speaking, and is associated with Reagan and Thatcher, and later the Clintons, who advocated for various free trade policies, most notably things like NAFTA. Domestically, they helped to gut social welfare programs like welfare and the like.
My absolutely awesome Primary school teacher (I was 8) introduced this concept to us with the example of designing a chair for use in a stadium.
What size do you make it?
We came to the conclusion that it would have to be quite large so as to accommodate the most different types of body. Even though it would be uncomfortable, small people would be able to fit in a large chair but large people would not be able to fit into a small chair.
I have decided that this quote perfectly encapsulates the gargantuan mistake in logic you are having.
You are a vehicle for some genes, competing for recombination with alleles of that gene for specific loci at intersections of the gene pool and the environment.
If it was all about ‘promoting’ your genome, we’d all be clones of you. Or in an advert or something.
Ergo, you are a virus.
(ok ok, your ideas are a virus and an unhealthy one to boot)
It’s clear you’ve never experienced either the 0.1% or even the 1% lifestyle, and have never worked in the financial services industry working with investors at that level. Your naiveté is quite fun to read! As long as no one is misinformed by your talking points, it’s all good.
the wealthy also get more use out of all forms of the infrastructure and services financed by taxes, not less but it is not a canard to point out that the people at the bottom pay taxes in response to a claim by a previous commenter that poor people don’t pay taxes. you’ve been sowing quite a bit of misinformation in the commenting threads in your attempts to wage class warfare on the bottom 99%. if you earn less than $343000 not only are you talking out of your ass, you’re also talking against your own interests.
Heck, if you’re a big enough corporation they’ll often build it for you on-demand. When a big-box retailer like Wal-Mart opens a new location on the edge of town the local government will often quite literally build a road to its door (not to mention other municipal services such as electricity, sewage/water lines, etc.) Good luck getting the municipality to invest that much in a small business.
