Main Entry: cap•i•tal•ism : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market
How the Energy Dice Were Loaded
The names of some of the corporate big shots and industry lobbyists who helped shape the deliberations and conclusions of the super-secret Cheney energy task force in 2001 are now beginning to surface, thanks to a former White House aide who provided a list to The Washington Post.
It’s interesting to discover that Kenneth Lay, Enron’s chairman, was favored with two audiences. But the rest is sadly familiar. The task force, which developed a national energy policy, had all the time in the world for the big energy producers — some 40 meetings with the oil, gas and coal companies and their trade associations — but barely a moment for environmentalists.
2007-07-25
07:14:42
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
. It’s hardly surprising that its report favored producers of fossil fuels at the expense of conservation and alternative fuels.
What this list really does is remind us how and why this administration has squandered six years that should have been devoted to finding innovative answers to the big questions of oil dependency and global warming.
Some energy experts say the Cheney report appears better balanced in retrospect than its critics claimed. But while it clinically assessed a range of energy strategies, including conservation, its actual recommendations were heavily weighted toward finding new sources of supply and removing regulatory impediments to oil and gas exploration and burning coal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/opinion/23mon2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogi
2007-07-25
07:15:15 ·
update #1
That's a very good point, actually. What begins with the free trade in capital ends up as monopoly capitalism that uses the state to defend is interests. I believe that is consistent with Marx's definition, and he coined the term, so maybe he has the authority.
But it is not the dictionary definition, which is free competitive trade in capital. However, no economist would even use this dictionary definition since you can capitalism with imperfect competition. That is why I use the theoretical definition of capitalism as simply the free trade in capital.
The street definition of capitalism is 'whatever the US does' and 'whatever the Soviet Union didn't do'. So even though we have a welfare state, subsidized education, unions, regulations, corruption, subsidized agricultural exports, a military that likes to take out the competition, we are 'capitalist'.
2007-07-25 11:06:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, it does! And right up at the top of the list is GWB, Cheney, and the resr of Corporate America, run mostly by RICH Republicans! Of course this fits right in with free enterprize! And they really do have it free, by paying little or no taxes at all!
I want to be a rich corporate business that doesn't have to pay taxes, and have George over for dinner so we can laugh at all those stupid SOB's who have to pay for it, and don't know, or don't care that they are!
America has to wake up from the drug induced sleeping powder the Republicans have spiked us with for years! NO matter how hard we try, Dem-Lib's can;t make a difference, and do it by ourselves, If you don't all us free-thinking Democrats, and close-minded Republicans alike, are going to continue to pay for George's parties! Since the majority of this country IS Republican, by snoozin', you're losin'! And you are so supremely blasse', that you DO NOT CARE!
Well, I do care, and I wish you people would wake up, before you drive all of us into the ground!
Since you don't like like any of our proposals to change thing, at TRY to at LEAST TRY to come up with a solution! Or stop fighting us every step of the way!
2007-07-25 18:11:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by jaded 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Of course it doesn't. In a capitalist system, companies who think they could profit from wind farms, nuclear power plants, etc. would do so. Some would fail, but others would succeed.
I suspect Big Oil would be against this, even though it would be in their own best interests--and national interests--to pursue these options. *shrug*
2007-07-25 14:32:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mathsorcerer 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Capitalism + Big government = Socialism + Corruption + Wasted Money
Capitalism is a system where the best business wins. Socialism is a system where the most politically connected business wins.
And yes, Bush is a socialist - the militarist, nationalist, expansionist type.
2007-07-25 14:25:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by freedom first 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
Hey I am short for time so all I can say is does this surprise you...probably not....why would oil men favor or even listen to environmentalists?..
2007-07-25 18:37:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by bruce b 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, if capitalism means "lining the pockets" of the dynamic duo.
2007-07-25 19:25:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Funny Girl 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nope... sounds like Cheney's idea for a good retirment fund to me.
2007-07-25 14:17:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Nope sounds more like Corporate Crime... business as usual
2007-07-25 14:21:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
It sounds like more Leftist propaganda from the New York Times to me
2007-07-25 14:17:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
8⤋
........NY Times........LOL!
2007-07-25 14:22:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by dave b 6
·
0⤊
5⤋