[email protected] wrote: > > This is a question for Fred and or others; you said the other day > that, "I think a convincing case can be made for permanent > nationalization." I know Joseph Stiglitz has mentioned that temporary > nationalization of the banks would allow the banks to operate in the > national interests. What is the most convincing case that can be made > for permanently nationalizing the banks?
1. All congressional legislation is repealable and amendable by later Congresses. So the wuestion of "permanent" natinalization is incoherent. 2. The nationalized banks would be run by capitalists and capitalists servants, just as the State Department, the CIA, and the Pentagon are. It would not under any stretch of the imagination be a challenge to capitalist class rule. 3. Mass organizatin is not something one orders from the local bakery to be delivbered with breakfast. All through Fred's post I kept expecting a small girl's voice to break in, We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. Carrol _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
