Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Whose profits are they anyway?
Town Hall.com ^ | 11/3/05 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 11/03/2005 8:48:11 AM PST by libertarianPA

It is my considered opinion, backed by 37 years of radio yammering, that 98.4% of the people in this country who use the word “fascist” have no idea what the word actually means. Ditto for “Nazi.” Being in a helpful mood I embark here on an educational effort so that some of us might actually recognize fascism when it truly does rear it’s ugly head, as it did this week from the mouth of Senator Charles Grassley (R- IA), the chairman of Senate Finance Committee.

Grassley has apparently decided that free enterprise no longer works for America. (The truth here is that Grassley discovered that free enterprise doesn’t serve the goal of empowering politicians.) It is Grassley’s view that American businesses must now seek the favor of the imperial federal government of the United States as to just how business profits must be disbursed. No longer, in Grassley’s economic world, will corporate boards decide on the distribution of profits. No longer will the private businessman be the captain of his entrepreneurial ship. Grassley apparently wants the government to have a de facto seat on every corporate board and a share of control in the spending decisions of every private business.

Let’s get back to the “fascism” word. Sheldon Richman writes in “The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics” that fascist thought acknowledge(s) the roles of private property and the profit motive as legitimate incentives for productivity—provided that they did not conflict with the interests of the state.” In other words, state approval must be sought before important business decisions can be implemented. I think I can simplify Richman’s definition of fascism so that even Americans educated in state schools can understand: Free enterprise (capitalism) is private ownership and control of the means of production. Socialism is government ownership and control of the means of production. Fascism is private ownership of the means of production, with government control. Private ownership with government control? There’s a somewhat familiar ring to that, isn’t there?

Charles Grassley would have admired World War II era Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. During Mussolini’s fascist reign he moved to virtually eliminate the ability of businesses to make independent decisions, including decisions pertaining to prices and wages. The government became the not-so-friendly business partner … a partner with a gun and the legal authority to use force to accomplish its goals.

So, how does this apply to this fine Republican senator? Grassley, it seems, feels that there is a role to be played by the federal government in decisions relating to how corporate profits must be spent, invested or disbursed. Grassley is now on record as wanting (the rhetorical equivalent of “demanding”) that oil companies “donate” 10 percent of their profits to help poor Americans pay their heating bills. Grassley sent letters to oil companies outlining his request; letters he claims to have sent to “embarrass” the oil companies into contributing to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Embarrass? I don’t think so. The right word here would be “intimidate.” Grassley says “It’s not unreasonable to expect corporations with 50, 75 or 100 percent growth in earnings this quarter to contribute a mere 10 percent of those profits to fund programs that supplement LIHEAP. In those letters Grassley also asked that these oil companies report to him on their recent charitable contributions.

Let’s try to get on the reality train of thought here for a moment. Grassley isn’t asking these corporations to fork over the money. He’s telling them. It doesn’t take much of a businessman to know that when the chairman of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee starts writing letters about “donations” and “contributions” the implied threat of government force and/or retribution literally oozes from the envelope.

While some may be surprised to hear such anti-free enterprise mutterings from the person of a senior Republican U.S. Senator, I’m not. Just chalk this up to another reason why I stopped paying dues to the Republican Party years ago, and started writing those checks instead to the Libertarian Party. No economic system in the history of civilization has done so much to lift so many people out of abject poverty as has free enterprise, the dynamic of a free people working together under a system that protects economic liberty. The Republicans now seem to be less than content with merely taxing the living (insert expletive here) out of the corporations and businesses who fuel our economy, now they want to dictate just how the profits that are left after the taxman leaveth are disbursed! Today it’s a demand for donations to heat poor folk’s homes. Tomorrow we’ll be demanding that America’s homebuilders donate a portion of their profits to build low-income (soon to be trashed) housing. Next automakers will be told to contribute some profits to public transportation initiatives.

It doesn’t seem to be enough to political power players like Grassley that they have billions of dollars in corporate taxes to spend on their vote-buying schemes. The new nirvana will be to control the disbursement of corporate profits as well.

Did anybody hear someone say the “f” word?


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: grassley; mdm; nealboortz; oil; oilcompanies; oilprofits
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
Democrats & Republicans... I can't tell the difference anymore. They're all trying to appeal to the same voter.

Pretty soon we're going to start saying, "Sieg Heil" (sp?) to our government officials.

1 posted on 11/03/2005 8:48:12 AM PST by libertarianPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA
Democrats & Republicans Rino's... I can't tell the difference anymore. They're all trying to appeal to the same voter.

That's more accurate I think.

2 posted on 11/03/2005 8:53:47 AM PST by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA

Yes, it's a boneheaded idea, but what I read about Grassley was that he was attempting to "shame" the oil companies into contributing more to some "fuel oil for the poor" fund, not actually trying to take the profits.


3 posted on 11/03/2005 8:54:29 AM PST by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon
Democrats & Republicans Rino's... I can't tell the difference anymore.

Call 'em Drainos - Democrats & Republicans - Americans In Name Only...

4 posted on 11/03/2005 8:56:22 AM PST by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

When you're a U.S. Senator, what's the difference between shaming, inferring, or outright stating? This man is trying to extort money earned honestly in order to pander to people who don't know the first thing about economics!

And that's really not the point anyway! This man has no right to do this in a "free" society. In Nazi Germany, this would be perfectly acceptable.


5 posted on 11/03/2005 8:57:00 AM PST by libertarianPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA
Grassley is generally ok, but he does go looney tunes once in a while.

Years ago he was on a radio talk show in Iowa and I got to ask him a question.

They were talking about the national debt and the general irresponsibility of congress.

I asked him to acknowledge that the government was required to put excesses from social security into the general fund. He did acknowledge it! I was surprised.

He said "Thats right and the excesses are just spent by congress".

Then he said "We have to do something about that". And that was the end of my call.

But this latest call to get into the oil company profits is misguided. Prices are falling because there has been a consumer based backlash to the high prices. We have driven less, car pooled and become more economical with our use of gas as a result of being gored.
6 posted on 11/03/2005 8:58:35 AM PST by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA
Why not write to him here: grassley.senate.gov/webform.htm.

I did, and suggested that he drop the R; and use T, for THIEF !

There's no pesky party line to pretend to toe, and it's more accurate, too!

7 posted on 11/03/2005 9:00:04 AM PST by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon

When George Bush (not considered a RINO) goes on TV after Katrina and says that poverty in America is rooted in racism and basically gives poverty pimps and race hustlers ammunition to blame the white man for the situation in New Orleans...

I'm sorry. The Reps are just as bad as the Dems.


8 posted on 11/03/2005 9:00:13 AM PST by libertarianPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA

Well, agree with you there.


9 posted on 11/03/2005 9:08:44 AM PST by wouldntbprudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA

It was the most idiotic thing I have ever heard anyone say....what about TV stars..Basketball players..Movie stars..concert tickets....homes in Florida...art work...who is to say what is "to much"...really....gas is cheaper than bottled water....Pandering...Pandering.....pandering..and it really is stupid


10 posted on 11/03/2005 9:09:34 AM PST by Youngman442002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Good one. Can I use it?


11 posted on 11/03/2005 9:15:23 AM PST by saganite (The poster formerly known as Arkie 2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: saganite

Please do...


12 posted on 11/03/2005 9:17:25 AM PST by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
what I read about Grassley was that he was attempting to "shame" the oil companies into contributing more to some "fuel oil for the poor" fund, not actually trying to take the profits

Sounds like (stinks like) a typical organized crime 'protection' racket to me...

13 posted on 11/03/2005 9:18:28 AM PST by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

....contributing more to some "fuel oil for the poor" fund, not actually trying to take the profits.

Of course it is. As a small business owner, if the government demands that I contribute a portion of my profits to one of their pet projects, then that government is "taking" my profits.




14 posted on 11/03/2005 9:19:10 AM PST by CTOCS (This space left intentionally blank...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA

According to Exxon Mobil's financial statements, their "obscene" profit is only about 10% of sales. That is not extreme at all. Why isn't anyone looking at it from this angle?


15 posted on 11/03/2005 9:36:03 AM PST by Money Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Money Lady

That's right. If companies like Exxon-Mobil were nearly as profitable as people make them out to be, then even people as marginal as U.S. Senators would quit their jobs and go to work in the oil industry.


16 posted on 11/03/2005 9:43:16 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Reid and his clowns can pout their cherry lips and put on a big show . . . ain't nobody watchin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pylot

Grassley is generally ok, but he does go looney tunes once in a while.


I agree. I had a phone conversation with him also that left me refreshed in his understanding. Was in regard to the farm program and him admitting what we were doing now wasn't working.

We all say stupid things every once in awhile but never here on FR.


17 posted on 11/03/2005 9:43:18 AM PST by PeterPrinciple (Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: libertarianPA
Actually since no one really owns anything in America he is a socialist.

The government just wants people to believe that they own their property.

But when someone can make you pay rent on your property (property taxes), can tell you what you can and can't do with your property (environmental regulations) and can take it away from you any time it wants to build a walmart (eminent domain/Kelo decision) ... then you don't really own the property, the government does. But the government just wants you to believe that you own it so you won't overthrow the government.
18 posted on 11/03/2005 9:46:52 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple

"We all say stupid things every once in awhile but never here on FR."

I am living proof that that is not entirely accurate! 8^}


19 posted on 11/03/2005 9:46:57 AM PST by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
Yes, it's a boneheaded idea, but what I read about Grassley was that he was attempting to "shame" the oil companies into contributing more to some "fuel oil for the poor" fund, not actually trying to take the profits.

Translation: Do so voluntarily now, or we will force you to do it later.

20 posted on 11/03/2005 9:48:47 AM PST by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson