Is the U.S. Capitalist, Socialist or Something In-between?


During the Presidential campaign, then-Democratic candidate Barack Obama inartfully described his proposed federal income tax cuts for the middle class as “sharing the wealth.” His more strident right-wing opponents – including Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin – almost immediately labeled Obama “a socialist,” adding to a litany of alleged infirmities as a presidential candidate that included lacking executive experience; being a closet Muslim; and “someone who pals around with terrorists.”

Yet in reality Obama’s middle class tax proposal may have been the least “socialist” concept that has been floated and acted upon by a broad array of elected officials and senior-level appointees since four weeks before and four weeks after the Presidential election. This includes not only the huge federal financial bailout and taking of ownership of major investment and commercial banks – something embraced by the establishments of both political parties and the putative ‘capitalist’ business elites – but a series of other proposals, including the bailout of the Big Three American automakers, that are far more socialistic than a tax cut.

Of course, effective campaigning, like good television advertising, tends to have at least two fundamental characteristics in common – oversimplification and hyperbole – so one might forgive or ignore the campaigns for taking liberties with such terms. Yet the ready and frequent use of the term “socialist” by a variety of sources does raise serious questions as to whether anyone out there really understands either capitalism or socialism as concepts or political constructs. This might help us know how much we should apply either label to the U.S. given the prevailing economic malady and the series of palliatives being offered up by the current and future Administrations, respectively.

Socialism, of course, places primary ownership of the means of production in the hands of the state, or in some cases, corporate entities controlled by the state. In its extreme cases, such as in North Korea, this reality is absolute; in many other countries, state control is predominant and preeminent but pockets of private enterprise, usually small-scale and concentrated in agriculture or business services, still exist.

Capitalism is a much more vague idea but essentially reverses priorities, putting the predominant role in the hands of private interests such as investors and corporations. State power in a capitalist country usually focuses on the creation of standards, public health, safety, and welfare, such things as regulating the currency, protecting the environment, and assuring the health of the populace.

In contrast to the 19th Century, the US already operates on a much-diluted form of capitalism. Our markets are not free; they are highly regulated (and yet many would today argue they are not highly regulated enough). The exchange rates and values of our currency do not float freely but are heavily manipulated through federal government rate-setting activities. Investment decisions are not driven purely by return expectations or classic risk/reward analyses; rather they are incentivized or discouraged by a byzantine system of rewards and penalties affectionately known as the Internal Revenue Code. In other words, the federal government – under both Democrat and Republican Administrations and supported by both Houses of Congress – intervenes routinely in how markets operate and how capital is deployed. In this sense the federal tax code is fundamentally a mechanism for wealth redistribution, so candidate Obama’s statement about his proposed middle-class tax cut simply represented a shift to one set of priorities, much as the Bush Administration’s tax cuts represented another.

If you accept the premise above that the U.S. already had one foot out the doorway between a more pure form of capitalism and socialism as it is widely practiced in other Westernized countries, it now appears that the U.S. is being pulled at warp speed through that doorway, as a consequence of the myriad plans (schemes would be a more accurate description, given how little thought appears to be devoted to them before rolling them out at press conference after press conference) for bailing out various classically capitalistic institutions.

Bailing out a completely broken mortgage finance system that rewarded handsomely (some would say shamelessly) myriad private-sector entities and the mortgage industry represents a shift towards socialism. Providing over $100 billion in taxpayer support for AIG is socialism, not capitalism. Providing $200 billion of taxpayer support to prop up consumer credit, so that Americans can return to a false economy predicated upon unbridled, conspicuous consumption, is socialism not capitalism.

The fact that these and other extraordinary moves by the federal government are undertaken in the name of saving our capitalistic economy and staving off a severe economic depression does not change the fact that we are experiencing – first under Bush and soon under Obama – a powerful drift towards extended state control of the economy. Free-wheeling and unfettered profit-making and corporate greed on the way up, backstopped by enormous government bailouts on the way down, represents in some ways the worst of both worlds .

We now add to this series of attempts to solve our economic crisis the so-called “New, New Deal” proposed by President-elect Obama the week before Thanksgiving. Focused on fixing America’s infrastructure improvements, technological innovation, and education – as well as the creation of 2.5 million new jobs in the process – the New, New Deal basically supplants a failed, quasi-capitalistic economy with one that is driven primarily by government spending on government projects, in part for the purpose of creating new government jobs.

There will be two silver linings if all of these government bail-out strategies and the implementation of Obama’s New, New Deal succeed: The U.S. could emerge from this economic abyss in which we find ourselves; and pass, at last, a comprehensive, universal healthcare reform that will not look nearly as socialistic as it may have appeared only six months ago.

Yet there are some real dangers as well. A massive government program that extends more and more into every aspect of the economy could bring enormous inefficiencies as political decisions overtake market-based decision-making. It is not beyond the pale, for example, that banks may make loans to customers not based on their fundamental ability to pay but their ability to shift their risks to the government. Land use and other decisions once left to markets and localities could be placed in the hands of federal regulators, where the influence of well-connected developers and special interests (including such laudable causes as environmental protection) could be profound.

Of course, this is a situation that could also change our national geography in profound ways. Parts of the country well-plugged into the new ruling party – the Northeast, coastal California, and most of all Chicago – could be huge beneficiaries. But the real winner, as I have argued before, may be the Nation’s Capital and its environs, whose power over the private economy would be greater than at any time since the Second World War.

Of course, it may perhaps be both overly simplistic and somewhat hyperbolic to suggest that Washington, D.C. is morphing into "Pyongyang on the Potomac." However, unless the federal rescue of our fundamentally capitalistic economy and society is not very carefully orchestrated, we may see greater similarities with another centrally planned economy – the one run from Paris. In that case, similarities between Paris and Washington, D.C. may extend well beyond the boulevarded street network and classical scale bestowed upon us by Pierre L'Enfant; we could also end up with something more akin to France's centrally controlled dirigiste system than anyone could have expected.

Peter Smirniotopoulos, Vice President – Development of UniDev, LLC, is based in the company’s headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, and works throughout the U.S. He is on the faculty of the Masters in Science in Real Estate program at Johns Hopkins University. The views expressed herein are solely his own.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Capitalism vs. socialism

The comments here and my understanding of human nature suggest that some sort of a hybrid capitalist-socialist system may be about the best that a society can do. Given the intuitive, mostly irrational, highly subjective, inefficient nature of U.S. politics, it appears that intelligent balancing of special interest demands or needs against costs and benefits to the "public interest" is the only feasible way to make politics more rational. Doing that seems to be either politically very difficult, maybe impossible. Given all the spin as the article and others acknowledge ( ), getting to unspun truth via unbiased logic is basically non-existent.

What might help rationalize things is to assess and compare efficiencies and measures of social well-being in existing "socialist" societies and more capitalist societies such as the U.S. Although the article asserts that government intervention generates enormous inefficiencies, my experience in the private sector over the last 30 years or so indicates that private sector entities, especially big ones, can be awfully inefficient, e.g., U.S. health care costs roughly twice that of industrialized countries with 'socialized' medicine, but with about the same or mildly worse outcomes. Given that, what does the data say? I suspect that the wheels come off the socialist cart when things go too far, e.g., modern Greece (assuming Greece is 'socialist'). On the other hand, when capitalists call the shots as they tended to do in the 1800s and early 1900s, that tended to give society a rather nasty, brutish life ( - legal insider trading, intentionally manufactured financial disasters, complete disregard for the environment, etc).

To the extent a comparison can be done, exactly how well do more or less socialist societies compared with more or less capitalist societies. I bet the hybrid model would give the best outcomes. That makes sense if one sees U.S. politics as a battle of special interests vs. the public interest, assuming the latter can even be defined. Articulating that definition is a rare ( ) but probably worthwhile endeavor.

Cool Find! I will get some

Cool Find! I will get some coffee today and post some comments here more often.
harga honda jazz 2015

nice post

Very greatful for the information presented. I have a great time reading your content. Keep it up.feast your diet away program


Very greatful for the information presented. I have a great time reading your content. Keep it up.the high performance handbook

I read your post very

I read your post very carefully and I want to say that the USA is a Diplomatic country. I personally don't like the policies of the USA they ruin the world order, so they don't follow them. So they should review their policies.
sore muscles

sky vue - Bishan New condo

sky vue - Bishan New condo launch by Capitaland Singapore at Bishan st 15. Sky Vue condo is located mins walk to Bishan MRT. Full set floor plan for ...

snoring chin straps Check

snoring chin straps Check our latest snoring chin strap review before buying this anti snoring device. You also find where to buy 1 get 1 free in our snoring chin strap...

tao of badass Become A Total

tao of badass Become A Total Badass At Meeting And Attracting Women This site is a leading resource for information about the Joshua Pellicer Tao Of Badass PDF book and... A A RebelMouse site for fans of relationship expert Mike Fiore. On this site, you can read reviews of Michael Fiore texts, products, books, PDF downloads, and new releases...

read more Old School New

read more Old School New Body Workout System: The Age-Defying Focus4 Exercise Protocol For Achieving Your Ideal Body. This site is a leading resource for information about the Steve Holman Old School New Body PDF book and workout training system that teaches you how to lose weight....