Government official of capitalism is not capitalism

It is difficult to recall a single ideology that leads the Occupy Wall Street movement that sprang up after the 2008 financial crisis. Still, many of these activists have used the opportunity to protest capitalism itself.

According to a recent Wall Street magazine historySome veterans of the Occupy movement now have “superior roles” in socialist groups, including those who support the New York Socialist Lieutenant General, Zohran Mamdani. But as history reveals, the anger of these socialists in capitalism is just as inappropriate as their confidence that the “right” version of socialism will ultimately work.

From Acorn to Occupy

The story of the magazine characterizes Gabe Tobias, who worked for the Acorn team at Santa Ana, California during 2006.

For those who cannot remember, Acorn now represents the Union of Community Organizations for Reform. Was a network of non -profit organizations gained reputation during the 2008 financial crisis. Critics accused Acorn to exert pressure on Congress to promote financial institutions to make more loans to low -income borrowers while defenders claimant The team simply helped the low -income peoples defend themselves against lending and exclusion practices.

But it is undeniable that Acorn, which began in the 1970s, has been upset for all kinds of “social justice” for a long time for all kinds of “social justice” causesfrom wages that live to increased use of the surface sector. They even helped to get the motor voter The law adopted in the 1990s.

Like this 1989 Southern exhibition article It is discussing, the members of Acorn even complained about the savings and loan crisis. He mentions a member who supported the use of surface area to help the homeless by saying “if a home sits empty, the government is ultimately responsible for it”. And like this consumer federation of America report It explains, Acorn (and other groups, including the National Medium Union) has played an important role in ensuring that the affordable housing provisions have made federal legislation passed after the crisis of S&L.

Thanks to these groups and the support of Banking President House Henry Gonzalez (D-TX), the Law on Reform, Recovery and Imposition of the 1989 Financial Institutions required any federal housing bank loans from each federal loan bank to create an affordable housing program. The explicit intention was to help fund “home property and rental of housing for low and income families”. (This language comes from the CFA report; section 721 of Firrea created Both “Community Investments” and “Affordable Housing” programs.)

One undervalued story is that Firrea has also allowed commercial banks and credit associations to become members of the Federal Loan Banks Bank. Is undervalued because there are now 6,500 Financial Institutions, but at that time it was a salvation for the FHLB system because the S&E LS was frustrating. In other words, when a real estate crisis eliminated the members of the FHLB system (the S&E LS), the Congress “defined it” by allowing everyone else to participate in the system.

This move essentially gave all commercial banks access to federal credit progresses.

Governmental crisis against capitalism

Now, let’s go back to Gabe Tobias. It is rather ironic that it attributes the origin of the newcomer socialist movement to the financial crisis of 2008.

For beginners, the S&L crisis was partly the product of government intervention in financial markets. And the level of government intervention used to clean it only in comparison to the level used after the 2008 crisis. And the 2008 crisis were not caused by government liberalization of financial markets. If anything, it was the opposite.

Regardless of this, the consequences of the 2008 crisis included almost 20 years of government support – both through the US Treasury and Federal Reserve – for the two giants sponsor Businesses in the center of the housing market.

Perhaps the names of these institutions and their origin to indicate that they are complaining capitalism Is it wrong? It’s hard to understand how someone gets any attraction supports that sponsor Businesses represent truly privately owned companies, but somehow the Occupy movement has been removed with it.

Limit the government, not capitalism

Is understandable that “The misery of the financial crisis proved to be a generation and then just reached the age” in 2008, but this crisis was undoubtedly caused by a harmful relationship between industry and the government.

The exact label for this layout does not matter. You don’t have to highlight socialism, fascism or anything else. The label will not change the facts: the government has been more involved in financial markets after the great recession, increasingly until the crisis of 2008. The results were bad before and after 2008 and the problem cannot be corrected with even more government involvement.

It is good that Tobias and his friends want to correct what is happening to the system. Supporters of capitalism, including liberals, want the same thing. Many of them even share concern about the poor and people who cannot help themselves, as well as a frustration for people who use the federal government to protect what they have at the expense of everyone else.

Government loans are not capitalism

But these problems are not a mistake of private property and profit incentive. It is not a mistake of capitalism. It is the mistake of expanding the role of the government in the economy while hiding behind capitalism.

Poverty is the physical state of humanity. The success of capitalism in changing this situation depends on cooperation, not exploitation. The marriage of private industry and the government is exploitation and reduces the success rate of capitalism. One could even argue that it leads to absolute fascism, where only people responsible people have rights and the common citizen suffers dramatically.

It is too much to attribute the financial crisis of 2008 to absolute socialism or fascism, but it is also too much to attribute it to capitalism. Anyone who wants to prevent recurring economic disasters, whether they are capitalists, socialists, Republicans, Democrats or members of any other group, must start from this common point.

Removing from capitalism, with increased government intervention and support of the private enterprise, narrows people’s freedom to do what they choose with their own money. Eventually it makes markets more fragile and contributes to crises. They complain that what is said.