• WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So… what you’re saying is too big to fail corporations are leaches and nationalizing them would be more efficient and cost effective than the current wealth transfer to shareholders?

    • x00z@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think the issue is far more nuanced.

      These kind of companies and their board members want as much money as possible so they are “set for life”. If you as a country make sure that everybody is protected from the bottom extreme of financials, than the top extremes are far less likely to happen.

      This means far better social care, a social security net to protect the people, better minimum wages, higher taxes for the top and lower ones for the bottom, affordable healthcare, etc. These protections make getting rich quite useless. It also makes it so the rich have nobody to make their mansions and fancy cars for them. Why would we? Money only has value if you can spend it, so it’s in our best interest to devalue having a lot of it.

      I don’t see any upside for nationalizing industries except the ones that are an absolute necessity to society, like healthcare, public transit, water, electricity, etc. Anything else is not healthy as it will likely hinder innovation and healthy competition. It would also give a government too much power.

      The companies that still try to take advantage obviously need to be stopped. But trying to stop them individually in a mostly capitalistic western world wastes so much resources that the next big shady company can do whatever they want in the meantime.

      TL;DR: fix the underlying causes instead of trying to fix the result.