Works better .... where? What country with collective ownership and management of the economy has EVER worked? Not in the past, not now, not ever.
Again, unless you specifically define the term "socialism", I couldn't possibly attempt to answer the question. China is a country where, according to recent estimates, 96% of economic output is generated by various state-owned entities. Is it such an abject failure? In Norway, the SOE share is 48%. In Singapore, it's 23%. All higher than the world average.
China is benefiting, presently, from converting a billion plus peasant farmers to sweat shop factory minimum (their minimum) wage earners. That won't last. Neither will socialism/capitalism lite. Norway survives strictly because of StatOil. When the dirty carbon based oil runs dry they look at other sources around the world. Hey no problem they tell the greens to eff off just like Exxon. Only they get a Socialist pass for some reason. At some point the well will eventually run dry and then no more Daddy maternity leave nonsense and all the rest. Everything has a cost. As for Singapore WTF is 23%. The Fed probably owns twice as much. LOL.
Yeah.. You keep telling yourself that. As I said, this was for @tomorton, you and your socialist buddies just distort everything and run from every piece of evidence(like the charts of West Europe and US, which coincide with the factors I mentioned. India became just another socialist shithole, thanks to another one of your idiot british socialist economists, who basically told them that a centralized economy was a great idea.Which is also shown on the chart. Like I said, this was just one piece of evidence. Like I already suggested to you in another thread: Read "A Monetary History of The Unites States" for in depth data. But of course you won't...Anything that goes against your socialist fantasies you simply ignore and pretend it doesn't exist(like you did with the chart as I mentioned). You are just like your buddies... Running from facts and reality, just to keep believing the crap you want to believe. So be it, I don't give a shit... Dream on... I won't waste more of my time in this thread.
Right, so I guess what you're saying here is that sometimes, for some reason, collective ownership and management of the economy actually does work, right? As to the strange Fed comment, I don't really know what you could possibly mean by that. How can the Fed "own" a share of US GDP?
Forceful taking from private citizens does work to an extent. Chavez made it "work" ... till it no longer "worked". Yes I agree it can be done right up till it collapses like it always does. As to how can The Fed own a share of US GDP. By you posting here (unless you are a Socialist bot) I assume you can read, right? The news media has been all over it for years and years. Trillions of treasuries on its balance sheet bought with "printed money" the socialist way, which fueled the stock market. Many traders park treasuries in a trading account to backstop their stock and or futures trading. The Fed likewise. Also previously there was Maiden Lane I and II. Last but not least Fed rules were changed either during or after the last economic crisis to allow them to be able to buy anything. Annnny thing. But who knows really how much and what percent they do buy. They answer to no one. Another thing ruling Socialists do.
To be sure, I am aware of all the Fed stuff... However, I still don't understand how any of it implies that Fed "owns" US GDP. For one, GDP is flow, whereas Fed holdings are stock, so we're not even talking about the same dimensionality. Do you think Singapore, with its economy characterized by a high degree of collective ownership and management, is going to collapse?