Just curious:

[captainsblog]

Why is it, when the government winds up having a voice in running a private company, after that private company asks for substantial financial assistance from that government, it's considered nationalizing the business, and bad, ...

But when a private company winds up running the government, despite that government not obtaining any financial assistance from that company, it's considered capitalism, and good?

Comments

[glenmarshall.livejournal.com]

Bullshit generally flows in the opposite direction from money.

[headbanger118.livejournal.com]

Au contraire...I find that bullshit and money often flow in the same direction and to the same destination.

[headbanger118.livejournal.com]

Halliburton doesn't run the govt; it merely had an inside track. That's called the "Good ole Boy" network here, and it's in every level of govt. from county to nation. And for the record, I don't approve.

My BIG ISSUE with the United States President hiring and firing CEO's of companies is that it's NOT in his list of constitutional duties. The President is the head of the Executive Branch, not the head of USA, Inc.