← Back to context

Comment by softwaredoug

12 hours ago

I’m pretty sure that’s socialism

Socialism would be worker ownership.

This is simply state ownership of what's seen as a strategic business. It's an abandonment of market dogmatism, but not a step towards any of the many ideologies or positions where markets have a smaller role.

  • So by that logic, state provided healthcare is not socialism. But a labor union providing health insurance is socialism.

    Can we get some of that state owned health care :-p

    • > So by that logic, state provided healthcare is not socialism.

      Well, it's not. It's only socialism if the state decides to provide it for everybody.

      A state-owned corporation isn't necessarily socialism.

      (And yeah, you say it like if it's a bad word...)

  • I think the phrase i heard before is State Capitalism. But i could be wrong

    • Yes. State capitalism is definitely the word.

      Usually I suppose, when I think state capitalism I would think something like the Soviet Union, where this happens across many businesses with the state owning everything, but I suppose it is state capitalism, or a state capitalist element in a market system. One might even call it a mixed economy, or a sort of hacked-apart Swedish model without labour unions and state ownership of only certain strategic industries, rather than let's say, state ownership of hospitals.