MLM Directory

How can neo-cons claim to love a free market while maintaining the idea of corporate welfare?

I mean, how can a market be free if large corporations are handed bailouts? It isn't just a neo-liberal thing, it's a neo-con idea as well, but neo-liberals seem to be more in tuned with Marxism and socialism so you expect that out of them, but neo-cons claim to love free markets but seem to love big businesses. I expect liberals to not know the difference between cons and neo-cons, but not conservatives.... Libertarians and neo-cons are two different things and they completely disagree with each other.

Public Comments

1. = I mean, how can a market be free if large corporations are handed bailouts? ANYBODY getting "bailouts" is both disgusting and counter-productive. = It isn't just a neo-liberal thing, it's a neo-con idea as well Wrong. Neither neo- nor regular conservatives support such bailouts.
2. Corporate welfare is interferring with the free market and I don't know a single person who was supporting that idea.
3. Most corporations would do fine with LESS government interference
4. Because they have huge stakes in those large companies. They are very good at convincing conservatives that major corporations are the opposite of government oppression. It's a bizarre false dichotomy that far too many cons are buying into. The corporatists have convinced your average hard-working con to fight for them under the false pretenses that they "represent the free market." This is why it's impossible for me to say "BP is a corrupt organization" or "I empathize with the plight of the poor" without hundreds of raging conservatives calling me a socialist commie Nazi.
5. This is a point that is made over and over again. "If free markets can self-regulate and free market capitalism always works out best for the consumers, how do you explain the sub-prime mortgage crisis?" The libertarian (neo-con, whatev) viewpoint is one of the following: 1) that the banks failed due to OVER-regulation 2) that they should have simply been left to fail, and the void left would allow for better self-regulation The first is demonstratably untrue, as it was loosening of restrictions that got us into this mess The second might well be true, but it would come at the expense of many, many people losing their jobs, livelihoods, and general economic turmoil much worse than what the world is currently experiencing.
6. That's why I'm conservative, not a neo-con. The Wall Street class and the lower class live in Socialism, while the middle class lives in capitalism.