Lemon socialism

Last updated

Lemon socialism is a pejorative term for a form of government intervention in which government subsidies go to weak or failing firms (lemons; see Lemon law), with the effective result that the government (and thus the taxpayer) absorbs part or all of the recipient's losses. [1] [2] The term derives from the conception that in socialism the government may nationalize a company in its entirety, while in lemon socialism the company is allowed to keep its profits but its losses are shifted to the taxpayer.

Contents

Such payments may be made with the intent of preventing further, systemic damage to what might otherwise be considered a free marketplace. [3] [4] For example, the bailout that followed the 2008 financial crisis may be described as lemon socialism. [5] [6] [7] The pejorative arises from the belief among free market economists that in a functional free market, failing companies would be replaced by better functioning companies in response to market demand.

The term may also be used to describe government efforts to nationalize companies or industries, in which the government takes over failing companies without taking over healthy companies. [8] [9] Advocates of free markets may then point to the faltering, nationalized enterprises as examples of how government regulation hurts business. [4]

Origin

Mark Green coined the exact phrase in a 1974 article discussing the utility company Con Ed. [8] [10]

The sentiment was earlier expressed in the adage "socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor", which was in use by the 1960s, though the notion of privatizing profits and socializing losses dates at least to 1834 and Andrew Jackson's closing of the Second Bank of the United States.

Joseph Stiglitz used the term ersatz capitalism to describe a similar approach by Barack Obama. [11]

Other languages

In Icelandic, lemon socialism is known as Sósíalismi andskotans, meaning "the devil's socialism", a term coined by Vilmundur Jónsson (1889–1971, Iceland's Surgeon General) in the 1930s to criticize alleged crony capitalism in Landsbanki, which gained renewed currency in the debate over the 2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis. [12] Lemon socialism, or more precisely crony capitalism, is also referred to as Pilsfaldakapítalismi, meaning "skirt capitalism", pilsfaldur being the hemline of the skirt; and the term referring to children hiding behind their mothers' skirts after having done something wrong to criticize the alleged lack of transparency in dealings and reluctance to deal with bad consequences by themselves.

See also

Related Research Articles

Crony capitalism, sometimes called cronyism, is an economic system in which businesses thrive not as a result of free enterprise, but rather as a return on money amassed through collusion between a business class and the political class. This is often achieved by the manipulation of relationships with state power by business interests rather than unfettered competition in obtaining permits, government grants, tax breaks, or other forms of state intervention over resources where business interests exercise undue influence over the state's deployment of public goods, for example, mining concessions for primary commodities or contracts for public works. Money is then made not merely by making a profit in the market, but through profiteering by rent seeking using this monopoly or oligopoly. Entrepreneurship and innovative practices which seek to reward risk are stifled since the value-added is little by crony businesses, as hardly anything of significant value is created by them, with transactions taking the form of trading. Crony capitalism spills over into the government, the politics, and the media, when this nexus distorts the economy and affects society to an extent it corrupts public-serving economic, political, and social ideals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporatocracy</span> Society controlled by business corporations

Corporatocracy is an economic, political and judicial system controlled by business corporations or corporate interests.

In economics, a free market is an economic system in which the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand expressed by sellers and buyers. Such markets, as modeled, operate without the intervention of government or any other external authority. Proponents of the free market as a normative ideal contrast it with a regulated market, in which a government intervenes in supply and demand by means of various methods such as taxes or regulations. In an idealized free market economy, prices for goods and services are set solely by the bids and offers of the participants.

Corporate welfare is a phrase used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations.

Market fundamentalism, also known as free-market fundamentalism, is a term applied to a strong belief in the ability of unregulated laissez-faire or free-market capitalist policies to solve most economic and social problems. It is often used as pejorative by critics of said beliefs.

Nationalization is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state. Nationalization contrasts with privatization and with demutualization. When previously nationalized assets are privatized and subsequently returned to public ownership at a later stage, they are said to have undergone renationalization. Industries often subject to nationalization include what Marxian economics refers to as the commanding heights of the economy – telecommunications, electric power, fossil fuels, railways, airlines, iron ore, media, postal services, banks, and water – and in many jurisdictions such entities have no history of private ownership.

A bailout is the provision of financial help to a corporation or country which otherwise would be on the brink of bankruptcy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Too big to fail</span> Concept in economics

"Too big to fail" (TBTF) is a theory in banking and finance that asserts that certain corporations, particularly financial institutions, are so large and so interconnected that their failure would be disastrous to the greater economic system, and therefore should be supported by government when they face potential failure. The colloquial term "too big to fail" was popularized by U.S. Congressman Stewart McKinney in a 1984 Congressional hearing, discussing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's intervention with Continental Illinois. The term had previously been used occasionally in the press, and similar thinking had motivated earlier bank bailouts.

The United States subprime mortgage crisis was a multinational financial crisis that occurred between 2007 and 2010 that contributed to the 2007–2008 global financial crisis. The crisis led to a severe economic recession, with millions of people losing their jobs and many businesses going bankrupt. The U.S. government intervened with a series of measures to stabilize the financial system, including the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor is a classical political-economic argument asserting that, in advanced capitalist societies, state policies assure that more resources flow to the rich than to the poor, for example in the form of transfer payments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Great Recession</span> Global economic decline from 2007 to 2009

The Great Recession was a period of marked general decline observed in national economies globally, i.e. a recession, that occurred from late 2007 to 2009. The scale and timing of the recession varied from country to country. At the time, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded that it was the most severe economic and financial meltdown since the Great Depression. One result was a serious disruption of normal international relations.

Regulatory responses to the subprime crisis addresses various actions taken by governments around the world to address the effects of the subprime mortgage crisis.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, often called the "bank bailout of 2008" or the "Wall Street bailout", was proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, passed by the 110th United States Congress, and signed into law by President George W. Bush. It became law as part of Public Law 110-343 on October 3, 2008, in the midst of the financial crisis of 2007–2008. It created the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to purchase toxic assets from banks. The funds were mostly redirected to inject capital into banks and other financial institutions while the Treasury continued to examine the usefulness of targeted asset purchases.

The Sweden financial crisis 1990–1994 was a housing bubble that took place in Sweden that deflated during 1991 and 1992, and resulted in a severe credit crunch and widespread bank insolvency. Similar crises took place in other countries around the same time, such as in Finland and the Savings and loan crisis in the United States. The causes of the crisis were similar to those of the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007–2008. In response, the government took the following actions:

The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is a program of the United States government to purchase toxic assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector that was passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush. It was a component of the government's measures in 2009 to address the subprime mortgage crisis.

In political economy, a zombie company is a company that needs bailouts in order to operate, or an indebted company that is able to repay the interest on its debts but not repay the principal.

The Subprime mortgage crisis solutions debate discusses various actions and proposals by economists, government officials, journalists, and business leaders to address the subprime mortgage crisis and broader 2007–2008 financial crisis.

The subprime mortgage crisis reached a critical stage during the first week of September 2008, characterized by severely contracted liquidity in the global credit markets and insolvency threats to investment banks and other institutions.

Social ownership a type of property where an asset is recognized to be in the possession of society as a whole rather than individual members or groups within it. Social ownership of the means of production is the defining characteristic of a socialist economy, and can take the form of community ownership, state ownership, common ownership, employee ownership, cooperative ownership, and citizen ownership of equity. Within the context of socialist economics it refers particularly to the appropriation of the surplus product, produced by the means of production, or the wealth that comes from it, to society at large or the workers themselves. Traditionally, social ownership implied that capital and factor markets would cease to exist under the assumption that market exchanges within the production process would be made redundant if capital goods were owned and integrated by a single entity or network of entities representing society. However, the articulation of models of market socialism where factor markets are utilized for allocating capital goods between socially owned enterprises broadened the definition to include autonomous entities within a market economy.

References

  1. ↑ Krugman, Paul (30 January 2009). "The Geithner put". New York Times. Retrieved 27 October 2018. (Defining lemon socialism as "socialized losses, privatized profits.")
  2. ↑ Rithotz, Barry (6 July 2015). "Greeks Stand Up to 'Lemon Socialism'". Bloomberg. Retrieved 27 October 2018.
  3. ↑ Green, Jonathon (1984). Newspeak: A Dictionary of Jargon. Routledge. pp.  142. ISBN   0-7100-9685-2.
  4. 1 2 Shaw, Randy (18 September 2008). "The Return of "Lemon" Socialism". Beyond Chron.
  5. ↑ Noah, Timothy (30 September 2008). "GOP, RIP? Nearly three decades of Republican dominance may be coming to an end". Slate.
  6. ↑ Will, George F. (29 September 2008). "Bailout on Wheels". The Washington Post.
  7. ↑ "The Bush Crisis Plan: Greatest transfer of wealth in world history". Pravda. 24 September 2008.
  8. 1 2 Green, Mark J. (26 May 1974). "Deciding On Utilities: Public or Private?". The New York Times. New York Times. Retrieved 27 October 2018. ("Critics fear that a rush to public ownership may bring a form of 'lemon socialism'—where the government, as in England, takes over failing companies, but not healthy ones.")
  9. ↑ Hahnel, Robin (2005). Economic Justice and Democracy. Routledge. p. 116. ISBN   0-415-93344-7. ("This problem is also referred to as 'lemon socialism': When social democrats were able to nationalize companies, or industries, it was usually because they were in terrible shape. Consequently they often performed badly as public enterprises simply because they were going to perform badly in any case.")
  10. ↑ Krugman, Paul (2 February 2009). "Lemon credit". The New York Times .
  11. ↑ Stiglitz, Joseph E. (31 March 2009). "Obama's Ersatz Capitalism". New York Times .
  12. ↑ Thorvaldur Gylfason. "Icelandic banks 2008 in context".
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.