1. I thought corporate welfare was mostly for industries deemed necessary to the functioning of society, like agriculture. 2. Banking reform in what way? I suspect that's where it differs. 3. Liberal and conservative uber-statists tend to security-state vastly different things. Among other things, liberals tend to security-state bank accounts, and conservatives like to security-state bedrooms.
1. I wasn’t thinking of the Ag subsidy, but it will do. If there is any economic activity that will never run out of customers, it is agriculture. American farms have gone from 40 to 80 acres before WW2 to 600 to 1000 acres now – at least in my part of the country. There are far fewer farmers than there used to be, but the ones that are left are making money hand over fist and do not need welfare. The purpose of the Ag subsidy was not to save the family farm, but to encourage the hyperproduction of corn and lower the cost of food. The USDA also keeps voters happy in low population rural states with a nice handout to farmers (and the big Ag companies like ADM and Monsanto) – and trades this off against EBT cards for poor voters in urban states. The system benefits both political parties and is good for incumbents. Meanwhile, we all get cheap, unhealthy, corn-based food that gives people type 2 diabetes at age twelve, and organic food is excessively expensive because it has to compete with the subsidy. 2. Well, as I said, the elimination of the commodification of debt would be a nice start. How about a reasonable reserve rate too. In more general terms, take away the enormous privilege that the banks have been given to make the stability of our money supply a farce. I don’t like gratuitous regulation (I despise it, in fact) but if it looks like fraud and smells like fraud – maybe it IS fraud. 3. I could certainly argue with this assessment – but that would be rather contrary to my purpose. Historically, when governments have had sweeping powers they have used them in intrusive ways. Sometimes right away, sometimes after a decade or two. It simply makes no sense to believe that we will be better off by letting government have ever more authority to re-engineer all aspects of our lives. Thanks for the comments. I’m always happy to see someone at least engage civilly on politics.