OK I have had ENOUGH!! Time to NATIONALIZE some Industries!!

[The Sushi Bandit]

Lets start with ...

HEALTH CARE

then...

ALL ENERGY SECTORS

I have had ENOUGH of this bullshit!!

[acmavm]

1. Good luck. You'll have to find a few politicians who aren't taking money

from those illustrious industries to get the job done.

[tridim]

2. Yes and yes

It's obvious that unregulated free market capitalism doesn't work when the product is a commodity and a monopoly. Things need to change in a big way, but I'm afraid the corporate lobbying industry will never let it happen.

[The Sushi Bandit]

3. We label them as corporate TERRORISTS

if you say it enough people will start to believe it...

[iconocrastic]

4. How about talk radio?

Except we'd have 4 hour Hillary speaches a la Fidel.

[Greyhound]

6. Talk radio is not an industry, but a sector of an industry. I would however,

like to see all broadcasting licenses put up for bid every time they expire, instead of the automatic giveaway we currently have. Added to the elimination of the T-Comm Act, this would open up the media to a much greater degree.

[iconocrastic]

8. It's too open already

I'd prefer government control of all media, and so would Hillary.

Don't anyone tell me they don't believe it.

LOL

[Zynx]

22. Worst idea ever.

Free political speech, however offensive, must be protected.*

*I must clarify this by saying not all speech is protected despite what some people here think the first ammendment means, but all political speech is.

[AndyTiedye]

5. The Bill of Rights Forbids The Seizure of Private Property w/o Compensation

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

We cannot nationalize these companies, but the government is under no obligation to offer oil exploration leases to them, for instance.

[Greyhound]

7. You are half right, compensation is required, but these seizures of private

property happen all of the time. It's also worth noting that the government gets to define "just compensation". Oil leases are given far too cheaply.

[AndyTiedye]

9. If The Leases Are Found to have Been Issued Improperly, They Could be Cancelled

There wouldn't need to be any compensation if it were found that the process of issuing the leases was corrupt, for instance.

[Big Pappa]

12. So you think

Bush will run these companies any better?:wtf:

[Zynx]

23. Courts define "just compensation". Thank God the government cannot

arbitrarily define it. Just compensation has come to mean fair market value. Have fun dishing out the money to buy up these companies.

[Alexander]

10. What about eminent domain?

Seizures happen all the time. What makes it unconstitutional is seizing land or industries without compensation.

[AndyTiedye]

11. The Government Could Not Afford To Pay…

…the market value of all of the outstanding shares of U.S. energy companies. To take them for substantially less would be violating the Constitutional rights of the shareholders.

If the company is found guilty of wrongdoing, however, that is a different story — substantial forfeitures are permissable as punishment.
If the wrongdoing concerns the awarding of oil exploration leases, that could render the affected leases invalid in their entirity.
That is the approach you should take, as that will pass Constitutional muster, and establish that you are seeking to punish bad corporate behavior.

[The Sushi Bandit]

13. Wrong..

... shareholders stock is priced at "par value". If they bought them from a 3rd party, like stock brokers, that is one of the risks they take. The government would only have to pay for the face value of the stock and not its current "speculitive rate".

Also note that once an industry is targeted for nationalization the stock price will plummit!

If your smart you get out of the oil, medical, utility industries now!

[AndyTiedye]

14. It Is Highly Unlikely That a Court Woud Agree With You

There is a substantial body of precedent that says that just compensation = fair market value.
I think these are among the least likely precedents in all of jurisprudence to be overturned by the current courts.

Par value is essentially meaningless. Some stock has no par value at all.

You would also face the political fallout of depriving a certain number of widows and retirees of their retirement savings.
Stocks like those are the sort of things that retirement funds are often invested in, being historically safe stocks.

[Zynx]

20. That's not the way real estate works.

At the very least you would have to pay the book value of the company since Shareholder's Equity is the liquidation value that shareholders receive if the company decides to liquidate. In the case of Exxon Mobil, this value is still $120 billion.

[Zynx]

19. Eminent domain always involves compensation.

Believe me. I have friends who have had dealings with road construction and they were paid above market value for their property.

[Hippo_Tron]

15. Healthcare yes, energy no

Privatizing energy gives the government far too much power, IMO. Energy can be fixed by breaking up the trusts and forcing the oil companies to actually compete. We should also tax the hell out of their profits and use them for research in alternative energy, because clearly they are interested in maintaining the status quo.

[Independent Democrat]

16. I highly agree......

Health care is a basic human right, not a business proposition. Meanwhile, the energy industry in this country has been starting wars, manipulating gas prices, and compromising efforts to develop alternative energies.

[Zynx]

21. Have fun with the debt load we would incur by buying those companies

out at fair market value. That would be ruinous. Regulations are far easier.

[Vidar]

17. Wonderful idea.

[Zynx]

18. And you have to pay the shareholders market value for those companies.

ExxonMobil alone is worth about $400 billion. The government would go broke trying to do that.

[tigereye]

24. do you really think that the government in it's current state

would be good at managing health care?

Take it from a health care person, some of the private health care companies are much more reasonable than those run by MA or government. JMO

In the sense of energy, there is already some govt regulation.

[The Sushi Bandit]

25. no You dont get it.. complete nationalization

not just regulation..

[tigereye]

26. as a health care professional who has dealt with both govt. agencies and

private insurers, I have to say that I am not in favor of this. I'd support a govt/private partnership first. The govt is not good at running things like this, it would be a bureaucratic nightmare. If they agreed to take payments and parcel them out to insurers and providers, maybe that might work.... but....

and yes, I get what you are saying. I just don't agree with it. Everyone needs to be insured, but I don't think the govt would do that great a job.

[gimberly]

27. Our 'System' should not be set up to allow profiting from basic utilities like

energy, health care, fire/police, schools, water, trash removal, public works

We all pay the cost anyways, so we might as well benefit from an efficient well-thought out sustainable system. AL