Yes, Bill O'Reily can recognize the faults in others, but not in himself. He accurately calls Barney Frank a socialist wanting the government to control the economy Barney Frnak's way, but O'Reilly fails (apparently) to realize that he is exactly the same.
It is O'Reilly who has said that the American automakers should be required to produce a certain percentage of "flex-fuel" vehicles, a certain percentage of electric cars, etc. In other words, O'Reilly wants to act as a central planner imposing his views of what should be produced on the automakers. That is socialism. It is also stupid (a quality of which I have accused O'Reilly often, although it is probably not so much stupidity as the fact that O'Reilly--for all of the talk about the "folks"--is interested in O'Reillay). O'Reilly is, in fact, no different than Barney Frank.
O'Reilly has sounded this same central planning, socialist theme before. It is not just his support of the Paulson bailout O'Reilly has suggested controls on oil company prices and salaries, and controls on executive salaries generally . You can look at the archives of this blog for other examples. O'Reilly is a central planner at heart. He just wants the central planning to be his and not that of Braney Frank (despite some striking similarities in what they want to do).
As I have said before, Bill O'Reilly does not believe in free market theory. Of course, why should he be different from all of those communists now on Wall Street? Central planning, however, is still historically proven to be the wrong approach. Further, there is no theoretical way it can work. It is fatally flawed, even in theory. The problem is that central planners may be right in any individual case. The problem is that when they are wrong, and they always will be wrong sometimes--even in any reasonable theory--it is fatal. There is no self-correcting mechanism.
O'Reilly should go give Barney Frank a hug. Underneath, they think the same way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment