In message beCUk.1513$o15.959@edtnps83 "Chom Noamsky"
was claimed to have wrote:

How much longer is socialism going to have to support the capitalists and
"free" markets?

Capitalism handles this situation nicely, when a company gets too
inefficient it gets replaced either by more efficient competition and it
modifies it's own behaviour or implodes under it's own weight.

The bail-outs are the problem because they unfairly allow an inefficient
company to continue to operate.

Socialism can be made to work, the problem is controlling greed.
Capitalism can be made to work, the problem is avoiding socialism.

People get hurt in both systems, the trick is to find the middle ground
to avoid too many people getting hurt at once. In this respect certain
things in a capitalist society need to be regulated, banking, insurance,
infrastructure, education, courts, safety and defense (both national
defense and police), and probably a few others.

The type of regulation can vary, for things like health, a crown
corporation is likely to be effective. Private hospitals can't get away
with charging $7,000/day if a crown hospital charges $100/day and you
can bet that private insurance will pay a maximum of crown payouts. You
can solve the problem of needing qualified doctors (and other medical
staff) by having the gov't fund the student loans and then letting
doctors work off their loan in crown hospitals and faculties while
paying them a reasonable wage at the same time.

The only case where you really need to nationalize is infrastructure,
police, courts, and defense. Capitalism isn't capable of managing
natural monopolies, so you generally need to nationalize those. You
need some degree of safety, and you really don't want a private police
or court system as they simply have too much power.

The problem today is that for whatever reason we're not willing to let
capitalism prune the massively inefficient wasteful companies and
instead feel the need to maintain them in their inefficient state.