Whole Foods CEO says 'socialists are taking over' in the US | Hacker News Reader

Whole Foods CEO says 'socialists are taking over' in the US

businessinsider.com

20 pointsbluedino19 comments

>They're taking over everything. It looks like they've taken over a lot of the corporations. It looks like they've taken over the military. And it's just continuing

Lmao. If only.

It is a bit unintuitive for civilians to consider, yet the military is much more like a socialist organization than many are comfortable admitting.

Housing and ration allowances

Free health care for you and your family

Better schools with newer, well maintained equipment

Employees are actually indentured (contractual terms which essentially make these government “property”)

Note I am both pro (lawful) military and NOT a socialist (I call myself a liberty minded conservationist hard-liner).

I was however raised a military dependent (grew up traveling and living throughout the world!)

I do recommend military service to those who aren’t quite sure their place in the world (airforce is a good branch for raising a family!) However I’m also a born and raised technology nerd and make ridiculously more income as a civilian.

The military actually needs technologists. They’re desperate.

That sounds communist, not socialist, due to the housing and food rations, command structure, and depending on your enlistment agreement, inability to separate at will from the org.

Socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

If the military were socialist, it would be controlled by the workers, but instead it’s very authoritarian where the front line employees have no say. This seems to confuse welfare and benefits with socialism.

Which is an example of socialism where workers actually control anything?

While my example may not be entirely text book accurate, I only hear of socialists speaking as you say (advocating fairness as a principle.)

Impressions of working socialism are of a committee deciding who gets what (and what is in everyone’s best interests).

The example might very well be an authoritarian form of socialism, though not really trying to mince words, only to reveal that sometimes working systems we are familiar with actually work outside of the conventions we expect.

There are quite a few socialists who I respect (altruistic intellectuals), though few (0) working examples.

The many worker co-operatives existing in the world today are working examples of socialism.

Good for instance!

Co-ops are a great thing!

I think I hate "back in my day" about as much as anyone else, but the short article quotes him raising valid points; plus, being co-founder and CEO of Whole Food with >40 years there all suggest that he may have some awareness of the topic. I'll check out the podcast later.

Edited for clarity.

Is it the young generation pushing ESG? ESG seems to me like the vanguard of socialism in today's era. And the blame for that rests on the Finks, the O'Learies, and the Buffetts of the world.

Not the young people who don't know any better. They're only acting this way because they aren't educated, or they're desperate. The old heads of capitalism know full well what they're doing.

Listen to the full Reason interview with Nick Gillespie, it’s a great discussion.

Oh my. Why would I believe anything wealthy bossy people have to say? Best scenario, they are biased. Worst, they are delusional.

Yeah socialism for large too big to fail corporations has indeed taken over and made the business environment nearly impossible for smaller companies

I agree.

I may be talking straight out of my ass, but I've been stewing on a chain of events I think I've been following in the USA:

We've left rates too low for too long - my observation is that industries are consolidating left and right with that leeway (who cares if it takes 20 years to see a return, keep buying competitors).

These consolidated, indebted monoliths are then either run terribly (so they get bailouts to protect voters with jobs - General Motors) or diving head first into anti-consumer rent seeking (to pay off their debts from consolidating - the whole Shkreli debacle).

These companies, either unable to pay off debts or diving into anti-consumer behaviors, will in turn have people voting for politicians who will gain the power to tell the monoliths how to operate, and next thing you know these particular companies are at risk of becoming direct extensions of the government, where their operations are dictated by a central authority (we have yet to fully embrace this phase in the USA, but we get so close every few years).

I can think of several historical examples where a central authority dictating how industry is run is a bad thing.

Personally I think it's a feature that companies fail, and we need to encourage our businesses to be happy to take the money and run, not perform this balloon up and seek rent song and dance. I think rate hikes can be a great way to achieve this incentive by increasing the risk involved in such large scale maneuvers.

I'd also be down for some good old fashioned Ma Bell break ups, however IMO it seems like there are too many companies in this position to know where to start. I may be misinformed but it feels endemic in our country.

Does anyone else have any thoughts?

EDIT: some phrasing

Or he’s moving to the right as he aged, or just as he’s chosen to admit. Or, people don’t want to work for what he wants to pay them, or want more benefits than he wants to give them. Cuz profit’s one of his freedoms…

There are less workers as boomers retire, which is what everybody wanted. So, this gives workers more leverage than they had pre covid. And the potential workers have had two years to try out alternate lifestyles and career paths that don’t necessarily involve part time work for the man.

"[Socialists are] taking over everything. It looks like they've taken over a lot of the corporations. It looks like they've taken over the military."

Left or right, I don't know how one could read statements like this and continue to believe the guy has any credibility. Literally just making things up.

> ...and I believe in liberty and capitalism," he said. "Those are my twin values. And I feel like, you know, with the way freedom of speech is today, the movement on gun control, a lot of the liberties that I've taken for granted most of my life, I think, are under threat."

He's leaving WF soon. This sounds like he's running for political office. Nothing wrong with that per se. Only that the publisher should be transparent about being hired for helping to set the stage.

That aside, it's kinda ironic since the left is more pro-organic, pro-sustainability, etc. I'm also wondering what WF pay and work conditions are like? Like an Amazon warehouse??

He did get slapped down pretty hard for talking about Obamacare back in 2009. Maybe this is just him letting loose?

Having said that, I don't really know much about setting up to run for prominent office, other than most of what DeSantis does.

At this point, name recognition it key. Trump, Dr Oz, etc.

I have to presume there are a fair number of ppl on the right who find Trump (the politician) flawed, if not bad for the party. Certainly others are looking to fill that eventual void with more finesse and less chaos.

Or: everything I don't like is either socialism or communism.

Furthermore, these socialists need a damned good thrashing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com