Charges have been levied at everyone trying to help our economy's recovery, from Barack Obama to this Institute, and both Republicans and Democrats.

In fact, nothing "socialist" is being done. The allegations are without merit and motivated solely by the political mentality that induces fear into the hearts and minds of citizens in order to gain political momentum for a candidate.  The politics of fear are simply criminal.

Our plan for capital investment in banks was a capitalist, not socialist plan. In fact, direct investment by government does not imply nor should it even suggest a socialist or communist agenda. Rather, by investing directly in banks, government takes on an incubator, not a management role.

Senator Obama's plan to "spread the wealth" is not a blanket redistribution of income, nor does it prevent people from earning more than others. It merely protects the delicate balance of wealth in the nation. It is important to note here that in previous crises, the imbalance of wealth played a major role in the creation of the economic situation. When wealth is concentrated in a limited few, the opposite must create problems. When the majority of the population is suffering lowered standards of living and reduced income levels against increased costs of living, economic upheaval is inevitable. In some countries, such conditions have also created political turmoil, and indeed regime change as well. One only has to look at the French and Russian revolutions, or the history of much of Latin America in the 20th Century to see this point in action.

While we agree that reducing taxes does have a trickle down benefit, such benefits are far too slow to have immediate impact. Nonetheless, we are urging the winner of November's election to reduce taxes on small to mid-sized private businesses. In New York City, taxes on such businesses were reduced and did result in an increase in tax revenues. When the companies have lower corporate tax rates, they can hire and spend more, allowing them to create additional tax revenues from other sources. While New York City did see a significant drop in corporate taxes, it saw a far greater increase in sales and income taxes, increased employment, improved real estate taxes, among others.

The concomitant circumstances of balancing tax revenues would not be socialist, it would be, in fact, capitalist, in so far as capitalism does require a base of buyers or the system collapses. We're now seeing this in the auto industry. As consumer income dries up, and banks refuse to lend because their depositor base is dwindling, auto manufacturers are selling fewer cars. This causes the potential collapse of the companies selling, servicing and manufacturing the automobiles, and eventually depletes the income base of those capitalists at the top end of these companies.

The provision of medical benefits for those incapable of affording them is socialist, but this is no more socialist than providing pension benefits such as Social Security or private pensions partially funded by companies. The American system is not a purely capitalist one, nor is it socialist. Like the composite nature of our populus, our economic system is also a hybrid - combining the best of a number of different disciplines.

Our system of government and economics has survived for more than 230 years simply because it is adaptable and capable of coping with temporary needs. While some complain that what happens in Washington that is temporary becomes permanent, those complaining do not realize that we as a society keep what works, while discarding those programs that do not work.

That is the nature of a capitalist-based open system. Adaptability and endurance are synonymous in our system of governance. This will ensure the sustainability the American nation.