“An Audacious Promise: The Moral Case for Capitalism”


James R. Otteson:

Even if we do not all get rich at the same rate, we all still get richer. To see the importance of this point, ask yourself: If you could solve only one social ill–either inequality or poverty–which would it be? Or suppose that the only way to address poverty would be to allow inequality: Would you allow it? This seems a no-brainer: poverty is a far larger factor in human misery than is inequality. If we could have steadily fewer people suffering from grinding poverty, is that not something to wish for, even if it comes with inequality? This appears to be the position in which we find ourselves. The only way we have discovered to raise people out of poverty is the institutions of capitalism, and those institutions allow inequality. Keeping people in poverty seems too high a price to pay in the service of equality. One is tempted to say that only a person who has never experienced poverty could think differently.

Craig Newmark

Craig Newmark

Associate Professor of Economics, North Carolina State Univ.

Related Articles

15

“What You Don’t Often Hear About Those ‘Greedy’ One Percenters”

So very true. People who should know better bemoan the economic means possessed by the 1 percent, but rarely do

4

New paper on income inequality: Does taxing the rich hurt the middle class?

Here’s: an article: by Indian economist: Aparna Mathur. She writes (in part): In a recent: paper: that I co-authored with Kevin Hassett, we explored the

4

Did 85 Democrats Vote In Favor of Government Shutdown?

Back on August first the whole country was waiting for the House of Representatives to raise the debt ceiling and