“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.

Also see,

Craig Newmark

Craig Newmark

Associate Professor of Economics, North Carolina State Univ.

Related Articles

81

The Chevy Volt Is A Piece Of Crap. Thank You, Government!

Now remind me again: Why have we been giving out $7500 tax credits to get people to buy hunks of

9

Do Not Fear the Chinese Economy

Hand-wringing over Chinese economic growth is both common and bipartisan. Commentators and politicians from the left and right alike find

2

The Hollywood Left: America’s Shame

The Occupy movement continues to stumble across the country, prompting MTV reality show buzz : and, according to high-ranking NYC police