“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

5

EPA to Give Itself Powers to Preemptively Deny Natural Resource Development?

Once again an Obama regulatory agency tries to give itself wild new powers, powers that would crush American energy and

7

Worst President Ever: Obama’s Intimidation Tactics Continue

Obama and his campaign apparatus have been filling the minds of possible campaign donors with calumnies and untruths about the

0

Grammy Nominee’s Occupy Wall Street Theme Song Features Bloodlust, Violent Imagery

While denizens of Hollywood are running around praising the Occupy-Whatevers as an articulate, non-violent example of “democracy in action” and