“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.

Trending Today
Craig Newmark

Craig Newmark

Associate Professor of Economics, North Carolina State Univ.

Related Articles

0

‘Historian’ Gets Mouthy At Congressional Hearing

I meant to get to this last week, but “historian” Douglas Brinkley is so forgettable as a writer that it

10

Herman Cain: Obama’s NLRB ‘A Direct Assault on the Free Market System’

Presidential candidate Herman Cain (R) recently spoke with FOX Business Network’s (FBN) Neil Cavuto about the dispute between the National

16

Another Example of How the NYTimes Warps Truth

This weekend The New York Times, the fishwrap of record, had yet another one of its left-wing excuses for political