“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

13

FBN’s Eric Bolling: ‘Obama’s Economy Will Dip Back Into Recession’

“The debt deal was a bad deal…” We were told that the country was about to collapse like the Weimar

13

Obama Set to Cost Each of Us Hundreds a Year in Higher Electric Costs

Barack Obama’s avalanche of needless regulations on coal-fueled power plants are going into effect and the net result will be

2

Thoughts on the CNN Republican Debate

Well the CNN debate of some of the GOP candidates for president is now in the history books and I