“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

23

Child Molesting Teacher Can’t Be Fired Thanks to Union

In 1997 a Brooklyn teacher was accused of attempting to molest a sixth-grade girl at PS 138. As it happened,

0

The Left Corrupts and Steals a Culture, It Doesn’t Convince

Just a sort of homily for today… I was recently reading an article about the folk music scene as it

1

After The Elections: Where Is America Now? It’s Dead, That’s Where

Due to the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama, the United States is officially a failed experiment. In fact, his election