“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

30

Geithner’s Spin: Auto Bailout A Success

At the Detroit Economic Club today, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner tried to claim the auto bailout is a success. It

697

CNN/Krugman: A Space Alien Attack Will Save Us (Disses FDR, Wants a Fake War?)

CNNs Fareed Zakaria and The New York Times’ Paul Krugman have solved our economic problems. They’ve decided that a space

63

The Fed’s $600 Billion Dollar Plan For Economic Suicide

Its called quantitative easing, which is just banker talk for devaluing the a currency. Today the Fed is about to