“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 on the Web
Craig Newmark

Craig Newmark

Associate Professor of Economics, North Carolina State Univ.

Related Articles

3

2010: The Entertainment Industry’s PC Year in Review

For the entertainment industry’s practitioners of political correctness, 2010 was another banner year. Even as conservatives have made deserved headway

14

Unemployment Worsens: What Happened to 3.5 Million Workers, Mr. President?

Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge asks an interesting question about the latest jobs data that the Obama administration has released

40

Democrats FINALLY Talking of Cutting Back Govt Employee Pensions

The Washington Post had a recent piece saying that it looks like Washington is finally coming to the stark realization