Stuck on Stupid

Question:  Is it preferable that people (1) Spend their money in the marketplace on the things and services they desire; or (2) Invest their money to make it available to private enterprise to grow the economy in response to market demand; or (3) Have their money confiscated by government planners to redistribute via an endlessly-expanding list of projects and favored constituencies?

Common sense favors some combination of (1) and (2).  The Political Class, though, will always favor #3 because it maximizes their power, with ideological cover provided by some doctrine of "fairness." Call that a clever disguise.  But if there is anything in economics that qualifies as an Iron Law, it is that this path eventually ends in economic ruin.

Those who resist believing that once pointed hopefully to Marxist experiments in Eastern Europe, but those collapsed in every possible way and are no longer mentioned in polite company. Then it was the post-World War II Western European model of social democracy, the "European Social Contract," that would stand as the shining, morally-superior alternative. That's the one currently falling apart in a hail of unemployment, debt, rocks, bottles, and tear gas.

Just thinking outside the box for a moment, maybe we should try what has always worked and has repeatedly proven to be, by far, and on multiple continents and in multiple cultural contexts, the greatest wealth-generating system ever devised -- Free market capitalism under a minimally intrusive government.

But in the Age of Obama? Our brave class warrior? President Head-Full-of-Mush?  Not a chance.

Byron