---------------------------
Mr. Gourley wrote a letter to the editor in response to a letter by Mike Comstock. I have previously dealt with Mr. Gourley here and here. In both of these examples Mr. Gourley invokes Adam Smith, and does so again in today's letter. First, Mr. Comstock:
---------------------------
I never continue to be amazed by the ignorance and lack of historical perspective liberal letter to the editor writers display. I had to laugh at the claim that in the real world, people reject conservatism.
The truth of the matter is, in the fantasy perfect world that liberals dream about, everybody would make an above average wage, all kids would have high grades, and we would receive government benefits and care far greater than what we individually contribute. Everybody would have the job they love, an abundance of money and material possessions. And for the last 100 years, these socialist daydreamers have attempted to rewrite the laws of economics, human nature, and mathematics to prove their case and create their utopia.
Now, $16 trillion in debt and caught in an economic implosion that is impossible to escape, they try to blame Reagan, Bush, and Daines for the impending catastrophic end to our once great nation. Their years of wealth redistribution, war on capitalism, bribing of the populace with free handouts and dividing people have turned us into a nation adrift without purpose, meaning, morals, guidance, or conviction. Their careless spending, borrowing, and unending printing of money has devalued our dollar and destroyed our economic future.
True, those who are self-centered, lazy, uneducated, unmotivated, and unemployed do tend to favor those promising free ice cream over conservatives who would rather kick them in the butt and tell them to get a job. But soon enough, the cold hard reality of decades of liberal policies will perhaps awaken a populace which has been swindled out of its future.
In the real world, the natural world, it's “live and let die,” perhaps an unsavory and cruel realization, but true nonetheless. It will be interesting to see who survives the upcoming revolution.
Mike Comstock
Bozeman
-----------------------------
Now for Mr. Gourley's response:
I never continue to be amazed by the ignorance and lack of historical perspective liberal letter to the editor writers display. I had to laugh at the claim that in the real world, people reject conservatism.
The truth of the matter is, in the fantasy perfect world that liberals dream about, everybody would make an above average wage, all kids would have high grades, and we would receive government benefits and care far greater than what we individually contribute. Everybody would have the job they love, an abundance of money and material possessions. And for the last 100 years, these socialist daydreamers have attempted to rewrite the laws of economics, human nature, and mathematics to prove their case and create their utopia.
Now, $16 trillion in debt and caught in an economic implosion that is impossible to escape, they try to blame Reagan, Bush, and Daines for the impending catastrophic end to our once great nation. Their years of wealth redistribution, war on capitalism, bribing of the populace with free handouts and dividing people have turned us into a nation adrift without purpose, meaning, morals, guidance, or conviction. Their careless spending, borrowing, and unending printing of money has devalued our dollar and destroyed our economic future.
True, those who are self-centered, lazy, uneducated, unmotivated, and unemployed do tend to favor those promising free ice cream over conservatives who would rather kick them in the butt and tell them to get a job. But soon enough, the cold hard reality of decades of liberal policies will perhaps awaken a populace which has been swindled out of its future.
In the real world, the natural world, it's “live and let die,” perhaps an unsavory and cruel realization, but true nonetheless. It will be interesting to see who survives the upcoming revolution.
Mike Comstock
Bozeman
-----------------------------
Now for Mr. Gourley's response:
Mike Comstock, berating liberals for supposed “lack of historical perspective,” betrays his own historical ignorance. The reality is that conservative policies have betrayed capitalism. (Ok, we have Mr. Gourley's premises: Mr. Comstock is ignorant of history, and, conservatives have betrayed capitalism. Let's see if he proves them and also refutes Mr. Comstock's letter.)
Adam Smith, the 18th century father of modern economic theory and capitalism, warned the world about the excesses of wealth inequality. Whereas conservatives of the late 20th century remade Smith into an advocate of unfettered free markets, the real Adam Smith was quite the opposite . A strong proponent of government regulated free markets, he argued that the marketplace must be regulated in order to prevent national self-destruction at the hands of the financial sector and merchants (corporations) who are prone to exploit laborers and hoard wealth. Smith devoted some 100 pages to describing how banks should be regulated.
A moral philosopher and economist, Smith argued that nations fall, via revolution by the masses, when too much of a country’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of too few. Today, wealth inequality in America is the equivalent of a third world nation: statistically, the 400 richest Americans own as much wealth as the poorest 180,000,000 Americans.
Smith’s answer to preventing capitalism from creating massive wealth inequality, and hence economic collapse and revolution, included marketplace regulation, progressive taxation, worker protections, living wages, and government-funded public education — policies anathema to many conservatives today. (Mr. Gourley spends three paragraphs extolling the virtues of a man who died more than 200 years ago, a man who never came to America, and a man whose views aren't so easy to summarize in the manner Mr. Gourley attempts. As to what he says about Adam Smith, well, we could address the many misrepresentations, but that would be fruitless and a diversion from the actual issues raised by Mr. Comstock.
Adam Smith, the 18th century father of modern economic theory and capitalism, warned the world about the excesses of wealth inequality. Whereas conservatives of the late 20th century remade Smith into an advocate of unfettered free markets, the real Adam Smith was quite the opposite . A strong proponent of government regulated free markets, he argued that the marketplace must be regulated in order to prevent national self-destruction at the hands of the financial sector and merchants (corporations) who are prone to exploit laborers and hoard wealth. Smith devoted some 100 pages to describing how banks should be regulated.
A moral philosopher and economist, Smith argued that nations fall, via revolution by the masses, when too much of a country’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of too few. Today, wealth inequality in America is the equivalent of a third world nation: statistically, the 400 richest Americans own as much wealth as the poorest 180,000,000 Americans.
Smith’s answer to preventing capitalism from creating massive wealth inequality, and hence economic collapse and revolution, included marketplace regulation, progressive taxation, worker protections, living wages, and government-funded public education — policies anathema to many conservatives today. (Mr. Gourley spends three paragraphs extolling the virtues of a man who died more than 200 years ago, a man who never came to America, and a man whose views aren't so easy to summarize in the manner Mr. Gourley attempts. As to what he says about Adam Smith, well, we could address the many misrepresentations, but that would be fruitless and a diversion from the actual issues raised by Mr. Comstock.
With only one paragraph remaining in his letter, we look forward to the possibility that Mr. Gourley will not only establish his premises [Mr. Comstock is ignorant of history, and conservatives have betrayed capitalism], but that he will spend at least some time discussing something Mr. Comstock wrote.)
Many corporations (Corporations? What about conservatives?)
now reject historical capitalism in favor of plutonomy, an economy controlled by a handful of super-rich individuals (Google “plutonomy memo”). While CEO salaries are astronomical, the working masses are being paid less and less, increasingly living in poverty and leading the government to subsidize minimum wage jobs through various social public programs. For their part, corporations are happy for the taxpayers to supplement their workers’ meager salaries. (Whew. Quite a litany. Much of this might be true. We could discuss the reasons these things have happened, all of which can be laid at the feet of big government interventionism, but again, they are a diversion. Mr. Gourley never seems to get around to discussing the basis for his assertions about Mr. Comstock's ignorance of history or how conservatives have betrayed capitalism.)
When will America be rescued from plutonomy and return to true capitalism that benefits the masses? (Did you know that true capitalism intends to benefit the masses? I didn't either. In reality, capitalism is no mystery, except perhaps to people like Mr. Gourley, who have been polluted by their worship of big government redistributionism.
Capitalism, quite simply, is the willing, legal, eyes-open exchange of things of value. People acting in their own self interest enter into informal contracts to obtain things they value more by offering things they value less in exchange. They don't do this to benefit "the masses." They aren't concerned about societal benefits. They simply engage in behavior that is natural.
Capitalism is natural. And many other people benefit as their actions ripple all through the economy, even though this isn't the purposeful intent of the actors.
So, how did Mr. Gourley do? Well, he never did discuss what he said he would discuss, and never addressed a single thing Mr. Comstock wrote. We are left to scratch our heads.)
Bruce Gourley Churchill
Bruce Gourley Churchill
No comments:
Post a Comment