« Has Capitalism Revived/Survived? Posner | Main | Can Government Programs be Cut Back? Becker »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Capitalism, Communism, Socialism, Marxism, Engleism, Leninism, Stalinism, The Square Deal, a chicken in every pot, etc. etc. and buckets full of Tar and White Wash; the fact still remains there are good reasons why Twain coined the phrase, "The Gilded Age". As for our current Economic debacle, fifteen percent of the U.S. population still lives in poverty, the unemployment rate is still running high. Even when we don't count those who have given up looking for work. And reality becomes, "All I need is full time paying Job with benefits and I'll take care of the rest". The benefits of Capitalism? Where?


What sort of innovations have been produced by the NSA and other government agencies?Didn't google have the same technology 5 years ago? How they positioned in the market? All these government agencies want everyone to work for the government.


Bravo Dr. Becker.

WRT neilhat -- 15% of the US will always be in comparative poverty. Compared to the US median which is very high relative to other countries.


Jd, That's like saying, "A problem is not a problem as long as we choose to ignore it". More Economics from the bucket of "whitewash"?Now what kind of Logic is that? The only real acceptable "Poverty Rate" is zero percent - coupled with full employment (which has it's own set of Democratic benefits). Unless of course you're an Ostrich...


Capitalism only 'wins' because of the undeniable benefits of the 'free market economy'. Few social democrats (not the same as 'socialists') would disagree with that.
The problem with capitalim is the entanglement between the private sector and the goverment, mutually helping each other out, at the cost of the so much desired open, accessible market place that benefits consumers. Institutions that represent the capitalist economy are the U.S. patent system, the Mexican telecommunication monopolist/grocer Carlos Slim and many others.
Government should not protect private enterprises more than it does consumers, like is the case in Mexico.
The free market with a social democratic government, like the ones found in Europe beneft consumers most. Both the European Union and the U.S. do a pretty good job in protecting consumers.
Consumers in Mexico are a lot worse of. The benefits of the free market are only available for entrepreneurs. Consumer protection has decreased under the PAN governments between 2000 and 2012. Hopfully the PRI will undo some of the damage done the past few years.

Terry Bennett

Philadelphia Mayor Frank Rizzo, when grilled on his open political patronage practice of handing out city jobs to supporters, retorted, "Who should I give them to - my enemies?"

Capitalism is what exists prior to all of our talk about what we should do. People want stuff, they go out and do the work to create it, and they own it. If we're talking about changing from capitalism to something else, we're talking about changing the "own" part - either eliminating private ownership or regulating it out of constructive existence. This monumental change is supposedly justified by the trivial fact that some people want more stuff than other people. I find this diversity entirely acceptable; others apparently do not. Getting to JD's point, which I believe was missed, depending how we define poverty the rate right now could be zero or it could be 100%. I'd like to see us keep our people from starving, and for the most part I believe we do. The surest way to undermine our collective ability to do that is to remove the incentive of private ownership, whence comes the excess with which we do feed the poor.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Become a Fan

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31