Volume 7, Issue 13
What is the true underlying problem of economic inequity in society today? Is it capitalism, in and of itself, as some profess? Or is it the loss of cultural values as some fear?
Noah Smith of Bloomberg News states that capitalism needs reform, not revolution. In his critique, he recognizes the arguments of progressives that, in their opinion, capitalism is fundamentally flawed in that local communities have lost authority, talent is concentrated in big business, and the middle class is shrinking. Some liberals even argue that capitalism is the cause of climate change.
Economists are notorious for stating economic constructs in mathematical terms. What we hear regularly is the measure of debt-to-gross domestic product as a percent. Unemployment, wage increases, inflation, unemployment applications, foreign exchange, interest rates, public savings, and velocity of funds, are normally presented in graphs as projections of mathematical formulas.
However, the science of economics is as much about human nature as it is about math equations.
Smith points out that the value of an economic system should also be measured in terms of deliverables important to everyday life. Certainly, a clean environment sustainable for the generations is critical. Other measures impacting human emotion include affordable health care, psychological fulfillment in employment, reasonable housing cost, adequate child care, a quality education, a dignified retirement, and basic equal opportunity for advancement of the individual pursuit of happiness.
The attack on capitalism as a system, that it must be replaced from the ground up, defies the common-sense logic of building up and course-correcting by reform, instead of by the destruction of a foundation. The fact that Capitalism must be managed for just outcomes was first argued by John Wesley in the late 1700s. Capitalism, unregulated, will not compensate for the basic needs of diversity in human endeavor. Education and health care as services are an investment in the potential of all citizens. Quality in both programs is universally essential to the entire citizenry.
In addressing the principles of discipline necessary for individual enrichment, liberals and conservatives view completely differently the protocol required. Richard Miniter, an investigative journalist and New York Times best-selling author, has stated that guilt plays a role in analyzing economic inequities. When a conservative is unhappy about economic inequality, they want to change themselves. When a liberal is unhappy about economic inequality, they want to change the world. In other words, conservatives apologize for success and liberals blame the system.
Neither properly evaluates and considers the role of citizen responsibility.
Yes, there is systemic privilege in the world today. And, yes, certain elements of society have experienced a past that was oppressive and unjustified. Yet, in America today, access to the tools of success is accessible to everyone. Anyone can attain a high school degree. They may need some help, but it is available. With preparation and hard work, anyone qualified can attend college. Vocational-technical training is a concentrated area of focus in all fifty states. Individuals in America today can pursue their dreams regardless of race, creed, color or sex.
Of course, children with two parents in the household are much more likely to succeed than those with a single parent. Drug and alcohol abuse take a toll on family structure. Early childhood development is important for all children to get a head start. However, no child can receive these services without proper parental management.
Citizens have a responsibility, to the best of their ability, to take care of themselves physically, manage their own health care, get a high school education, live as a law-abiding citizen, and pass on to the next generation more than they received. Liberals would have us believe that every ill realized in society is because the system is corrupt and challenged citizens are victims. Conservatives, on the other hand, are reluctant to reinforce principles that lead to individual success. Progressives seek more and more government services to change the world. Conservatives are silent on the need to balance the federal budget or address the mathematical consequences of ill-advised economics.
Therefore, the only children who receive the benefit of principled nurturing are those with a parent or parents who believe in such doctrine. Other children, abandoned to an environment without principled adult mentorship, find themselves lacking the necessary resources or vision to reach their full potential. Victimization becomes a relative term.
The point that is lost, in the vociferous debate about the outcomes of capitalism versus socialism or communism, is the basic standard to be met for essential citizen responsibility.
Capitalism is without question history’s winner in the production of wealth. Though without society’s cultural input of morality, inequality can be exacerbated. Socialism can, in theory, dictate equal outcome through redistribution of wealth and standardization of individual identity. Though without society’s cultural input for pursuit of happiness, freedom can be threatened.
Without consideration of citizen responsibility, both systems will fail.
In building a sound economic system, society should rely and build on proven success, held accountable for the needs of human nature. Balance is found for the prosperity and freedom sought in the relationship of government and citizen responsibility.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?