There's weak sauce and then there's this. The most vague, assumption upon assumption laden of arguments FOR increasing the use of force against the citizenry by the government.
I'm still waiting for anyone to address what could be done to change the so called inequality problem. I'm still waiting for anyone to describe in terms other than wishes and horses how they can tell inequality of outcome causes harm to anyone, rather than people causing themselves harm by inequality in ability to choose well what to do with one's time/money.
Krugman's opinion is the field was rigged by bad government to stack it towards the enrichment of the rich to the detriment of the poor. My opinion is, all attempts to organize economies hurt the poor, since the reason they are poor is they are not as resourceful and cannot dodge consequences of government meddling like the rich can. The poor also cannot set themselves up to get big payouts from government like the politically connected do. IOW - more government meddling, more inequality.
If there's anything in Krugman's analysis that would justify the use of the government's monopoly on coercive force, I'd like to see it. I think his answer would, "If I could just run all this like I think it should be run, we wouldn't have all this inequality, everybody would be better off."
Really? OK great, just run this whole show then Paul, what could possibly go wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment