The Armchair EconomistReader comment on: A Query From Abroad Submitted by Jim (United States), Dec 24, 2009 12:43 Not a textbook, but a collection of vignettes that originally appeared as articles in Forbes magazine. Applies "economic thinking" to every day situations, often with surprising results. This one is particularly valuable in providing stories of how things don't always work the way it seems they should on the surface. FWIW conversations about "Capitalism", especially vs. "Socialism" usually conflate at least these things: - External formation of capital / outside ownership of "the means of production." - Free and / or market based vs. directed exchange of goods & services. - What are socially preferrable allocation(s) of wealth, goods & services? - Government participation in or action supporting or restricting the previous two. I'm not taking sides here. But, for understanding, arguments (in the formal sense of "argument") about why "Capitalism" or "Socialism" is better or worse than the other mainly amount to: - Doesn't work economically. (For several values of "work" - producing stuff at all, innovation, alignment of economic output with what's desirable, and a few others.) - Lets people do bad things that we could otherwise prevent. (Again for several values. "Over-charging" bank customers for bad transations is one example. Doling out economic favors to the unions who vote for you is another.) - Impacts a fundamental "right" that trumps pretty much everything else. So, the "right" to be left alone, to own your own life, or to the property - things and thoughts - you need to survive and flourish on the one hand. This vs. the "right" to not be hungry, poor, unhealthy, or perhaps more hungry, less rich, or less healthy than anyone else. So, for example, you'll see an argument "for" Capitalism, go something like: "Doesn't work - look at the kerfuffle in California or the collapse of the Auto industry, that came about in part driven by entitlements of the folks within, disconnected from what someone would pay for what they produced. Then there's the rake-offs to the UAW that have pretty much each of the rest of us buying a Chevy that we don't get. Why is their well-being more valuable than mine?" That's one argument of each type, in order. The kicker, kind of a Trojan horse in Landesberg's book, is that we're not very smart compared to the complexity of many people doing many things to get the many different things they want and value. Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing. Submit a comment on this article Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item |
Follow Us On:
ADVERTISEMENT |
