The Market Will Provide

So, a few questions for the “Free Market” crowd:

1) If you guys are so big on getting rid of government and letting The Market effectively become government, why run for public office?  If you hate the public sector so much, why don’t you try to find some kind of privatized solution to achieve what you’re looking to accomplish?

Yet, no, Michele Bachmann and other Tea Party dorks are more than happy to take government paychecks.  (Psst… not sure if anyone told you this, but if you get elected into office and then work to destroy government, you’re basically getting rid of your own jobs.  Or at least you should be, but you won’t because you’re just as huge a hypocrite as everyone else.)

2) So, if market rule were actually somehow superior, applying the same Libertarian logic one step into the “meta” realm, wouldn’t you think that Market Logic would have ensured at this point that it succeeded over public, representational government?

3) What’s the real difference between someone taking home $27 million dollars and someone taking home $25 million dollars?

4) If there shouldn’t be any limitation placed on how much money someone is able to make, then logically the 1% of the population that owns over 50% of the wealth should be allowed to continue to gobble up that wealth until they own 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, etc.

How do you not see anything wrong with this?

5) If the wealthiest really were “job creators”, then we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re currently in.  It’s not like the aforementioned top 1% somehow can’t afford to start enough businesses to employ large chunks of unemployed — they own over 50% of the nation’s wealth!  So why haven’t unemployment rates dropped in correlation with the increase in how much money the wealthiest own?

6) Why base an entire economic system on Humans Behaving Rationally when all evidence in recorded history indicates our minds behave otherwise?  You might as well base an economic system on how many rainbows a unicorn can fart in a given hour.  It is, at best, completely unscientific.

7) How is allowing 1% of the population to siphon unmitigated amounts of wealth out of the system supposed to facilitate choice?  One would think that there would be a greater capacity for choice, and substantially more options for everyone, if nobody were allowed to gobble up so much.  I know I, for one, would be far more inclined to start a business or take any sort of risk if half the money in our economy wasn’t held by 1% of the population.

There’s more to choice than being able to choose whether or not to pay your taxes.

8) So, if we deregulate and eliminate employee protections and employees’ rights to organize and demand fair pay, how does THAT give anyone choice?

And what are people supposed to do, then?  “Compete” with overseas sweatshop workers, offering to do the same jobs for EVEN LESS pay?  (Some conservatives have actually suggested this!)  How does that make anything better for anyone?  And how is anyone supposed to be able to save up to try to start their own business when they’re paid pennies a day while the executives rake in unmitigated incomes?

Meanwhile, who’s supposed to buy any of the shit that’s getting made?  People in the U.S. who have lost their jobs to outsourced labor can’t afford to.  And the people who took those jobs who are getting paid tiny amounts of money certainly can’t.  Especially when they’re starting to get replaced with robots.

Capitalism might be good for a lot of things, but it fails spectacularly when it comes to the inevitable mechanization of labor.  As machines get better and faster and more resilient and able to repair and reprogram themselves, there’s less work to go around.  And technological progress has been an exponential curve.  So who’s going to have any money to buy ANYthing when cheaper and cheaper robots have become the majority of the world’s workforce?

And how — HOW, how how how HOW — can you POSSIBLY want to build a system of governance around “voting with your dollars” in such a shitty economy, with such a shitty downward trend, where conservative “leaders” are saying that Americans should be competing with overseas labor for substantially less pay!?  Are you OUT of your FUCKING MINDS!?  That disenfranchises almost everyone in the middle and lower classes.  How is that even the tiniest bit better than democratic, representational government?  Yeah, it has its flaws — and some pretty major ones at that — but at least it doesn’t tell everyone “vote with your dollars; also, we are going to make sure you have less dollars.”

9) If you’re as focused on small businesses as you claim, then what difference does it make if taxes are raised on the wealthy?  The CEO/ of a small business isn’t going to be raking in $20 million a year in profits.  So what does it matter if top executives and entrenched businesses are taxed, or have limitations placed on them?

10) How can eighth grade “simple supply and demand” economics POSSIBLY deal with a global, increasingly technological economy?

3 thoughts on “The Market Will Provide”

  1. I get the impression that people who preach this sort of stuff are either hopelessly deluded or rather rich themselves.

    1. Well, hopefully not “hopelessly”. I hold out hope that there’s SOME argument, some perfect formulation of words, that will change their minds. Maybe not, but if there isn’t, we’re all fucking doomed and might as well just pack it in and say “fuck it”.

  2. Re #1: The pose with anti-government or anti-worldly conservative types is that they’re all following the example of Sulla, who took the mantle of dictator in Rome, instituted constitutional reforms, and then retired. Seeking impure power may be permissible when it is sought for virtuous ends.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *