Moody Center
Ventura's Faulty Economic Theory
RECEIVED Fri., Sept. 23, 2005
Michael Ventura,
Your recent editorial “If New Orleans Were Dry” [“Letters @ 3am,” Sept. 16] exposes a wrong and potentially dangerous point of view that is widely held by well-intentioned people working for the causes of anti-poverty, anti-trade, anti-capitalism, and even Islamic terrorism.
It's not the conclusion that a right-wing cabal is responsible for 9/11 and Katrina, or that the U.S. causes immeasurable suffering by using too much of the world's resources and not sharing, it's the untenable foundation of these conclusions which many assume to be self evident: “Obviously if we had less, the world's impoverished people would have more ... the haves have because the have-nots do not ... we live on theft ... our way of life is a criminal enterprise.”
The author lends some authority to his views by citing Lao Tzu author of the Tao Te Ching, who unfortunately died 1,200 years before the arrival of the phenomenon of sustained growth in living standards. But let's ask ourselves what Tzu would think about capitalism in China if he were alive today? Wouldn't he look at the experience of his country over the last 70 years and determine that the reliance on sharing wealth rather than creating wealth does not work? Wouldn't he conclude based on China's experience and on the experience of their neighbors like India and North Korea that economic growth fueled by capitalism and free markets is obviously the best long-term answer to poverty, disease, and environmental damage? He might also point out how well-intentioned, anti-capitalists like our author do more real harm to impoverished people of the world than any injustice capitalism or free markets inflict.
Before writing about economic matters it's important to have a good understanding of the issues. I recommend reading Learning Economics by Arnold Kling or Naked Economics by Charles Wheelan.
Your recent editorial “If New Orleans Were Dry” [“Letters @ 3am,” Sept. 16] exposes a wrong and potentially dangerous point of view that is widely held by well-intentioned people working for the causes of anti-poverty, anti-trade, anti-capitalism, and even Islamic terrorism.
It's not the conclusion that a right-wing cabal is responsible for 9/11 and Katrina, or that the U.S. causes immeasurable suffering by using too much of the world's resources and not sharing, it's the untenable foundation of these conclusions which many assume to be self evident: “Obviously if we had less, the world's impoverished people would have more ... the haves have because the have-nots do not ... we live on theft ... our way of life is a criminal enterprise.”
The author lends some authority to his views by citing Lao Tzu author of the Tao Te Ching, who unfortunately died 1,200 years before the arrival of the phenomenon of sustained growth in living standards. But let's ask ourselves what Tzu would think about capitalism in China if he were alive today? Wouldn't he look at the experience of his country over the last 70 years and determine that the reliance on sharing wealth rather than creating wealth does not work? Wouldn't he conclude based on China's experience and on the experience of their neighbors like India and North Korea that economic growth fueled by capitalism and free markets is obviously the best long-term answer to poverty, disease, and environmental damage? He might also point out how well-intentioned, anti-capitalists like our author do more real harm to impoverished people of the world than any injustice capitalism or free markets inflict.
Before writing about economic matters it's important to have a good understanding of the issues. I recommend reading Learning Economics by Arnold Kling or Naked Economics by Charles Wheelan.
Jeff Albrecht