Letter: In defense of private property, capitalism

Capitalism has never been a bad economic system. The very fact that there are extremely wealthy and extremely poor proves that it works. The individual is born into a social class. The majority are content to remain within that class. For reasons that have not been fully explained, some have an intense need to get out of that and join another social class. I am not talking about the extremes between ghetto life and having breakfast in bed and a maid to make the bed. I mean working class people who like their life and their friends, but would like to be able to buy a few "nice" things now and again. Jose Ortega y Gasset, the philosopher, said that we are every choice that we make. There is no one future, but many.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on February 20, 2009 at 11:19 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: In defense of private property, capitalism

Joshua, We are all innately unequal in ways that are largely unknowable to those around us. I find this sentence fascinating and haunting. I think KU should have some sort of study as to how race, social status, religion, culture, age, affects how we think and act about money and property. Some spend with no thought of tomorrow, some refuse to part with their money because of fear of tomorrow. Why? What makes one person give to the street beggar and another curse them? Is there an answer that we can find and use to our advantage?

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on February 24, 2009 at 2:12 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: In defense of private property, capitalism

Interesting, I hadn't realized the paper had printed this article. Apparently my comments will be rather late than, and probably unseen.

Thanks for your responses. I would have expected more negative comments from Lawrence.

"We are all innately unequal in ways that are largely unknowable to those around us. Property does not magnify these differences; property rewards our use of these differences in our attempt to individually prosper,"

To the commenter "Irishswearingen", there is much to be learned regarding how race and culture ect affect a person's actions via psychology. However my comment was aimed toward the economic realm which steers clear of why people act (psychology) and focuses on how to or how not to accomplish the material goals you've set.

Ultimately the point was meant to expresses the inability of central bureaucracies to effectively allocate resources. The variables affecting an individuals economic circumstances are scarcely known to the individual, who is closest to the situation, let alone a national government trying to act on his behalf. (acting with little accountability, minimal economic risk, and the ability to mortgage future generations if gov programs fail)

Even if every congressman had a PHD economics it wouldn't confer upon the state capable of observing phenomena it is inherently incapable of doing. The fact that many Congressman (in my experience) find it difficult to productively function in their own personal lives should be an indication.

Congressman A accepts illegal gifts on the order of tens of thousands of dollars and then hides the cash in his freezer for months/years. What concerns me is not that he's a crook...the modern welfare systems by its nature perpetuates corruption, what concerns me is that a US Congressman, campaigned and elected by hundreds of thousands of people, doesn't know how rent a private jet to the Caymans and fill out a deposit slip. This guy is suppose to keep the Fed Chairman accountable...hah.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by JoshuaCondon on March 23, 2009 at 3:51 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal