Tuesday, July 25, 2006

The Whipping Boy Policy of Democrats

Have you ever noticed how the economic policy of the Democratic Party is terribly inconsistant? Time and again I've heard my fellow Democrats complain about the "price gauging" and tremedous profits big oil companies. Do they not realize that this is how the market functions? Businesses set production levels and prices such that they yield maximum profits. Every other business in the market, from Microsoft to my grandfather's flea market booth, does this, but the big oil companies are "profit gauging" by commiting the same act.

The economic progressives, for political reasons, cannot afford to admit that they simply do not believe in the power of freedom in the marketplace. That is why they engage in this whipping boy policy. They attack individual businesses for engaging in common market practices that they are too affraid to attack directly. After all, even they recognize how stupid it would sound to suggest that profit maximization doesn't serve to incentivize productivity and efficiency in the free market.

Whether it's Exxon, Wal~Mart, McDonald's, or Nike, economic progressives will desparately search for any pathetic excuse to attack big business. Their attacks on individual businesses invariably apply to the market in general, but they would not dare to attack the ideal of economic liberty directly. Instead, they choose a prominant business as a scapegoat for common market practices they secretly despise. They have hoped that people would not realize that their attacks on individual businesses are nothing more than thinly disguised attacks on the free market. Unfortunately (for them) people have begun to see through this charade and now they must cease their whipping boy rhetoric or admitt that they do not believe in economic freedom as a means to ecnomic prosperity.

Monday, July 24, 2006

I Am What Economic Liberals Fear Most

In order to perpetuate their economic ideology, liberals have relied on the premise that anyone who opposes their views must do so out of selfishness and disdain for the poor. If they admitt that a person can hold the free market ideology based on an informed opinion that the capitalist market is universally beneficial, they will have lost their most potent rhetorical weapon. One might say that I am what economic liberals fear most, a poor libertarian. The existance of specimens such as me disproves their claim that the free market ideology is nothing more than a tool of the rich to supress the poor, unless they wish to make the absurd claim that I am trying to opress myself and my own family. The fact is that many people, both wealthy and poor, believe in the laissez fair system, not out of greed, but rather out of the informed opinion that the unfettered market is the ideal system of producing wealth for all members of society. The liberals, however, once again, cannot afford to admit this fact. Otherwise, their notion of the free market as the playground of corporate greed would be destroyed.

And yet, we have the example of poor libertarians. The liberals simply cannot dismiss all of us as completely misinformed. I, myself, have taken two college courses in economics and have studied various economic issues passionately in my spare time. If I am misinformed, it is only to the extent that I could not avoid such misinformation. Unless they want to come up with an elaborate and absurd conspiracy theory that the rich are in collaboration to perpetuate this misinformation, they must admit that at least some members of the upper class legitimately believe in the free market as a means to universal prosperity. Once again, the smoke and mirrors of the corporate greed rhetoric has proven unsubstantial. The liberals are now forced to make logical and disciplined arguments against the free market without resorting to pathetic ad hominem attacks. This is what they fear most; that the free market and socialist ideologies will be compared side by side without bias. Even they know in their hearts that such a comparison is vastly advantageous to the free market system.