In making a libertarian case for Bernie Sanders, Will Wilkinson draws attention to an awkward point for right-libertarians – that inequality is the enemy of freedom.…This is a major point of left libertarianism, following Marx on it. A free society politically is both egalitarian legally (absence of privilege) and relatively equal both socially (status and power) and distributively (income and wealth). This is also a requirement for economic liberalism based on competitive markets. Otherwise, paradoxes of liberalism arise that are illiberal.
We should, though, ask: what sort of egalitarian institutions and policies might increase freedom?
For me, the answer is clear: those which increase workers’ bargaining power. This means fuller employment and a jobs guarantee; stronger trades unions; and a citizens’ basic income. The point here is that if workers have the power to bargain for better wages and conditions, and the real freedom to reject exploitative demands from bosses, then we’ll not need so much business regulation. In this sense, greater equality and cutting red tape go together.
What don’t go together – in the real world – are inequality and freedom. So-called right-libertarians therefore have a choice: you can be shills for the rich, or genuine supporters of freedom – but you can’t be both.
Stumbling and Mumbling
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle
7 comments:
Oil rents received by MENA for the last 10+ years could be considered a BIG... ie non-productive contribution... doesnt look like it worked out too well...
Plenty of jobs for Jihadists were created.
Matt, a BIG for the elites controlling the oil fields maybe.
Although is true that in S.A. there was/is a huge welfare state driven by the oil rents. But on the other side those rents were also used to create a JG for the bureaucracies, militaries etc. of those countries and the military contractors oversees...
So I would say it's about even results... the management of the programs matter. Creating a JG to build military equipment and destroy other countries is productive to you?
There is, of course, the justice aspect of reducing inequality since the richest have benefited the most from government-subsidized private credit creation since they have been the most so-called worthy of government-subsidized private credit.
The justice aspect also eliminates a Job Guarantee since victims should not have to work for their restitution. Besides, one might also mention that guaranteed jobs in excess of those that benefit the general welfare detract from it since they waste people's time, energy and morale.
Well we sometimes go back and forth about the JG or a BIG... like "which is better?" type thing...
I'd say (maybe) we see the results of a BIG in the hell-hole that is MENA currently... and perhaps Venezuela, etc... the OPEC people...
Bob you forgot hot-tub masturbators, swimming pool defecators, titie squeezers, and ass grabbers, rapers, pillagers, etc .... which are the big export products currently from over there....
There are many guest workers in the wealthy gulf states, who are poorly paid and badly treated. No BIG for them...
We should, though, ask: what sort of egalitarian institutions and policies might increase freedom?
Here's an obvious* one: Inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank for individual citizens, businesses, organizations, state and local governments, etc. and the abolition of government-provided deposit insurance via equal fiat distributions to all individual citizen accounts at the central bank to provide the needed new reserves for the transfer of at least some of the currently insured deposits to those inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank.
*because of a thing called equal protection under the law.
Post a Comment