Woolleybugger
Mayor
The arguments lukey and others make about where money should flow to maximize benefits to an economy are not based on economics at all. They are based upon ideology, politics and dogma. The reason he chooses to follow economists such as the von Mizes institute is that they agree with his pre-disposed views on what capitalism should be and how he views a mythical meritocracy that does not exist. Myth making is critical to his kind of world view. In his mind, America was built by the Edisons, Harrimans, Carnegies, Fords, Rockefellers and all the other giant moguls and inventors of history. It is like saying Walt Disney was the only person at Disneyland that mattered. These stories about the rise of paupers to riches supports his view of America as a land set apart from the rest of the world feeding his sense of belonging to a thing greater than any individual part. In many ways, I agree with a lot of this mythmaking myself.
But did anyone really start a massive new industry simply to get rich? No entreprenuer that I know was motivated primarily by being rich. Perhaps bankers and Wall Street types are only motivated by personal wealth but certainly no one that I know in Silicon Valley shares that singular purpose.
Money should move around our economy as efficiently as possible while supporting the overall improvement of the individual, the state and the people at large. Lumps of giant pools of money is like hoarding in many ways. If the distribution of money is lumpy, that is it collects in greater lumps for certain people, then the economy will be forced to either make more money out of thin air to provide some money to smooth out the lumps or the nation will just take a cut out of those lumps via taxes and end up in the same place.
Its not that hard to figure out if you first throw out all your baggage and treat this like a giant mathematical puzzle. The possible solution set has to be an economy that allows for the greatest possible wealth and prosperity for the most people. Anything short of that has always lead to poverty and eventually, revolution.
But did anyone really start a massive new industry simply to get rich? No entreprenuer that I know was motivated primarily by being rich. Perhaps bankers and Wall Street types are only motivated by personal wealth but certainly no one that I know in Silicon Valley shares that singular purpose.
Money should move around our economy as efficiently as possible while supporting the overall improvement of the individual, the state and the people at large. Lumps of giant pools of money is like hoarding in many ways. If the distribution of money is lumpy, that is it collects in greater lumps for certain people, then the economy will be forced to either make more money out of thin air to provide some money to smooth out the lumps or the nation will just take a cut out of those lumps via taxes and end up in the same place.
Its not that hard to figure out if you first throw out all your baggage and treat this like a giant mathematical puzzle. The possible solution set has to be an economy that allows for the greatest possible wealth and prosperity for the most people. Anything short of that has always lead to poverty and eventually, revolution.