My economic theory of American politics
As Obama and McCain are warming up for the general election campaign, I see a sharp contrast in the economic theory of the two camps. As the old adage says, follow the money. As a background note, let me mention that I am talking within the capitalist paradigm and I am no Karl Marx.
I believe this is what this battle comes down to: more wealth (money, power and opportunity) concentrated in the hands of a minority on one side, and more wealth shared by more people on the other side. I call it the exclusivist and the inclusivist philosophies. As of now, the exclusivists are mostly the Republicans lead by George Bush and McCain and the inclusivists are mostly the Democrats led by Obama. The best defense that exclusivists have is that overall, it is better for everyone meaning that if we have richer billionaires and bigger corporations, the average Joe would be better off. This is the old battle between liberty versus fairness, and please don’t think Ayn Rand versus Lenin. Evidence shows that in a free-market capitalist system people are better off (think South Korea versus North Korea) but the question is where do we draw the line? Are we better off because Haliburton, Exxon Mobile, Blackwater and lobbyists are better off with George Bush in office? Or would we be better off living in a society where veterans would get a chance to go to college and more people would have access to health insurance? I don’t think we are any better off because of Republicans’ exclusiveness and I think the election in November will show that most Americans don’t think so either.
| 2.5 |
