| | | | |
“Say it with me: To control inflation, we must take aim at corporate profits, not working people.”
Those were the recent words of lefty economist Robert Reich. Or as I like to call him Commie Bobbie.
Now, I’m not an “ends justify the means” type of guy so I’m not going to join his chorus. But I will say how he can improve his economic reasoning. In fact, were he to reason based on the following assumptions he might become a decent economist.
The first assumption is this — incentives matter. Diminishing the profit incentive piles a motivation problem onto the existing inflation one.
The second — to choose is the ultimate moral imperative. As I see it, to choose is the single, most unavoidable criteria for conscious beings. Choosing is every individual’s responsibility. Since incentives motivate choice, it is therefore unjust to fiddle with incentives artificially.
The third — the ends never justify the means — is my go-to moral heuristic. It’s how I choose. So, with that as my guide, you can’t justify the means of constraining choices through profit controls to achieve the end of saving jobs.
Call it pro-choice reasoning. And since choice is essential to human life you can call it pro-life reasoning as well.
See, everybody wins…
Moreover, since no one has enough information to steer the ship towards the end Commie Bobbie seeks, the only end is unpredictable (and most likely undesirable) outcomes. Plus, a heaping side of corruption always comes along for the ride.
Unfortunately, most economists do not reason from these assumptions. And we all bear the cost of the unintended and unwanted results through recession and inflation.
Now, I’ve spent the last couple of months talking about recession assumptions that the market seems to be missing.
And today I want to address what that same market is assuming with respect to inflation…
| | | | | |
|
|
0 Response to "The Ends Never Justify The Means"
Post a Comment