A friend recently sent me this article entitled, “Ten Quotes From Economist Walter E. Williams” by Sarah Stanley and this was my response…

  1. He points out that we were able to defeat England in the 1700’s without a cell phone. I wonder what our chances of defeating any country today with muskets and without modern day technology?
  2. He referred to Democracy as little more that mob rule. I think that is lacking in definition. I find that many arguments by both sides of political arguments are flawed by no or defective definitions for:

Democracy: control of an organization or government by the majority of its members

Republic: citizens do not govern the state themselves but through representatives

Free enterprise: an economy that relies chiefly on market forces to allocate goods and resources and to determine prices and individual income. Competition is the natural regulator to the economy. Free and open ingress and egress into the marketplace is necessary for the system to work.

Communism: derived from the Latin communis, meaning “shared” or “common”. In the ideal state described in Plato’s Republic, the governing class of guardians devotes itself to serving the interests of the whole community. Distribution of economic income is based on need and not production. 

Socialism: Sorta like communism.

One problem with arguing in favor of free enterprise is that of doing so in absolutes. Even my more conservative friends are in favor of some government programs outside the free enterprise structure such as:

Flight control, FDA, natl defense, interstate highways, patent agency, antitrust regs, police, military etc all fall within the definition of socialism.

One argument is that an extreme distribution of wealth is contra to the characteristics of free enterprise and individual political powers necessary for a Republic. According to The New York Times, the richest 1 percent in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent. This distribution can be a detriment to the health of both free enterprise and the peoples’ choice of representatives for the US republic.

3. It is certainly true that legality doesn’t necessarily equal morality. There is a difference between legality and morality. In criminal law the decision isn’t just its wrong but should it rise the level that society should punish. I agree with his statement.

4. I’m a strong believer in the value of capitalism for everyone and agree with Williams. I do think that the advantages of the top 1% with 90% of the wealth have the opportunity to live better than royalty of history. Our current tax structure doesn’t require all ultra-rich to pay significant taxes and allows their money to be passed on to those who did not earn it via the free enterprise system. Our free enterprise system today is much like a person being born into a Monopoly game where some people already own most of the properties with hotels and the ability to pass on in their wills. I think our opportunities within our free enterprise system will require major emphasis on education, infrastructure and basic income for the poor so they can compete in the modern free enterprise system. By definition, free enterprise can’t exist with a crippling division of income and assets. 

5. I agree with Williams that free enterprise can create a natural path for all people but think that the system can grow into disfunction without regulations.

6. Bill Gates et al are classic examples of the opportunities of free enterprise…yet the system needs to be available for those who are not geniuses. My only reservation is that for the success of free enterprise to work it must have a free and easy ingress and egress into the marketplace. If basic housing, food and education are at issue, I think free enterprise requires an effort for the masses for its own survival. One of the true conservatives in our free enterprise history was Henry Ford. Out of the blue he gave a big raise to his employees. This act came back to him in spades. Among other things he enjoyed intense loyalty and an increase of consumers who could afford to buy his cars. I do disagree with Williams with his use of morality with free enterprise…don’t see that in the definition. Morality intervenes when considering adjusting the natural consequences of free enterprise.

7. Not sure what he means about loss of morality and failure of religion. (Quoting the 10 commandments written for the chosen people seems inappropriate and I suggest the revised version for us gentiles given by Jesus at the sermon on the mount.) Jesus seemed like a liberal…Matt 26:52; he hung out with a bunch of unemployed guys who didn’t mind not owning anything. One of the guys kept their money for when it was needed. Matt 19: 20-24. When cross examed by a lawyer on how to be accepted by God he told the story of a guy who was not in the right tribe or religion who did what the guys of their religion and culture didn’t do. He helped a guy who was beat up; got him help; paid for it; offered additional help and didn’t want to be repaid. Luke 10. Jesus wasn’t a tea party anti-tax guy. Mark 12:13-17. He didn’t think much of the super-rich. Matt 19-24; Luke 6:24 and maybe the original Occupy Wallstreet guy. John 2:15. He was sympatric for those poor in spirit, mourners, the meek, hungry, thirsty and admired characteristics that would slow down folks getting a top management job in the military-industrial complex (merciful, pure of heart, peace makers and those prosecuted for righteousness) Matt 5 He took a pretty liberal view on crime and punishment and discouraged righteous indignation John 8: 1-11 Sounds like a commie to me!

8. I think I agree with Williams but not sure exactly what he means. One problem that needs government intervention is the ability for a few to create a monopoly therefore destroying the natural check and balance of free enterprise. Intervening regulations necessary when this occurs especially since the natural controls of free enterprise won’t work. Interestingly, one of our best Presidents and commanding general in WWII had an interesting thing to say: “Beware of the Military/Industrial Complex”. That’s interesting since the US spends as much on our national defense as the next 10 countries. It is, by nature, a secret enterprise. The number of companies with defense contracts is less than 10. There is nothing more classic in the US for an uncontrolled monopoly. Ironically, most who campaign for free enterprise spend most of their time talking about giving money to the poor rather than the big drain of monopolies that have moved out of the natural checks and balances of free enterprise.

9. I agree that greed (intense and selfish desire for something, especially wealth, power, or food will always exist in our systems but think that if we evolve above that, replacing greed with honest healthy ambition, our political and economic system would work better.

10. I agree that a separation of vested interests of private industry and religion from govt is critical to have a true Republic. Obviously neither exist today. Massive amendments in political contributions are necessary for that to have a chance.

Sorry for my ramblings…but found the subject matter interesting