Dat inequality

[Renton]

Most accounts of that period will have either a heavy libertarian or socialist slant, unfortunately. It's a topic that Jeffrey Tucker and Thomas Woods tend to cover a lot. Here's a video that popped up on google, but I haven't seen it yet. I can vouch for the speaker though:

[rong]

Most accounts of that period will have either a heavy libertarian or socialist slant, unfortunately. It's a topic that Jeffrey Tucker and Thomas Woods tend to cover a lot. Here's a video that popped up on google, but I haven't seen it yet. I can vouch for the speaker though:

That was fantastic!

I think I may even be convinced. I tend to lay blame at the feet of capitalism that perhaps doesn't belong there. I think I'm leaning far more to the Wufwugy school of governance which is free market capitalism with a strong welfare state, welfare-capitalism I think it's branded.

[wufwugy]

That was fantastic!

I think I may even be convinced. I tend to lay blame at the feet of capitalism that perhaps doesn't belong there. I think I'm leaning far more to the Wufwugy school of governance which is free market capitalism with a strong welfare state, welfare-capitalism I think it's branded.

To be a little more specific, welfarism has a role when market reforms are lacking. I think if we let capitalism run in every industry, there would be little to no use for welfare. But we're not going to get that in our lifetimes, so welfare is here to stay. With that in mind, it needs to be structured in a way that creates incentive for results and it needs to have very little in the way of bureaucracies. The type of thing I'm talking about is a scaling wage subsidy and abolishing many, many other programs and agencies. Add in some vouchers for healthcare and education and abolish some more bureaucracies. Lower taxes a whole bunch.

We don't need a welfare program if capitalism is allowed to work, but we do need one because the populace's response to disaster is more statism.