[Sick of Lefties]

“Absent that, however, it is simply to general a claim to be valid; and is invalidated by too much recent history. “

What recent history are you referring to? I imagine you mean the crash, and Wall Street’s money grab. Or perhaps you mean GE and the new generation of crony capitalists.

I assume that those are aberrations, exceptions that prove the rule. If I build a factory, to use Professor Warren’s example, I do not get rich by making others poor. I get rich by giving others something of value.

If I run to DC, or my state capitol (Lansing) in order to get rich, or stay rich in the face of better competition, then I am making others poor. But, that’s not capitalism. That’s Statism. It’s also sin.

[the invisib1e hand]

I think you feel a threat to a sacred cow and so you're obfuscating the point. The instant "the rich" are seen as a non-existent ideal instead a bunch of individuals, the patron saints of "capitalism" are shown to be flawed. In fact, the very idea of questioning presumptions about "capitalism" is anathema to the typical self-described "conservative," at least as represented on FR. I'm here to tell you that Ayn Rand and her "capitalist" myth did as much to promote socialism as Marx did, arguably more. She enabled it, whereas he only talked about it.

No exposition. You'll have to do your homework, work for some original thoughts, face some uncomfortable realities, as the author of this otherwise fine piece seems to be otherwise comfortable with doing.