"Of course, there would be losers as well as winners in a deregulated market economy,...."
the part i don't get is why the children of the winners of a market economy, now faculty at american universities, want to promote socialism.
IMHO the reasons the winners in a market economy espouse socialism is that it is a form of aristocracy. One of the more amazing things about America is that the top of society and business is dynamic-names rise and fall reflecting the market consequences of decision making. The big 501c3's are all "family" run -the Pew, the Kaiser, the Carnegie etc...and socialsim creates a "caste" system that helps preserve a level of acheivement. In Europe it is a vehicle for preservation of aristocracy. ...." but socialism. Aristocracy and socialism were really mirror images of the same thing:
. . . what I used to respect was not really aristocracy, but a set of personal qualities which aristocracy then developed better than any other system...a set of qualities, however, whose merits lay only in a psychology of non-calculative, non-competitive disinterestedness, truthfulness, courage, & generosity fostered by good education, minimum economic stress, and assumed position, & just as achievable through socialism as through aristocracy. (SL 5.321)...http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:g4oa-ApgBhwJ:www.themodernword.com/scriptorium/lovecraft.html+socialism+aristocracy&hl=en
the part i don't get is why the children of the winners of a market economy, now faculty at american universities, want to promote socialism.
====
Blind, brainwashed, indoctrinated stupidity. The standard disease which has spread throughout academia.
One widely mooted hypothesis is that Socialism is a poorly sublimated manifestation of Oedipal impulses. I don't generally buy into Freudian quackery, but if the facts fit the hypothesis...
You don’t understand the call of socialism.
Socialism resolves the individual of any and all responsibilities.
Most adults understand responsibilities and a few actually enjoy it. We call them business leaders. Other adults want to be removed from the harsh realities
of the world. Their dream is to have all of the freedoms possible and none of the consequents. In short these “adults” want to be a five to eight year-old living
life to the fullest without any consequents other than a skinned knee. When that happens they come running to “Mommy” and she kisses it and makes it better.
Remember that almost none of the college professors have lived in the “real world”. They went from high school, to undergraduate, to graduate, to professor, to doctorial candidate, to tenured professor. There are occasional side trips to work for a corporation involved in the “correct” type of work, an NGO, etc.. But, no having to meet a payroll.
Those who became lawyers and entered into government service have always had their needs meet by the government and can not understand why government (in their case a replacement for “Mommy”) can not take care of the rest of us.
Bottom line - can you expect a blind man to paint a lassical master piece? They can not do what they don’t know about (or, is it what they don’t want to know about?)
Because taxation will pay their salaries and enact their will. If there is not enough money, just tax some more. If there is no law to justify their wishes, they can find a sympathetic judge to do so.
Why waste time with earning a living or changing the Constitution the legitimate way?