The only sustainable economy is one based on surplus — the alternative being rationing, price-fixing, five year plans, and other single party police state tactics.
While I do not wish to argue with such a distinguished gentlemen, the “surplus” error causes great harm to the understanding of economics and the conservative (classical liberal) cause.
The only sustainable economy is one that allows individuals to trade freely according to their preferences. Surpluses are not needed. Trade is not a zero-sum game.
See here: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2008/10/munger_on_middl.html Take a look at the highlights on that page at 8:27 for the story partially and relevant comment: “Insight: by definition the amount of stuff in the camp is fixed. All trading does is rearrange it. By definition, the quantity of material is zero-sum. If anything it gets smaller by a tiny bit by friction. On the surface, trading is a waste of time, moving stuff around. Yet every person traded in hopes of improving their lot.”
Further information is contained in the link below.
http://www.clsbe.lisboa.ucp.pt/docentes/url/jcn/ie2/0POWCamp.pdf
You will very much enjoy the story, its economic insights and, given the history from WW2 it might be worth a separate post and discussion.
You’ll see that it is preferences coupled with free trade that cause economic benefits. Surpluses aren’t required. Liberals use the “surplus” argument to push all their policies. The love zero sum and we should hate it.