capitalism is a Government Program

ABC This Week | 1/13/2002 | George Will

[tonyinv]

George Will just uttered the most absurd statement I've ever heard. He said (paraphrasing)

"Rebpublicans need to understand that capitalism is complex web of laws and regulations" and further "that capitalism is a government program"

I knew George Will wasn't exactly a conservative, but this is unbelievable.

[tonyinv]

I didn't put this in Breaking News.

[AM2000]

Depends on what the word 'is' really means, doesn't it.

[Dog Gone]

I didn't see that (my cable went on the fritz this morning), but I doubt that he meant that literally.

[Rogmonster]

This country is founded on the freedom to trade. Basically, that is capitalism. Was this quote taken out of context? He usually backs up his statements with examples.

[tonyinv]

No, He ended his statement, an answer to a question, by stating. Capitalism is a Government Program. Where can we get a transcript?

[TheOracle]

I don't see the problem with what George Will said. Of course capitalism is a government program. Wouldn't Ayn Rand be the first person to agree with this? There has to be a legal framework within which I am allowed to operate my business without inappropriate interference from others. If others stray outside the framework in an attempt to harm my business, the legal system allows me to seek protection and restitution. The fact that government officials can be the ones I need protection from doesn't change this. The legal framework is absolutely essential for capitalism. And it is government that enforces the legal framework. The alternative is anarchy.

[B4Ranch]

"that capitalism is a government program" controlled by taxes.

[tonyinv]

Would you say that without government, you could not have capitalism?

[ffrancone]

This may be a little overstatement; but he is basically correct. Take an anarchy hypothetical. The guy with the most guns runs will always end up running things locally. He extracts tribute from those he allows to trade. Noone can predict what the consequences next year are of their actions today. If I have a contract with a buddy of the local dictator, it is only enforceable if I buy off the local dictator--and maybe not then if he does not like the color of my hair. Capitalism can only exist in this circumstance in a weak and unproductive form. In a sense, capitalism is there (and that is where Will overstated) because people will always trade. Its just that its really hard to do and the complex system of capitalism is not too good, under these circumstances, at building freedom and prosperity.

The government enforces the rule of law. The rule of law imposes predictability to ones actions and a set of enforceable property rights. I can now sue for breach of contract, even if the guy is Bill Clinton's buddy. I know that if I build a set of retail stores on my land, I will be able to lease them for years to come. All of these things flow from the existence of predictable rights enforceable by the government. In that sense, Will is 100% right.

Think! This was the genius of the founding fathers. They were creating a government. Not a non-government. That government was well designed to release capitalism from the shackles of anarchy and petty tyranny. Of course the government can destroy capitalism also. But the flowering of capitalism in the past 200 years has indeed been a government program.

[TheOracle]

Would you say that without government, you could not have capitalism?

I would. Here are a couple definitions I found at www.dictionary.com:

An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

an economic system based on private ownership of capital

I don't know how you properly define private ownership outside a legal framework of rules, and I don't know how you properly enforce the rules outside a legitimate representative government.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

I was shocked by that too. First Kristol, now Will. What is it about ABC's "This is Weak" creating (or revealing) RINO's? Kooky must have a special form of "persuasion"!

[tonyinv]

But wasn't capitalism first? Doesn't capitalism as the engine enable the government? The implication of Will's statement (to me anyway) was that without government enabling business there would be no businesses.

As for anarchy, wouldn't the free market handle that? If there were truly bad companies wouldn't they everntually fail due to lack of support from either other businesses (suppliers) or customers. Maybe I'm a bit niave on that point.

[Cobra64]

Guess he never read Adam Smith.

[tonyinv]

An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. an economic system based on private ownership of capital

I dont see here were government comes in.

I don't know how you properly define private ownership outside a legal framework of rules, and I don't know how you properly enforce the rules outside a legitimate representative government.

Isn't ownership defined by posession? I dont need governemnt to sanction that fact that I own something, do I?

Don't get me wrong, I understand that today government has so intruded that indeed it probably does, through taxes and such, but is that right?

[StriperSniper]

I don't know how you properly enforce the rules outside a legitimate representative government.

.38
.357
.44
etc.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

All of these things flow from the existence of predictable rights enforceable by the government.

I don't know how you properly define private ownership outside a legal framework of rules

Capitalism is an economic system which does not definitionally require government involvement. State-to-state transactions are examples of capitalistic trade where there is no over riding legal authority. It is true that undesirable effects such as monopoly, repression, and theft may occur without regulatory oversight, but that does not negate the capitalistic framework. I agree that state power may make capitalistic transactions more safe and predictable, but it is not a requirement.

[TheOracle]

I dont see here were government comes in.

It gets back to that "ownership" thing.

Isn't ownership defined by posession? I dont need governemnt to sanction that fact that I own something, do I?

You don't need government sanction, you need government protection.

"The proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect men from criminals; the military forces, to protect men from foreign invaders; and the law courts, to protect men's property and contracts from breach by force or fraud, and to settle disputes among men according to objectively defined laws." -- Any Rand, "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal", page 47 of the Signet paperback edition.