You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to SpringfieldNewsSun.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and interactive features. Starting at just 99c for 8 weeks.

X

Welcome to SpringfieldNewsSun.com

Your source for Clark and Champaign counties’ hometown news. All readers have free access to a limited number of stories every month.

If you are a News-Sun subscriber, please take a moment to login for unlimited access.

breaking news

Pedestrian, hit by vehicle in Clark County, is seriously injured

The political uses of the ‘free market’ myth

FROM THE LEFT: ECONOMY


One of the most deceptive ideas continuously sounded by the right is that the “free market” is natural and inevitable, existing outside and beyond government.

So whatever inequality or insecurity it generates is beyond our control. And whatever ways we might seek to reduce inequality or insecurity — to make the economy work for us — are unwarranted constraints on the market’s freedom and will inevitably go wrong.

By this view, if some people aren’t paid enough to live on, the market has determined they aren’t worth enough. If others rake in billions, they must be worth it. If millions of Americans remain unemployed or their paychecks are shrinking or they work two or three part-time jobs with no idea what they’ll earn next month, that’s too bad; it’s just the outcome of the market.

According to this logic, government shouldn’t intrude through minimum wages, high taxes on top earners, public spending to get people back to work, regulations on business, or anything else, because the “free market” knows best.

In reality, the “free market” is a bunch of rules about (1) what can be owned and traded (the genome? slaves? nuclear materials? babies? votes?); (2) on what terms (equal access to the Internet? the right to organize unions? corporate monopolies? the length of patent protections?); (3) under what conditions (poisonous drugs? unsafe foods? deceptive Ponzi schemes? dangerous workplaces?); (4) what’s private and what’s public (police? roads? clean air and water? health care? good schools? parks and playgrounds?); (5) how to pay for what (taxes? user fees? individual pricing?). And so on.

These rules don’t exist in nature; they are human creations. Governments don’t “intrude” on free markets; governments organize and maintain them. Markets aren’t “free” of rules; the rules define them. Without such rules, we’re back to social Darwinism, where only the toughest and biggest survive.

The interesting question is what the rules should aim to achieve. They can be designed to maximize efficiency (given the current distribution of resources), or growth (depending on what we’re willing to sacrifice), or fairness (depending on our ideas about a decent society). Or some combination of all three — which aren’t necessarily in competition with one another. Evidence suggests, for example, that if prosperity were more widely shared, we’d have faster growth.

The rules might even be designed to entrench and enhance the wealth of a few at the top, and keep almost everyone else comparatively poor and economically insecure.

Which brings us to the central political question: Who should decide on the rules and their major purpose? If our democracy were working as it should, presumably our elected representatives, agency heads and courts would be making the rules roughly according to what most of us want. The economy would be working for us.

Instead, the rules are made mostly by those with the power and resources to buy politicians, regulatory heads and even the courts. As income and wealth have concentrated at the top, so has political clout. And the most important clout is determining the rules of the game.

These are the same people who want you to believe in the fiction of an immutable “free market.”


Reader Comments ...


Next Up in News

Teachers save choking girl's life with Heimlich maneuver
Teachers save choking girl's life with Heimlich maneuver
Teachers at a Pennsylvania school are being credited with saving a girl’s life. A 7-year old girl named Aubrey was eating breakfast Wednesday morning at Lockley Early Learning Center when she started to choke.
Stafford: Updated takes on classic Christmas carols
Stafford: Updated takes on classic Christmas carols
Samsung to disable Galaxy Note 7 devices on Dec. 19
Samsung to disable Galaxy Note 7 devices on Dec. 19
In an effort to get U.S. customers to turn off their devices, Samsung will be issuing a software update next week that will make the Galaxy Note 7 inoperable.
Former MLB pitcher graduates from police academy
Former MLB pitcher graduates from police academy
Former major-league relief pitcher Anthony Varvaro is switching jerseys. He won’t be pitching to batters, though.
Deputies: Florida man claims he downed 18 beers, Xanax, before setting house fire
Deputies: Florida man claims he downed 18 beers, Xanax, before setting house fire
A Florida man was arrested Wednesday after police said he vandalized a vacant house during the summer while high on Xanax and drunk on 18 beers.
More Stories