What if Karl Marx was … half right?
Marx’s theory of history elaborated that, with each bust of the boom-and-bust cycle, the rich would nab ever more property — capital — until impoverished workers united to take all that capital for “themselves” (as a collective) and run it for the common good.
That’s dialectical materialism. It didn’t predict what happened even in Communist countries. But something vaguely Marxian is going on now.
Today, when there’s a bust, government bails out the failed rich guys — even buying companies.
Further, governments keep hiring more people to “stimulate” the economy. Government workers increase as a percentage of the workforce, with higher-than-average wages and benefits.
This used to be called “creeping socialism.” Politicians move us closer to total government — measure by measure, tax by tax, law by law. No revolution necessary.
Except … well, as politicians put more of our eggs into the collectivist basket, each down-swoop of the business cycle makes the whole system less stable — and (with increasing taxes and debt) more burdensome to sustain.
It could all lead to revolt — a taxpayer revolt.
Taxpayers, who’ve had to put up with a lot of nonsense over the years, aren’t even a tad bit interested in the foolishness of communism — or a corporate, fascist super-state.
That’s where Marx and his followers had it all wrong. Only the build-up of instability seems Marxian. Americans’ response is to seek limits on government.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
2 replies on “Prophet of Loss”
I read a story today which follows.
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich… “a great equalizer”.
The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama’s plan”.
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A…
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B- (B minus). The students who studied hard were upset and the students who never studied were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who never studied didn’t even open their text books and the ones who had before studied hard, decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
The Kentucky and the Virginia Doctrines, ala Jefferson and Madison. Never tested in court. If the 10th ammendment has any meaning, then the power to tax under the 16th is only the power to do the 17 things delegated by the Constitution to the federal government. If the 10th ammmendment has no meaning, then neither should the 16th.
In the interim while the courts sort it out, the state holding of the federal taxpayer funds in escrow will definitely shut off the spending party in DC.