Wherever you stand on the political spectrum, you should be
able to differentiate between (1) what potential the country has to produce wealth
and what it actually delivers. And (2) what system should be used to produce
goods and services at maximum level and distribute the wealth as equitably as
possible.
Each time there was a serious debate on point (1) or point
(2), the discussion inevitably linked the two points because the debaters
instinctively felt that the level of efficiency which goes into the production
of goods and services is determined by the way that these products are
eventually distributed. This means the distribution of the wealth dictates how
efficiently it is produced. In turn, the linkage took the discussion into the
kind of government that can deliver the best results.
The political spectrum being wide from end to end, it has
two extremes which are opposed to each other in many ways. But there are also
an infinite number of positions between the two extremes where principles from
both sides are mixed in a variety of ways. Thus, the best approach we can take
to understand what the debaters wrestle with instinctively as they verbalize
the concepts that carry their arguments, is to study the extremes of the
spectrum with the proviso that in real life, nobody is really that extreme.
At one end of the spectrum, there is the Conservative Right
which believes in the idea that some people are born with the entrepreneurial
spirit. They know how to organize events and people to produce goods and
services at maximum efficiency. When they are in charge of the economy, the
country becomes wealthy, and everyone in it benefits because the wealth
trickles down to all, including those who are unable to work.
For this to happen, you need to keep the workforce striving
at all time to obtain more because it requires more to live on. This means
never to give the workers so much as to become complacent. If this leads to a
situation where the rich get to keep most of the wealth, so be it. But the
wealthy are the type that set-up private charities to look after the poor, the
sick, the old, the widows and the orphans. In the end, everyone has the chance
to rise to he top while no one is deprived of the necessities of life. It is an
ideal situation.
For this system to work, the government must be kept small
for two reasons. One is that the money it would spend is better left in the
hands of entrepreneurs who will make better use of it. The other is that the
government must be prevented from redistributing the wealth because experience
has shown that when this happens, it creates a powerful incentive for the
workers to fall into complacency. They are encouraged to work less or not at
all, and this leads to the impoverishment of the country, and everyone in it.
At the other end of the spectrum, there is the Progressive
Left which believes in the idea that all people are born with a mix of talent
and ambitions. No matter what they choose to do in life, they must be
remunerated equitably, and not kept barely above starvation levels as an
incentive for them to try producing more whether or not they can. Starvation
wage is an old idea that died when the Age of Enlightenment dawned on the
world. And the idea must never be revived.
The truth is that people give their maximum when they are
well treated, not when they are whipped as modern slaves or deprived of their
rights. Also, experience has shown that growth in the economy has occurred
every time that the workers who produce it were treated well. This, in turn,
has allowed science and technology to progress, which is why we are able to
live at today's level of civilization. If you reintroduce the old ways of
coercion and serfdom, the economy will deteriorate and go back to a level that
none of us can live under.
Now that significant change has come to the system of
governance in the United States of America, a debate on the economy is about to
flare. It would be helpful for all sides to remember that their country has the
potential to adequately feed, clothe, shelter, educate and care for everyone in
it. The idea is to fashion a system that will produce goods and services at a
maximum level of efficiency, and distribute them at a maximum level of equity.