by Vedran Vuk
often ask, "How much is enough?" The answer is one dollar
more. A person is not obligated to stop earning at a certain point
despite what these fools would like you to believe.
to them is also, "How much is enough?" How many policies
do we have to pass until they are satisfied? How much redistribution
must take place before they are done? Their answer always seems
to be one social policy more.
In these facts,
lies the greatest danger of our society. Many have been misled into
believing that a certain level of social policies will be adequate
to cover poverty. If we only move minimum wage up a little or make
better government housing, this will be enough. This is the great
lie. Liberals and socialists do not plan to stop until we are equally
poor; until their vision of a freedom-less tyranny against the individual
Mises said it best, "The Welfare State is merely a method for
transforming the market economy step by step into socialism."
Those who think that social programs are going to end at some point
are very wrong. The Welfare State grows larger without end.
If you are
convinced the free market with some government intervention will
solve poverty, you are very wrong. Poverty is whatever the opponents
of freedom make it out to be. Have capitalism and semi-free markets
not increased the wealth of the poorest in America ten-fold?! The
luxuries considered standard to the average U.S. citizen would have
been marvels to kings and queens of a hundred and fifty years ago!
in another hundred years improves the situation of the poor ten-fold
again, the obstructers of liberty will still call it poverty! Not
because the lower 20% donít have enough but because the upper 20%
have a hell of a lot more. This is where one begins to hear the
talk of most "virtuous" equality.
program advocates are concerned with equality, mainly robbing tax
payers. If they were true saints, they would only speak of poverty.
But talk of equality exposes their underlying Marxism. Their war
on poverty will only end when no man is above another financially.
The system will only be enforced by violence to keep those in society
with intelligence, skill, hard work, and ambition down. Poverty
will be declared a thing of the past when no man is richer than
We will never
win this struggle through a democratic government. Greed is not
virtuous. But, one thing stands above greed and that is envy. The
envious masses, no matter how well their lot, will always outvote
the rich and highly productive of society. Mises comments on this
too, "Politically there is nothing more advantageous for a
government than an attack on property rights, for it is always an
easy matter to incite the masses against the owners of land and
youth will continue to enter schools where they are mis-educated.
The socialists control our universities and high schools, teaching
redistribution and theft as virtue. What is the benefit of studying
political science or sociology in a market economy? Does one job
of political science (or as I like to call it Commissar School)
actually exist in a truly free society without government subsidization?
Political Science in most schools is the study of government justification,
not study into the nature of government.
In these places
of "education," students are taught that the world would
be better when a certain policy is passed in a certain way. The
schools teach intervention and dabbling with the lives of citizens.
Sociology students are told how society "really" works
and how it should be. The government project buildings could supposedly
be fixed if only a certain combination was met.
when the government builds housing well enough or the correct neighborhood
is chosen, the policy could work. So, the sociologists experiment
on citizens, creating a chemical explosion of poverty, destitution,
and crime. In the documentary, New Orleans eXposed, Rosevelt Mohamad,
a motivational speaker for urban schools says to an audience, "Damn
dog, I thought we learned science projects when we was in science
class, but why they call where I live a project. It seems like Iím
the object of somebodyís project."
completely right. This whole process of redistribution is not about
helping the poor; do not be fooled. Look at the things sociology
students study. They study theories of how the world should be according
to them. They have a vision of a grotesque Marxist dream, they want
you to be part of their social society science project. Rosevelt
Mohamad goes on further to say, "what is the object of the
project" it is to keep us "stuck in the mentality of rats
in a cage."
How do we escape
this system? If socialism is a step-by-step process through the
Welfare State as Mises said, then privatization is a step-by-step
process to freedom. The role of government must be delegitimized
slowly. Whether you can privatize your garbage disposal or your
security, you have made a great step towards liberty. Privatization
makes one less reason to justify our taxation and redistribution.
People must see for themselves the inefficiencies compared to the
efficiencies. Companies like DHL and FedEx have shown millions the
advantages over government. Government can do nothing to curtail
their success now.
bottled water is a step in the right direction. Iíve heard countless
comedians jest at people who drink bottled water. Whatís so funny
about this? I donít drink bottled water because I have been "brainwashed"
by marketing. I drink bottled water because public tap water tastes
like filth. Some say, "But look on the label itís just purified
tap water." Yes I know it is. Thatís why I drink itÖ.because
it is purified. That should tell you something about the state of
regular tap water.
If people can
begin to understand why they drink bottled water over tap water,
why they choose DHL over the U.S. Postal office, why they prefer
private housing over public housing, they will begin to understand
the nature of government in all things. Once people realize why
government canít even provide good water, a basic necessity to life,
they will begin to realize that government makes everything filthy
My final justification
of the market goes beyond efficiency. The market is the way of freedom
and in my opinion also the way of God. God learned himself what
happens when you simply give. Even in a utopian setting in the Garden
of Eden where God could give without taking, He saw Adam and Eve
gravitate toward evil.
ask, "Where is God to help with all this poverty on Earth?"
God does not need to intervene. He in his Greatness has realized
the effects of even a utopian Garden of Eden. In return for kicking
us out, He gave us the greatest gift of all. This gift is mutual
benefit through voluntary exchange and the Invisible Hand of Adam
Smith. The Invisible Hand is the same as the hand of God. Whenever
His people demand something, it will be supplied so long as there
is no intervention through sinful government coercion and violence.
If we do not sin through government intervention, everything on
this Earth will be given to us by supply and demand. The market
is Godís way of caring for us. The free market is the gift of God
and the only thing that will save the world from violence, coercion,
slavery, and ultimate socialism.
Vuk [send him mail] is a student
of Economics at Loyola University of New Orleans, and a 2006 Summer
Fellow at the Mises Institute.
© 2006 LewRockwell.com