A free economic order can only continue if and so long as the social life of the nation contains a maximum of freedom, of private initiative, and of foresight. Economic freedom and compulsory insurance are not compatible. FULL ARTICLE by Ludwig Erhard
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/12958/rss-the-german-miracle-vs-the-welfare-state/
The German Miracle vs. the Welfare State
Previous post: The Fractional-Reserve Banking Question
Next post: Regulating Caveman Technology
{ 3 comments }
Erhard: “Have the defenders of such a thesis reflected where the state is to find the power and the means to meet such demands which, taken one at a time, might be justified?”
Actually, they have thought about this. Erhard assumes scarcity. Socialists assume abundance. Socialists are convinced that the wealth exists in the pockets of the wealthy to finance all of their desires. They attribute all arguments from scarcity like Erhard’s to the desire of the wealthy to hang on to their wealth. According to socialists, there is plenty of wealth to go around if the state would simply get tough with the wealthy and take what it needs.
“Socialists assume abundance.”
A quibble here.
Seems to me that socialists actually believe in scarcity; i.e., it’s morally incumbent upon the body politic to carve up the static, small pie so that everyone gets his “fair share.”
They believe we are running out of food, out of space, out of money, and we need to be equitable.
The libertarian sees a virtually infinite resource pool, with commensurate opportunities for wealth generation. The sea, the land, the planets beyond…
I know your paradigm is focused on the socialist’s silly notions of economics. But just thought I’d throw in two cents.
Thus, the principal thing to fight, would be the governmental policy of a continual general increase of prices.
Comments on this entry are closed.