2) Socialism is more sensitive to signals of wealth inequality. Although its prescriptions for the problem – things like raising the minimum wage, universal healthcare and shared ownership of productive assets – are trickier to deliver than they assume, socialism is far superior to capitalism in telling us that a member of the electorate is being left behind and that a gap in the wealth distribution is widening. This is natural – capitalism puts a premium on unbridled freedom rather than egalitarian equality. It is socialists who have been more vociferous in opposition to the central problem of the post-Bretton Woods environment – “
a breakdown in the system of financial intermediation — the ability of the market to finance the exchange of relatively simple tasks, because of the risks attached to a floating currency and almost confiscatory taxation of capital,” as Jude described. Republicans whine about the latter problem without doing anything about currency stability. If they were to follow
Nathan Lewis’ advice and offer growth-oriented tax reform coupled with a return to the gold standard they would achieve what Karl Marx articulated better than Adam Smith about money
par excellence.
That was a whole lot of nothing..
