Leftist Economics: The Magical Accretion of Wealth

As George Orwell observed, “there are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.” __ https://www.providencejournal.com/opinion/20190319/my-turn-mackubin-thomas-owens-ignoring-socialisms-countless-corpses

Socialism is once again fashionable in certain circles of American society — particularly in the university, the media, political activist circles, and the deep state. The $100 trillion leftist economic plan being proposed by outspoken socialist politicians within the Democratic Party brings up the great question of socialist economics: “Where does the wealth come from, to be spent and redistributed in this grand $100 trillion plan?”

The Socialist Theory of Wealth: “Accretion“

Accretion is the gradual formation of a larger body through natural forces. Like sediment, it simply increases, piling up, layer upon layer. No one does it, it simply occurs.

For America’s new left, this is how wealth occurs in society. It is a natural force, not a manmade one — and certainly not due to capitalism, which they see as taking credit for what would have occurred anyway. To paraphrase a popular vulgarism, for the left: Wealth happens.

… By simply assuming wealth is a “given,” the left can justify their policies with impunity. If wealth will simply accrue, then the question is not whether it will exist and how to create it, but how to allocate it…. Because they believe wealth arises from simple accretion, wealth is fair game for the left. As a result, all their policies target it.

… Subsidization, taxation, and regulation can all be used to redistribute wealth in ways the left believe superior to the working of the private sector. Each becomes means toward the left’s larger goal of income redistribution. And each takes the left further from the free market’s optimal wealth allocation, effectively destroying increasing amounts of wealth as their policies increasingly fall further short of the wealth that would otherwise have existed.

____ JT Young

In my early twenties I passed through a number of political philosophies — from a soft form of socialism to an uneasy form of conservatism to a hard and tough form of libertarianism. The journey was self-propelled, as I pursued the self-study of political economics, and basic economics under a minimal governmental system.

Studying economics under a minimal government is the only true way to understand economics, since one does not have to posit any magical economic forces to create and wisely redistribute wealth. Wealth is not created in the first place unless rational actors interact to generate the wealth (crops, manufactured goods, services of value, etc.) and magnify the wealth through trade.

Wealth must first be generated and expanded before it can be redistributed to citizens and used to grow a monstrous all-consuming bureaucracy. Any system of political economics which depends upon “natural accretion” processes to provide the wealth to run a large and generous welfare state and to drive massive $100 trillion green new deals and other vast and costly monuments to grandiose socialist ideas, will learn the lessons of Zimbabwe and Venezuela — and of the deceased USSR and the many failed nations of the Warsaw Pact.

Sweden is not a socialist country. It tried to be socialist, and it nearly collapsed. Only radical reforms away from suicidal socialism allowed the Swedish nation to survive in its current form. China’s radical retreat from Maoist communism saved the nation from perpetual starvation and poverty.

The myth of Nordic socialism is partially created by a confusion between socialism, meaning government exerting control or ownership of businesses, and the welfare state in the form of government-provided social safety net programs. However, the left’s embrace of socialism is not merely a case of redefining a word. Simply look at the long-running affinity of leftists with socialist dictators in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela for proof many on the left long for real socialism. __ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/07/08/sorry-bernie-bros-but-nordic-countries-are-not-socialist/#326323a874ad

Socialist countries fail. Good intentions and a mystical belief in the magical accretion of wealth will not save any nation foolish enough to neglect the old fashioned, tried and tested ways of creating wealth. These require the free and diverse exercise of intelligently guided labour and trade in its millions of various forms, without government coercion or dictate.

Socialist at Twenty: OK; Socialist at Thirty: Mentally Deficient?

Several thinkers through the years have noted that young people in their teens and early twenties seem drawn to socialism. But the brighter ones eventually notice significant problems with socialism whenever it is exercised in the real world — even if their professors studiously fail to point these things out to them. By the time they reach the age of 30 the brighter ones usually pull away from the suicidal theory of socialism. Good intentions cannot compensate for consistent failure to meet grandiose goals and promises.

Socialism vs. Capitalism?

Socialism is a political ideology with economic overtones. Capitalism is a form of market economics that can be paired with any number of political ideologies — including socialism. So the conflict is never between socialism and capitalism, which can be easily reconciled — although socialism tends to drag the system down eventually beyond the ability of capitalistic mechanism to generate wealth and provide for all the required graft in socialist systems.

Recent and current graduates of most universities — particularly the liberal arts — are poorly prepared to meet the requirements of the real world outside of the binge-fornicate-indoctrinate world of university. When these persons of shrunken mindsets begin influencing national policies, a descent into socialist suicide is not uncommon. The same result can occur when large numbers of immigrants of low IQ are allowed to flood a nation and participate in the political process. Similarly, when a low IQ population that had been kept out of the political process is finally allowed to vote and fully participate, a socialist descent in policies — and a radical decline in infrastructure — is not uncommon (eg South Africa and Zimbabwe).

As the economist Thomas Sowell has observed: “Socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster.” __ https://www.providencejournal.com/opinion/20190319/my-turn-mackubin-thomas-owens-ignoring-socialisms-countless-corpses

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. It is never too late for a Dangerous Childhood © .