Entaarepreneurs, not 'big-government liberals' foster success

[littlebuddy]

Thomas Sowell

Entrepreneurs, not 'big-government liberals,' foster success

Every year about this time, big-government liberals stand up in front of college commencement crowds across the country and urge the graduates to do the noblest thing possible -- become big-government liberals.
That isn't how they phrase it, of course. Commencement speakers express great reverence for "public service," as distinguished from narrow private "greed." There is usually not the slightest sign of embarrassment at this self-serving celebration of the kinds of careers they have chosen -- over and above the careers of others who merely provide us with the food we eat, the homes we live in, the clothes we wear and the medical care that saves our health and our lives.
What I would like to see is someone with the guts to tell those students: Do you want to be of some use and service to your fellow human beings? Then let your fellow human beings tell you what they want -- not with words, but by putting their money where their mouth is.
You want to see more people have better housing? Build it! Become a builder or developer -- if you can stand the sneers and disdain of your classmates and professors who regard the very words as repulsive.




Would you like to see more things become more affordable to more people? Then figure out more efficient ways of producing things or more efficient ways of getting those things from the producers to the consumers at a lower cost.
That's what a man named Sam Walton did when he created Wal-Mart, a boon to people with modest incomes and a bane to the elite intelligentsia. In the process, Sam Walton became rich. Was that the "greed" that you have heard your classmates and professors denounce so smugly? If so, it has been such "greed" that has repeatedly brought prices down and thereby brought the American standard of living up.
Back at the beginning of the 20th century, only 15 percent of American families had a flush toilet. Not quite one-fourth had running water. Only 3 percent had electricity and 1 percent had central heating.
By 1970, the vast majority of those American families who were living in poverty had flush toilets, running water and electricity. By the end of the 20th century, more Americans were connected to the Internet than were connected to a water pipe or a sewage line at the beginning of the century.
More families have air-conditioning today than had electricity then. Today, more than half of all families with incomes below the official poverty line own a car or truck and have a microwave.
This didn't come about because of the politicians, bureaucrats, activists or others in "public service" whom you are supposed to admire. No nation ever protested its way from poverty to prosperity or got there through rhetoric or bureaucracies.
It was Thomas Edison who brought us electricity, not the Sierra Club. It was the Wright brothers who got us off the ground, not the Federal Aviation Administration. It was Henry Ford who ended the isolation of millions of Americans by making the automobile affordable, not Ralph Nader.
Those who have helped the poor the most have not been those who have gone around loudly expressing "compassion" for the poor, but those who found ways to make industry more productive and distribution more efficient, so that the poor of today can afford things that the affluent of yesterday could only dream about.
The wonderful places where you are supposed to go to do "public service" are as sheltered from the brutal test of reality as you have been on this campus for the last four -- or is it six? -- years. In these little cocoons, all that matters is how well you talk the talk.
People who go into the marketplace have to walk the walk.
Colleges can teach many valuable skills, but they can also nourish many dangerous illusions. If you really want to be of service to others, then let them decide what is a service by whether they choose to spend their hard-earned money for it.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His column is distributed by Creators Syndicate. E-mail comments to letters@detnews.com.

[ghettopalmetto]

You want to see more people have better housing? Build it! Become a builder or developer -- if you can stand the sneers and disdain of your classmates and professors who regard the very words as repulsive.

And if it weren't for "big government liberals" [[whatever that term means), then peoples' houses would be falling on them left-and-right.

But at least the builders would be making money.

God gave you a brain, littlebuddy. Use it.

[firstandten]

Have fun littlebuddy living in a world of total de-regulated industries. Without government laissez-faire capitalism would run over you like a run-away freight train without brakes.

[Pam]

Entrepreneurs

Spelled right in your cut and paste but not in your title.

God gave you a brain, littlebuddy.

Perhaps not.

[Jimaz]

Friends don't let friends start threads drunk.

[maxx]

Yes, thanks, WalMart, for forcing small businesses out of business with your cut-throat pricing. And thanks for forcing some manufacturers like Levis to have to keep giving Walmart lower and lower costs until they could no longer operate in the US. That shows the spirit of true capitalism, destroy the competition. What good is a low-price computer if you can't afford to hook it up to the internet?

[ejames01]

What businessman ended child labor in the U.S.?

[Crumbled_pavement]

Seems like a bunch of socialist lovers in this thread. Littlebuddy has the right idea. Government should only be responsible for the army and police, nothing else.

[Lowell]

Government should only be responsible for the army and police, nothing else.

Difficult to argue with^. Works perfectly in North Korea.

[gibran]

hey folks hate to break this to you ....I am liberal and a business owner...in fact I am working hard to provide hope for people with disability as they try to find work...in an economy that we didn't destroy...so when you generalize get a clue...not everyone is who is a business is a kool aid drinking Beck head or a Hypocritical Rush follower...just decent folk trying to right for all people equally...not some ...nor do we buy the free marker hypocrisy...we are educated and liberal ...we pay taxes ...fight in the wars of Bush ...liberals is not a diseased just opinionated as well...we just happen to have the right opinion [[kidding)...do you liberal trashing folks really think all people actually like where the tea party would take this country....any more than we would like where we would have headed with the likes of Sarah Palin...FREEDOM my friends freedom is fought for so hard by so many ..."but it should be extended to all people equally" [[Wendel Willkie)

[Crumbled_pavement]

Government should only be responsible for the army and police, nothing else.

Difficult to argue with^. Works perfectly in North Korea.

Plus they don't have an illegal immigration problem.

[rb336]

yet another fan of corporate feudalism.

[ghettopalmetto]

Government should only be responsible for the army and police, nothing else.

Difficult to argue with^. Works perfectly in North Korea.

Hey, why not? We already have the population that is oblivious to the outside world and thinks our nation is #1 at Everything.

I suspect, though, that the Koreans at least have half an idea that they're getting hosed.

[oladub]

-Government should only be responsible for the army and police, nothing else.
-Difficult to argue with. Works perfectly in North Korea.

-Plus they don't have an illegal immigration problem.

North Korea is a big government paradise. Everything is nationalized, public transportation, communal farms, lots of public housing, public radio sporting fair speech; what more could big government liberals ask for? It's a workers paradise. It's no wonder that North Korea's illegal immigration problem is it's own citizens escaping to China.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIRjJ...eature=related

[Pam]

I think C-P was only kidding folks.

[Retroit]

Excellent article, littlebuddy. Thanks for sharing. Even more poignant considering its author doesn't conform to the stereotypes dictated by those who disagree with him.

[Retroit]

Have fun littlebuddy living in a world of total de-regulated industries. Without government laissez-faire capitalism would run over you like a run-away freight train without brakes.

Yeah, we don't want an economy like China!

By the way, I don't think "total de-regulation" is what is being proposed. The government does have an obligation for keeping a fair marketplace, but when the government becomes such a burden that business cannot prosper, the marketplace is no longer fair.

[ghettopalmetto]

...government does have an obligation for keeping a fair marketplace, but when the government becomes such a burden that business cannot prosper, the marketplace is no longer fair.

What's your measuring stick? What constitutes "such a burden"? What constitutes "prosper"?

For what it's worth, I don't recall anything in the Constitution that commits the federal government to a "fair marketplace". I do recall seeing enumerated powers of regulation, though.

By any account, the United States has the largest economy in the world. I'd say that's fairly prosperous. Wouldn't you agree?

[Retroit]

What's your measuring stick? What constitutes "such a burden"?

When businesses of our country are at a disadvantage to those of other countries, I would say that that is a burden.

What constitutes "prosper"?

When a business of our country can make as much profit as those of other countries, that is prospering.

For what it's worth, I don't recall anything in the Constitution that commits the federal government to a "fair marketplace". I do recall seeing enumerated powers of regulation, though.

"Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce..." I.8.3 This was intended to prevent any state from profiting from trade with foreign nations or Indian tribes to the disadvantage of other states. It was also intended to prevent states from unfairly trading amongst themselves.

"No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another..." I.9.6 Again, to prevent unfair competition between the states.

"No state shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts..." I.10.1 Intended to prevent the government from interfering in private contracts, many of which would be entered into for business reasons.

Most of the rights conferred upon the people by the Constitution were also considered conferred upon their property, which would include their businesses.

By any account, the United States has the largest economy in the world. I'd say that's fairly prosperous. Wouldn't you agree?

The US's share of the worlds economy has, is, and will continue to decrease as long as we are unwilling to acknowledge that the privileged position provided by our victory in WWII has long since passed away.

[firstandten]

Yeah, we don't want an economy like China!

By the way, I don't think "total de-regulation" is what is being proposed. The government does have an obligation for keeping a fair marketplace, but when the government becomes such a burden that business cannot prosper, the marketplace is no longer fair.

That is the libertarian view some of us espouse on this forum. Let business do what the hell they want and the common man will get the benefit.

That is the balance that must be maintained. gov't regulation and business.

However the problem we have been running into lately is not too much gov't but too little. So there needs to be a balance struck between the two.

Sowell begs the point. The argument is not between entrepreneurs and big gov't liberals.

Entrepreneurs didn't put the economy into the tank and the only big gov't folks I know of are the Repub conservatives

[ghettopalmetto]

When businesses of our country are at a disadvantage to those of other countries, I would say that that is a burden.

You're right. It's a shame that universal health care is politically unpalatable in this nation. That would instantly level the playing field. It's also a shame that we let our physical infrastructure go to complete shit, while the rest of the world is upgrading theirs.

When a business of our country can make as much profit as those of other countries, that is prospering.

Numbers? CIA World Factbook shows that the United States has the 8th highest per capita GDP [[PPP) in the world. In other words--we're making more money [[purchasing power), on average, than the vast majority of nations in the world. Please explain.

The US's share of the worlds economy has, is, and will continue to decrease as long as we are unwilling to acknowledge that the privileged position provided by our victory in WWII has long since passed away.

The US's share of the economy will continue to decrease as long as people think they don't have to educate and continually improve themselves. That means secondary as well as post-secondary education, as well as continuing professional education. For example, people in other nations graduate high school speaking three languages, while our kids are barely literate in their native tongue. How are we supposed to be internationally competitive if we can only speak to the Canadians, Brits, and Australians?

We have a sense of entitlement in this nation that is nothing short of astounding. I think we like the IDEA of "hard work" more than we want to roll up our sleeves and work hard.

[gibran]

love mercury in your water....lead in your paint....holes in your bridges...oil on your shores....dead in your streets.....clear cut forests.....hidden credit card fees....no education....private prisons...then enjoy little government and big business

[Crumbled_pavement]

love mercury in your water....lead in your paint....holes in your bridges...oil on your shores....dead in your streets.....clear cut forests.....hidden credit card fees....no education....private prisons...then enjoy little government and big business

Those are just scare tactics. Big businesses are benevolent and here for everyone's benefit and prosperity.

[Gistok]

When I read the thread title before even checking out the posts... I thought to myself.... hmmmm this was either started by "Knödel Kid" or "Big Bully"....

Right again...

[Retroit]

A strong economy is what makes a country great. That strong economy is provided by business, not by government. Yes, government is necessary, but it's function is to provide for a strong economy. What happens when the government grows in proportion to business is that it becomes a burden on the economy.

I think Sowell's point is that young people should aspire to be a productive part of the economy rather than be a burden on the country by aspiring to a secure, high-paying, high pension, early retirement, bureaucratic job at some government agency.

Our country did not become a prosperous economy because of the government, but rather because of capitalism. The flaws of big government far exceed the flaws of capitalism, and capitalisms flaws are more easily rectified.

If you want to see what happens when an economy is all government and no capitalism, study the USSR. If you want to see what happens to an economy when government gives way to capitalism, study China. And if you want to see what happens to an economy when capitalism gives way to government, study the US.