Rich people cling onto money so stingily because deep-down most of them know they are going to hell.
In the same way that the ideological war between imperialism and Third World Socialism distinguished 20th century Africa, with the triumph of Third World Socialism seen from its rapid proliferation within the continent, it is apparent that a new war is to define Africa in the early parts of the 21st century. Namely, what development economist William Easterly – author of The White Man’s Burden – regarded as the standoff between “Planners” and “Searchers”. Planners advocate “top-down” solutions to alleviate poverty whilst Searchers operate through “bottom-up” solutions. Despite their opposing methodologies, both schools of thought share common ground on one notion: No serious emancipation of Africa, and more broadly LEDCs, from poverty can come to fruition in the absence of a market environment.
I would challenge any economist, economics professor, or economics student to take a look at my model for High-Efficiency Capitalism and tell me it is not superior to current models associated with traditional capitalism. I think the models for traditional capitalism are inherently flawed. For example, I think Adam Smith’s model has inherent problems within it and he identified some of these himself in “The Wealth of Nations.” On top of this, the American system goes even further beyond these flawed models and has resulted in a lumbering hodgepodge of broken economics and inefficiency.
A New Economic Model for a New Age
Raymond Li BSc Pharm
High-Efficiency Capitalism is a simple concept. The first principle is that the basic necessities of life are guaranteed: food, shelter, water, electricity, and health. People will work hard just to do better than others on relative terms.
This economic model is far superior to either pure socialism or pure capitalism alone for various reasons. It is also not so much a compromise between the two as much as it is both systems at the same time.
1) Ethical Reasons:
a) It is frankly not ethical for people to be homeless and starving when society is able to provide for them.
b) No matter how wicked people are, as human organisms we all deserve the basic necessities of life.
2) Efficiency Reasons:
c) People want job security and even more decent individuals will block progress in technology and other sectors in order to maintain job security. For example, if I am a receptionist I might block phone automation in order to keep my job. If I was confident the basics of life were still guaranteed, I would allow this automation to occur. I could then live off the system until I find a new job. In our society today, jobs require far greater training and are far more standardized than in the past. Thus, there needs to be sufficient time for people to transition from one job to another.
d) Allowing greater automation and for people to transition to areas they are actually needed is far better for the economy overall.
e) People naturally want to work, to feel they are making a difference in the community, to feel they are useful, to look like they are not lazy, to look healthy, to be doing well relative to their peers and people in the community, to keep ahead or keep up with the group etc. All of these factors will drive people not only to work, but to do that which is actually of maximum value to society.
f) On top of this, people will work to have luxuries. Video games, jewellery, and fancy cars are not things the state will be providing for under this economic model. Market forces are still considered valuable to set prices for these non-essential commodities.
g) Competition can be of value when not overdone. When children play soccer, the competition drives them to do better; but no matter how poorly a child performs, they are still fed at the end of the day and still get to sleep indoors.
h) It frankly isn’t worth it to maintain a level of poverty in order to punish the lazy. Society hurts itself far more than it helps itself in the long run.
3) General Knowledge:
i) Ayn Rand only argued for individualism and detested weakness in men because she herself is incapable of standing alone and these views allowed her to find a stronger mating partner. Women such as Dickinson and Bronte who did not detest the weak to indulge the strong should be the true heroines among feminists.
j) Nobody argues for traditional capitalism with the intent of making the world a better place. People only argue for traditional capitalism because it is the ideology of the strong. Those who argue for traditional capitalism do so out of purely selfish pathology. Selfish individuals such as these still have a place in the economic model of High-Efficiency Capitalism because it is assumed that selfish individuals will still work hard to benefit themselves.
Today’s servant of power is:
If it’s true that he recommended keeping a baseline level of poverty to create worker insecurity to “stimulate” the economy, then he has already destroyed one of the fundamental tenets used to justify capitalism. Capitalism is supposed to raise people out of poverty and result in everyone having more. It inherently cannot do that if a baseline level of poverty is maintained.
Again, people like Greenspan couldn’t care less about the public. He is there to maintain a ‘mindless-consumption’-economy that is “properly” under the control of the business élite and nothing more.
Those who are willing to create an environment of financial insecurity for those at the lower levels of the economic ladder ensure that they never have to experience that anxiety themselves.
People like Greenspan, to me, represent a branch of finance and economics I like to refer to as “A-hole economics.”