The alternative to all the complexity we experience with political-economic issues can be obviated with a very simple political measure: ensuring a free and unconsolidated economic model in priority.
Ensuring a competitive multiplicity of the marketplace, Adam Smith said, is the first and foremost job of government.
Why is it we don't hear big business mention that part of Adam Smith's prescription for free market economics? How come we don't hear Bernanke or Paulson say anything about ensuring a practical pluralism instead of ensuring that what is big cannot be allowed to fail? How pragmatic is it to not put all the eggs in one basket? I do believe an MBA can figure that out as being of a very high practical utility, yet it is suffering a complete technocratic deficiency.
Why is because it does not have priority. In fact, it has no priority for the administration of power. The alternative we need to achieve an efficienct accountability of power is being denied access to its constitutional apparatus. It is barred from entry, and those barriers must be removed to achieve a genuine constitutional legitimacy of power. The antithesis of the true legitimacy is not just a bad approximation of the perfect model, it is the lack of it. It is wholly illegitimate.
Notice that the inflation has been increasing most in sectors that have been allowed to consolidate the most. That clearly identifies a direct causal relationship that can be effectively treated with ensuring a free and unconsolidated marketplace in priority instead of trying, or not trying, to regulate it with an easily cooptable authority.
Pluralism is poison to a consolidated model of power. It ensures accountability, low prices, full employment and adequate compensation for sustainable growth through innovation in priority. It is a deconsolidation of power that centralized power authorities consider inimical to its interests and must falsely sell to The People as the general welfare.
We need to stop buying it and strive for the perfect market model. Practice makes perfect, and if we try, we can get close enough for all practical purposes. What do we have to lose but the chains that bind us with what we have now.
The antithesis of what we have now is ensuring a free market model, not ensuring a consolidation of power.
Obama is the consumate pragmatist. He is most suited to allow for the pragmatic processes of a legitimately free market mechanism that allows for the innovative empirics of a continuous improvement and a quality of life we all deserve, that we all KNOW we can have, if we try!
Very best wishes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment