What government interventions create the most poverty and social inequality? I feel that this is very important when talking to socialists since they say that capitalism satisfies petty wants of some while others don't even have their basic needs.
As a response to the OP, I tend to think that in many ways, the programs that are touted as being the most beneficial to the "poor and disadvantaged" are often the ones that keep them exactly where they are in an aggregate sense. So really, I tend to think of it as a great example of how the best of intentions can yield the worst of results.
Kenneth:Ok. I was wrong in saying 'most rich people gain their wealth through the state'. What I would like to say was that the richest of the rich or at least a large number of them gain their wealth through the state. Do you really think that people like Rothchild are natural elites?
If you are defining "richest of the rich" as "billionaire" (which would fit you designating the Rothschild family as an example of such), then you might want to look at some of the numerous folk listed on Wikipedia's helpful list of billionaires article. Going just by the top 5, we have:
Bill Gates: His industry is a comparatively unregulated one, with the only major interference by government being intellectual property laws and, of course, the anti trust lawsuit against Microsoft.
Warren Buffett: Berkshire Hathaway presumably profits from FRB, but to what degree? And what relationship does he have with government officials and lobbyists?
Carlos Slim Helu: Probably the strongest case for a crony capitalist here, considering he's A. Operating in Mexico and Central America and B. In telecommunications, an industry I would rank below only utilities, finance and heavy industry in terms of cronyism.
Ingvar Kamprad: I know of at least one case where IKEA has stolen land, though to what extent IKEA benefits from this compared to profits made by legitimate means I would not know. Someone from the Scandinavian countries may be better able to answer here.
Lawrence Ellison: See Bill Gates, above. Computers tend to be less of a cronyised markets than others.
What you want is empirical proof and that is very tedious way of finding out the answer. However, we can employ praxeology and develop a theory that can say a lot about rich people and the state. Hans Hermann Hoppe has done this and also Noam Chomsky, although Chomsky uses a different method. It is just in the incentive system of the state. There is an enormous mismatch of incentives between voting and corporate lobbying. A concentration of power in the state apparatus tends to attract the next largest concentrations of power, or corporations. It just makes too much sense for a rich person to spend money on bribes and lobbies than to actually risk money in producing goods in the free market. This is why Ayn Rand called the business class the original collectivists. And I think we can look at history and easily come to the conclusion that the state has largely benefited the corporate elites than the little guy.
Kenneth: What you want is empirical proof and that is very tedious way of finding out the answer. However, we can employ praxeology and develop a theory that can say a lot about rich people and the state. Hans Hermann Hoppe has done this and also Noam Chomsky, although Chomsky uses a different method. It is just in the incentive system of the state. There is an enormous mismatch of incentives between voting and corporate lobbying. A concentration of power in the state apparatus tends to attract the next largest concentrations of power, or corporations. It just makes too much sense for a rich person to spend money on bribes and lobbies than to actually risk money in producing goods in the free market. This is why Ayn Rand called the business class the original collectivists. And I think we can look at history and easily come to the conclusion that the state has largely benefited the corporate elites than the little guy.
That's fine, but theory is not as good as proof.
EDIT: for specific individuals. Also, the degree to which these rich people have been helped by the state must certainly vary. I'm just trying to say that even though in general, I think you're right in many ways, but in terms of specifics, it's much trickier.
Kenneth:It just makes too much sense for a rich person to spend money on bribes and lobbies than to actually risk money in producing goods in the free market. This is why Ayn Rand called the business class the original collectivists.
It just makes too much sense for a rich person to spend money on bribes and lobbies than to actually risk money in producing goods in the free market. This is why Ayn Rand called the business class the original collectivists.
Did she?
Also, the irony of referencing both Chomsky and Rand in the same paragraph is overwhelming.
Life and reality are neither logical nor illogical; they are simply given. But logic is the only tool available to man for the comprehension of both.—Ludwig von Mises
Life and reality are neither logical nor illogical; they are simply given. But logic is the only tool available to man for the comprehension of both.