Arguing Free Market Capitalism (not corporatism) vs. Jon Stewart
In the course of the interview Jon asks, “What do we do with the losers that are picked by the free market?”
Answer: We don’t need to do anything with them. The market has weened out those that are not able to provide a product that is worthy of consumer dollars. They failed and are able to try again, learning from their mistakes. Meanwhile, the economic resources that they used in an inefficient manner are released back into the economy (employees, capital, etc.) that can use them for a more effective product.
Jon’s “Collective Society” argument
Then Jon goes on to say, “But don’t we live in a society… where everybody’s success is predicated on the hard work of all of us.” This is a very general statement. How have you, the person reading this, ever contributed to my success? You haven’t. In turn, I haven’t helped your success. What Jon is referring to is the collective that has produced the high standard of living that we are enjoying now; the tools we have to use for our success. What he fails to realize is that he is referring to the spontaneous organization of the Free Market.
People selecting the best product based on value-price and those entrepreneurs thriving while other entrepreneurs fail. When I buy a mobile phone, I do so because I believe the following value proposition: $300 is worth less or is equal to this specific mobile phone that has apps, camera, gps, Y attribute, Z attribute, etc. that is easy to navigate and rarely breaks. I don’t buy items based on the producer of those items not failing. That is not part of the value proposition. If we bailed out the losers we’d still be wasting economic resources on Netscape, AltaVista, Lycos, Friendster, Delorean, Pets.com, Vector Motors, Worldcom, etc. Instead, we’ve saved tax money by not bailing out these companies and then released those resources back into the economy so new and/or successful entrepreneurs could use them.
Jon endorses Gov’t going beyond the confines of the Constitution, if it is “effective”
Jon doesn’t realize that he is endorsing a very slippery slope where we, the people, sit by and let the government pick winners and losers. A slope where the line has already been crossed as we watch lobbying money flow into D.C., making it the richest area per capita in the United States (recently passing Silicon Valley). Restrict the government to it’s Constitutional confines and there will be little power to lobby for.
Understand that we haven’t had free markets in many areas for quite sometime. Healthcare (medicare/medicaid, 1965; AMA given power by the gov’t that caused shortages of graduating doctors), College Tuition, Food and Gas, Housing, Monetary system, the list goes on.
The Free Market delivers
We’ve come this far despite government interference into the free market. For the most part, the gov’t stays out of technology and now you have a cell phone that has a billion times the processing power and a million times as small as the first computer, at a million times less of the cost. Let the Free Market operate.