By G. Murphy Donovan
Presidential candidate Rick Santorum drew fire from the usual suspects the other day for his remarks on the utility of inequality. A typical reaction was that of columnist Charles M. Blow in the New York Times, who accused Senator Santorum of "praising income inequality." Santorum was actually praising the value of individual and group inequity -- as a necessary motive force for hard work, competition, and success. Unlike the shallow reaction of the NY Times, Santorum's argument is underwritten by history, science, and common sense.
William Playfair (1759-1823), groundbreaking political economist, when discussing the rise and fall of individuals and nations, concluded:
Presidential candidate Rick Santorum drew fire from the usual suspects the other day for his remarks on the utility of inequality. A typical reaction was that of columnist Charles M. Blow in the New York Times, who accused Senator Santorum of "praising income inequality." Santorum was actually praising the value of individual and group inequity -- as a necessary motive force for hard work, competition, and success. Unlike the shallow reaction of the NY Times, Santorum's argument is underwritten by history, science, and common sense.
William Playfair (1759-1823), groundbreaking political economist, when discussing the rise and fall of individuals and nations, concluded:
The superior energy of poverty and necessity which leads men, under this pressure, to act incessantly in whatever way they have it in their power to act, and that seems likely to bring them on a level with those that are richer, is then the ground-work of the rise and fall of nations, as well as of individuals. ... [T]he triumph of poverty over wealth on the great scale as on the small, though very irregular in its pace, has continued without interruption from the earliest records to the present moment.
No comments:
Post a Comment