Recently I got into a discussion with friends over what danger some of the new Democrat Congress members posed. “Why that woman from New York wants free college education for everyone” one friend said. “How is the country going to pay for it?” The person added, “that woman wants to tax the rich to pay for it and that means we are going to have to pay more in taxes”. Hmmm.
Where does one begin?
The friend making that statement probably lives in the 90th% income bracket which is about $150,000 in yearly income. The couple probably have a pension, social security, and some income from investments. They own a home and a vacation house. They live comfortably but certainly not extravagantly. Compared to average household income of $61,000, they are doing well. So why the fear of free college?
My friend did not stop at having to pay higher taxes. My friend quickly added, free college education would take the US to socialism. And another friend said, “from socialism, communism was next. And just look at Russia, Venezuela, and Cuba” (I guess they had never visited China.) Hmmm.
These two friends are both educated, well spoken, and otherwise reasonably charitable people. From where could this disconnect from logic and reality come? That’s a “foxy” question I think.
I wonder whether my two friends have thought why someone would advocate for free college education in the first place? I wonder whether they realize that educated people are a resource just like rivers, roads, and electricity. An educated work force drives prosperity. In the US, unemployment, average income, and home ownership are all correlated to whether one has a college education or not.
Of course the likely reply would be, “I had to pay for my college education, so should the kids today”. Hmmm. I would quickly agree to that if there were options for kids to borrow at no interest the money to pay for their college education and depending upon what profession they chose or where they applied their college education, there were “forgiveness” provisions.
In many respects, the free college education argument is a red herring with respect to the risks posed by socialistic regulations and laws. And the connections between socialism and communism are faint if at all. Socialism arises invariably to counter the excesses of capitalism. Hmmm.
Most people are surprised to see how much in our daily lives is a form of socialism. Public roads, libraries, and utilities are starters. Social Security, the VA hospital system, and the host of consumer protection agencies are socialistic in nature. All our discrimination laws, rent protection, and FHA loans in some way overcome excesses of unfettered capitalism and are a bit socialistic.
The question of why unfettered capitalism is not dangerous is deceptively difficult to answer. Unfettered capitalism opens a world of possibilities for those who seek to succeed in business and accumulate wealth. But given time, the entrepreneur becomes very wealthy and for most everyone else, life can become a little (or a lot) less good.
In a wealthy country, like the US with abundant natural resources and protection from enemies by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, great wealth can be amassed though hard work and intelligence. Question… if all it took was hard work and intelligence, why would these entrepreneurs not go to the Sahara Desert or the North Pole and put their skills to work? Capitalism’s success has a lot to do with the inherent natural resources, which in some way belong to everyone, and how these natural resources are harvested by the risk taking capitalist. A hard working, risk taking socialist should be just as successful under similar circumstances, I would think.
But, one might ask, why aren’t socialist Venezuela and communist Cuba successful countries?
Does anyone think that if Venezuela or Cuba simply said “unfettered capitalism” is the way of the future, that life would change? IMO, history has shown that all that would change is who the rich people were. The poor would remain poor.
There is no simple formula for accumulating national wealth. Clearly abundant raw materials play a big role. So does motivated entrepreneurs and an educated and skilled work force. And, don’t forget “guns and butter”. A country consumed with defending itself militarily will not have the time or ability to concentrate on economic development if it is preoccupied defending its borders.
With Venezuela and Cuba there is another factor which IMO outweigh all the others. These countries lost their way when they cast aside “democracy”, rule of law, and free speech/free press. Graft, corruption, and incompetent leader escape the natural consequences of their decisions when free speech and free press are suppressed.
One last observation. Countries like Japan, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, or Canada all utilize more socialistic laws and regulations than the US. None of these countries are teetering on the edge of communism. And all these countries offer their citizens healthcare costs roughly 1/2 or less that the US with healthcare outcomes uniformly better. Hmmm.