Althouse: "What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith."

February 13, 2013

"What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith."

Rand Paul delivers the SOTU response from the Tea Party.

44 comments:

Brian Brown said...: Oh, no, no, no, no!

See we need INVESTMENTS done by the government.

And the really great part is that when you make several hundred billion in investments, you get to say: Nothing I'm proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime!

It's like magic! Can you feel the magic, Ann?; 2/13/13, 10:08 AM
Nonapod said...: Unfortunately our elected leaders are largely economic nincompoops. For example, Nancy Pelosi said that for every dollar spent on food stamps we get a $1.79 back into the economy. So logically we need to put everyone on food stamps!; 2/13/13, 10:15 AM
mccullough said...: Almost no one knows who Adam Smith is.; 2/13/13, 10:16 AM
Pastafarian said...: He's wrong. We do need Robin Hood.

Robin Hood stole from tax collectors. He was an anti-tax crusader. He never 'stole from the rich to give to the poor'. That's a bullshit hijacking of a mythological hero by the left, the same way they hijack language to steer the debate.; 2/13/13, 10:17 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: Rand Paul's message is sure to resonate with the English nobleman demographic.; 2/13/13, 10:21 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: I think that they have been listening to Paul Krugman too much. But Rand is right, and a good part of the reason that we are in the fifth year of the Obama Recession is just that, that the Democratic Party is filled at the top with economic nincompoops.

Peloisi is probably just dumb enough to believe what she says, but, then again, she grew up in a Dem political family family, and, for a lot of them, winning is all about the power of rewarding your friends, so that you can continue in office, they can continue to benefit financially from it, and the cycle keeps going around, with those at the center, including the politicians, skimming off the cream, and getting rich and powerful as a result.; 2/13/13, 10:22 AM
bagoh20 said...: "Almost no one knows who Adam Smith is."

That's because they robbed him on American Idol.; 2/13/13, 10:24 AM
Nonapod said...: Mitchell the Bat said...

Rand Paul's message is sure to resonate with the English nobleman demographic.

I know this was meant to be facetious, but Adam Smith spent an entire chapter in Wealth discussing how the free market brought down the nobility. It's a bummer that more people don't know the first thing about it's contents (even though it is a slog of a tome); 2/13/13, 10:25 AM
mccullough said...: Does Rand Paul wear a wig?; 2/13/13, 10:28 AM
AllenS said...: When Robin Hood was doing his thing, the only rich people were the ones in government.; 2/13/13, 10:31 AM
bagoh20 said...: This economy should and could have roared back two years ago. You have to be a pretty successful President to prevent that, and Obama has gotten almost everything he's wanted. The last five years have been leftist dreams run rampant, and the results follow.

After 5 years we have added 12 million people of working age, and we now employ 3 million less than then.

This has been a disaster, and we will never get those 5 years and the next 5 back after they are wasted. All those people over all those years who could have been working, innovating, improving, building, and paying taxes have been permanently lost to silliness, binders of women, lies, greed, and a worthless press.; 2/13/13, 10:35 AM
test said...: Pastafarian said...
Robin Hood stole from tax collectors. He was an anti-tax crusader. He never 'stole from the rich to give to the poor'

Maybe the way to think about it is that under Feudalsim the rich were the government. The mistake leftists make is attaching the sins to the rich rather than the government as those entities diverged.; 2/13/13, 10:40 AM
test said...: I see AllenS beat me to it. Should have checked.; 2/13/13, 10:41 AM
Shanna said...: I went to Adam Smith's gravesite when I was in Edinburgh.; 2/13/13, 10:42 AM
Pastafarian said...: Marshal said: "... under Feudalsim the rich were the government."

Were? Isn't the area surrounding Washington DC the richest in the country?

My point remains: Obama isn't Robin Fucking Hood, he's the Sheriff of Nottingham.; 2/13/13, 10:46 AM
furious_a said...: Robin Hood stole from tax collectors. He was an anti-tax crusader.

...and it said in the Magna Carta, somewhere near the front:

Skilled archers being necessary to hold our flanks at Agincourt, the right of the sturdy yeomanry to keep and bear yew longbows shall not be infringed.; 2/13/13, 10:56 AM
test said...: Pastafarian said...
Marshal said: "... under Feudalsim the rich were the government."

Were? Isn't the area surrounding Washington DC the richest in the country?

Certainly the groups can intersect and with crony capitalism they often do. But in Feudalism the rich literally were the government. Your lord was in effect your governor or mayor - only with far more power. At least now the two can be independent even though our government is trying to tie the two back together.

I agree Obama's not Robin Hood. Obama's primary beneficiaries are upper middle class college graduates who work for government or in government funded industries / institutions, and the politically connected rich of course.; 2/13/13, 11:03 AM
Skipper said...: Rand did get the Robin Hood metaphor wrong. Robin fought the corrupt Sheriff of Nottingham who stole from everyone. We need a Robin Hood now.; 2/13/13, 11:05 AM
coketown said...: I think Santa Claus is the closer analog. At least Robin Hood's obsessive philanthropy was properly paid for. We have a president who thinks you can have a $4 trillion government that runs on taxes for 1% of earners and reindeer shit. Sorry, I mean Treasuries. Which will eventually be worth reindeer shit.; 2/13/13, 11:07 AM
Rusty said...: Skipper said...
Rand did get the Robin Hood metaphor wrong. Robin fought the corrupt Sheriff of Nottingham who stole from everyone. We need a Robin Hood now.

No. He was right.
We don't need one man to come and save us, but a lot of people working in their own self interest.; 2/13/13, 11:12 AM
Scott M said...: Sorry, I mean Treasuries. Which will eventually be worth reindeer shit.

Incorrect. Reindeer shit will always have intrinsic value if for nothing other than fertilizer. Treasuries can make no such claim.; 2/13/13, 11:15 AM
Anthony said...: winning is all about the power of rewarding your friends, so that you can continue in office, they can continue to benefit financially from it, and the cycle keeps going around, with those at the center, including the politicians, skimming off the cream, and getting rich and powerful as a result.

Probably the best and briefest description of the core function of government I've ever read.; 2/13/13, 11:30 AM
Anthony said...: winning is all about the power of rewarding your friends, so that you can continue in office, they can continue to benefit financially from it, and the cycle keeps going around, with those at the center, including the politicians, skimming off the cream, and getting rich and powerful as a result.

Probably the best and briefest description of the core function of government I've ever read.; 2/13/13, 11:30 AM
edutcher said...: The more I hear Rand Paul, the more I like him.

PS Instead of Robin Hood, maybe we need Zorro.

After all, he is Hispanic.; 2/13/13, 11:39 AM
edutcher said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/13/13, 11:39 AM
Cedarford said...: Rusty -

No. He was right.
We don't need one man to come and save us, but a lot of people working in their own self interest.

The problem with capitalism is that soon enough under it, wealth and power become concentrated in ogopolies. That working in their own self-interest, as factory owners, fiscal health destabilizing bankers and financiers, Robber Baron builders of monopolies, and crony capitalist - globalists acting as off-shorers of millions of jobs under free trade - work to maximize wealth to the capitalists and crony politicians in their hire. Extracting as much wealth as they can away from labor.
Even as they destroy the social fabric and stability capitalism depends on - because they cannot see past their own self interest.

The correctness of the criticism in Das Kapital compells all societies to rein in the abuses inherent in powerful capitalists only acting in their self-interest and destroying others to maximize wealth going to a few.

The problem is that the people in societies abused by unchecked capitalist greed, the exploitation of the masses by the oligarchs - get many of the fixes wrong. Time and time again. But the inherent conflict capitalism sets up compels such interventions again and again.; 2/13/13, 11:46 AM
furious_a said...: PS Instead of Robin Hood, maybe we need Zorro.

Yeah, but he's a huero. To be authentically non-cornball we need a cholo.; 2/13/13, 11:52 AM
Tank said...: c4

We're so far now from unregulated, runaway capitalism, that it's really irrelevant to discuss the possible dangers there.

The real problem is, as it always is, gov't, and crony capitalism (people using gov't for their own good).; 2/13/13, 12:00 PM
garage mahal said...: Don't agree with Rand Paul on much, but I applaud his stance on civil liberties and on the burgeoning police state we live in.; 2/13/13, 12:19 PM
bagoh20 said...: "We're so far now from unregulated, runaway capitalism, that it's really irrelevant to discuss the possible dangers there."

And it never was so either, anywhere. It's always been a huge straw man.

The problems blamed on capitalism start when the rich start using government to control what they cannot through the market. There is a limit to what you can do in a free market before your size becomes and impediment. Only the government can prevent the smaller competitors from picking you apart.; 2/13/13, 12:32 PM
Seeing Red said...: The inherent conflict isn't in capitalism, Cedar, it's in humans.

Kronk got a new bearskin & I want one, too. Go get one for me, will ya? It's only fair.; 2/13/13, 12:36 PM
Nonapod said...: The problem with capitalism is that soon enough under it, wealth and power become concentrated in ogopolies. That working in their own self-interest, as factory owners, fiscal health destabilizing bankers and financiers, Robber Baron builders of monopolies, and crony capitalist - globalists acting as off-shorers of millions of jobs under free trade - work to maximize wealth to the capitalists and crony politicians in their hire. Extracting as much wealth as they can away from labor.
Even as they destroy the social fabric and stability capitalism depends on - because they cannot see past their own self interest.

You've incorrectly conflated a lot of ideas and concepts with Capitalism that aren't Capitalism. Technically speaking "Robber Barons" and "Crony Capitalists" are not capitalists. Crony Capitalists exploit the unholy relationship with government and big business. "Off shorers" only exist at all because of heavy domestic regulation and taxation (two very anti-free-market concepts). The "fiscal health destabilizing bankers and financiers" are exploiters of a heavily governmentally involved financial system and regulatory system that encourages using public monies for bailouts of "too big to fail" organizations rather than letting them just fail.; 2/13/13, 12:47 PM
Rusty said...: The problem with capitalism is that soon enough under it, wealth and power become concentrated in ogopolies.

You missaprehrend free markets.; 2/13/13, 12:58 PM
Robert Cook said...: "The last five years have been leftist dreams run rampant, and the results follow."

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!

Sure...I guess...if the "leftist dreams" are exactly those of Wall Street and the big banks and military and big pharma, et al.; 2/13/13, 12:59 PM
Robert Cook said...: "Technically speaking 'Robber Barons' and 'Crony Capitalists' are not capitalists."

I guess capitalism can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?; 2/13/13, 1:03 PM
Tom said...: Man, Rand makes too much sense to be taken seriously. Ask yourself, if Rand is president and we implemented his plan, what would we get? Can Americans really deal with the reality of being responsible for our own lives and fortunes? Libertarianism requires three things: personal responsibility, ownership of our decisions, actions, and results, and accountability. Are we as Americans prepared to accept the necessary level of responsibility, ownership and accountability for Rand Paul to be president. I'd like to believe we are... But my guess is that we're children to will vote ourselves free stuff as long as we can.; 2/13/13, 1:10 PM
Known Unknown said...: I guess capitalism can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?

I guess government can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?; 2/13/13, 1:28 PM
Nonapod said...: I guess capitalism can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?

Capitalism is just a system. It's a system that I happen to believe is most congruent with human nature. And I have good reason to believe it to be so.

It has been shown over and over again in world history that nations that put less regulation on their trade (countries with a more "free market" than others) are more successful than countries with more strictures and more centralized control. In short, the more that people are allowed to succeed or fail on their own merits without government interference the better off it is for everyone in that society.

Although completely unregulated capitalism - so called "anarcho-capitalism" - hasn't ever really been tried (with the possible exception of Iceland in the 10th and 11th centuries).; 2/13/13, 1:31 PM
Rusty said...: Robert Cook said...
"Technically speaking 'Robber Barons' and 'Crony Capitalists' are not capitalists."

I guess capitalism can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?

We've talked about this before , comrade Bob.
Capitalism is a Marxist term. It isn't descriptive of free markets.
Free markets work where ever they are tried.
"f Wall Street and the big banks and military and big pharma, et al."
All heavily regulated by the government and therefore hardly free markets.; 2/13/13, 2:00 PM
Shanna said...: Capitalism is just a system. It's a system that I happen to believe is most congruent with human nature. And I have good reason to believe it to be so.

Somebody needs to link that Milton Freidman video again.

If you want to understand where conservatives are coming from economically and morally all you have to do is read his books.; 2/13/13, 2:20 PM
JAL said...: I heard Rand Paul interviewed this morning on the radio.

Based on what I heard, I would seriously consider voting for him for POTUS.

Not the usual political schmoosh I hear from my fav Republican conservatives.

He made sense.; 2/13/13, 2:25 PM
Revenant said...: I guess capitalism can never fail, it can only be failed, huh?

Capitalism can never fail in the sense that physics can never fail. The laws of capitalism apply to all economic systems.

A capitalist is just someone who thinks our economic system should follow the natural laws of human economic behavior.; 2/13/13, 3:10 PM
Rusty said...: Shanna said...
Capitalism is just a system. It's a system that I happen to believe is most congruent with human nature. And I have good reason to believe it to be so.

Somebody needs to link that Milton Freidman video again.

Fergitit. The usual knuckleheads are convinced they've created ,"The New Soviet Man".; 2/13/13, 5:35 PM
jim said...: The 300 lb. elephant in the room: HERE IT IS.

Why does the GOP now get to offer TWO separate rebuttals to the SOTU?

I'm trying to imagine the shrieks on the Right if Bush had faced rebuttals from both the DNC & the Progressive Caucus every time he put out a SOTU address ... except that nobody in the "liberal media" would've seriously contemplated offering the extra airtime for such an absurd scenario for a New York Minute.

Noone can seriously say that the "Tea Party" isn't simply the GOP's rebranding project (a life-or-death political necessity after the utter disaster of the Bush Follies, distinct - though happily co-opting it - from Ron Paul's fan-club of the same name, & a textbook case of Astroturfing that was actually started up in 2007 by the Kochs & Big Tobacco). Hell, Paul himself is a Republican member of Congress. There's nothing substantially different between Rubio's & Paul's statements.

So, again, why in the world are there now two rebuttals?; 2/14/13, 12:36 PM