mirror of
https://github.com/nhammer514/textfiles-politics.git
synced 2024-10-01 01:15:38 -04:00
188 lines
10 KiB
HTML
188 lines
10 KiB
HTML
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>democ-pr</title>
|
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="../CSSstyle.css"/>
|
|
<!--Fill in your link line for CSS and JS in the XSLT here! -->
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<h1 id="title-index">democ-pr</h1>
|
|
<div id="conspiracy">
|
|
<p>PRODUCER INTERESTS VS. THE PUBLIC INTEREST: THE ORIGIN OF
|
|
DEMOCRATIZED PRIVILEGE</p>
|
|
<p>By RICHARD M. EBELING</p>
|
|
<p>In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith constructed some of the
|
|
most devastating arguments against the then-prevailing system
|
|
of economic policy--mercantilism. In practically every country
|
|
in Europe, governments regulated, controlled and planned the
|
|
economic activities of their subjects. In France, the
|
|
regulations were so detailed that they specified how many
|
|
stitches should be used in attaching a button to a shirt. In
|
|
Austria, the state limited the period in which people could be
|
|
in mourning so that the dye-makers would not lose the business
|
|
of selling colored cloth.</p>
|
|
<p>Adam Smith demonstrated that rather than bringing prosperity,
|
|
mercantilism had retarded economic progress. Governments, he
|
|
argued, had neither the wisdom nor the ability to plan the
|
|
economic affairs of a multitude of people. If governments
|
|
primarily limited themselves to the protection of life,
|
|
liberty and property, Smith said, men could be trusted to
|
|
manage their own affairs. And when left to do so in an open,
|
|
competitive market, the natural forces of supply and demand
|
|
would generate a rising prosperity for all. Free men in free
|
|
markets were the ultimate source of the wealth of nations.</p>
|
|
<p>But having presented the case for free markets, Adam Smith was
|
|
not optimistic about the future. To expect that a regime of
|
|
free trade would ever be established was, he said, as likely
|
|
as the establishment of a utopia. "Not only the prejudices of
|
|
the public," he despaired, "but what is much more
|
|
unconquerable, the private interests of many individuals
|
|
irresistibly oppose it."</p>
|
|
<p>Governments had turned over many industries and trades to
|
|
private monopolies, whose interests were clearly opposed to
|
|
open competition. Special-interest groups, with their
|
|
government-bestowed privileges, were too strong ever to be
|
|
defeated.</p>
|
|
<p>Within one lifetime, however, Smith was proven to be wrong. By
|
|
the middle of the 19th century, England was a free-trade
|
|
nation and many other nations were following its path.</p>
|
|
<p>But in our century, governments once again use their power to
|
|
regulate the marketplace, protect various industries from
|
|
foreign and domestic competition, and limit entry into markets
|
|
through licensing procedures. Mercantilism has returned; and
|
|
it has returned stronger than ever. The older mercantilism was
|
|
a system that benefited a few privileged producers at the
|
|
expense of most of the society. But in our era of democratic
|
|
government, it is the many who lobby and politick in the
|
|
political arena. Almost every group in society now does battle
|
|
for a piece of the economic pie--not through open competition
|
|
for consumer business, but through the political process to
|
|
gain a greater share by manipulating the market. Ours is the
|
|
era of democratized privilege.</p>
|
|
<p>Why have free societies all around the world become
|
|
battlegrounds for political privilege and economic plunder?</p>
|
|
<p>The answer is to be found in one of Adam Smith's most famous
|
|
ideas: the division of labor. "The division of labor," Smith
|
|
explained, "so far as it can be introduced, occasions in every
|
|
art, a proportionate increase of the productive powers of
|
|
labor." By specializing in various lines of production, the
|
|
members of society are able to improve and increase their
|
|
skills and efficiency to do various things. Out of these
|
|
productive specializations comes an increased supply of all
|
|
kinds of goods and services. The members of society trade away
|
|
the large quantities of each commodity they respectively
|
|
produce for all the other goods offered by their fellows in
|
|
the market arena.</p>
|
|
<p>Society's members give up the independence of economic self-sufficiency for the interdependence of a social system of
|
|
division of labor. But the gain is a much higher standard of
|
|
living than any one of them could ever hope to attain just by
|
|
using his own capabilities to fulfill all his wants and
|
|
desires through his own labor.</p>
|
|
<p>Each individual is now dependent upon others in the society
|
|
for the vast majority of the goods and services he wishes to
|
|
use and consume. But in a competitive market setting, this
|
|
works to his advantage. Sellers vie with one another for his
|
|
consumer business.</p>
|
|
<p>They underbid each other and offer him attractively lower
|
|
prices; they devise ways to produce and market new and
|
|
improved products. As consumer, the individual is the master
|
|
of the market, whom all sellers must serve if they are to
|
|
obtain his business.</p>
|
|
<p>Viewed from the perspective of the consumer, the competitive
|
|
market serves the public interest. The resources of society
|
|
are effectively applied and put to work to satisfy the various
|
|
wants and desires of the individuals of that society. The
|
|
products which are manufactured are determined by the free
|
|
choices of all of the demanders in the marketplace.
|
|
Production serves consumption.</p>
|
|
<p>But the market looks totally different from the perspective of
|
|
the individual producers. They, too, are dependent upon the
|
|
market: they are dependent upon buyers willing to purchase
|
|
what they have for sale. While the market serves every one as
|
|
a consumer, no one can be a consumer unless he has been
|
|
successful as a producer. And his success as a producer
|
|
depends upon his ability to market and sell his products or to
|
|
find willing buyers for his particular labor skills and
|
|
abilities.</p>
|
|
<p>As a consequence, for each producer the price of his own
|
|
product or labor service tends to be more important than the
|
|
prices of all of the multitude of consumer goods he might
|
|
purchase. Because unless he earns the necessary financial
|
|
wherewithal in his producer role, he cannot be a consumer.</p>
|
|
<p>Being the consumer of many things, but the producer of usually
|
|
one thing, each seller tends to view competition as a
|
|
financial threat to his position in the market as well as to
|
|
his specific share of the market. The incentive for each
|
|
producer, therefore, is to want to limit entry into his corner
|
|
of the market, or to reduce the amount of competition
|
|
currently existing in his industry or profession.</p>
|
|
<p>The only avenue for limiting competition, however, is the
|
|
government. Only the government has the ultimate authority to
|
|
permanently prohibit those who think they could do better in
|
|
the market and who desire to try. Producers, therefore, have
|
|
incentives to use portions of the resources and wealth at
|
|
their disposal in the political arena to gain or protect the
|
|
market position that they feel themselves unable to obtain or
|
|
maintain in an open field of competition. And as long as the
|
|
costs of acquiring political privileges and protections from
|
|
the government to secure profits are less than the costs of
|
|
earning profits by making better and less expensive products,
|
|
producers will resort to lobbying and politicking to achieve
|
|
their ends.</p>
|
|
<p>The dilemma for the society is that when producers lobby in
|
|
the political process for profits via government privilege,
|
|
this results in a using-up of resources that otherwise could
|
|
have been invested in making products desired by consumers.
|
|
Furthermore, existing producers, sitting behind their walls of
|
|
political protections and privileges, have fewer incentives
|
|
for making product improvements. Therefore, the normal,
|
|
competitive forces that over time would result in better
|
|
and greater supplies of goods are retarded,</p>
|
|
<p>When government is viewed as the means for acquiring income
|
|
"entitlements," job "guarantees" and "fair" (rather than open)
|
|
markets, producer interests will always win over the public,
|
|
i.e., consumer, interest. Because most individual sellers will
|
|
view that they have more to lose from competition as producers
|
|
than they have to gain from competition as consumers.</p>
|
|
<p>Unfortunately, the pursuit of producer-protection policies
|
|
through government has a perverse outcome: the society as a
|
|
whole is poorer than it otherwise would be. Every privilege
|
|
and protection raises the prices, narrows the variety and
|
|
lowers the quality of the goods available to all of us as
|
|
consumers.</p>
|
|
<p>How, then, do we reverse our age of democratized privilege, in
|
|
which politics is reduced to a free-for-all for mutual plunder
|
|
and economic power? The answer is not an easy one nor one that
|
|
offers a "quick fix."</p>
|
|
<p>A turn from our era of neo-mercantilism, with its philosophy
|
|
of privileges for all who can win on the political battle
|
|
field, requires a moral revolution on the part of each of us.
|
|
It requires each and every one of us to apply the rules of
|
|
personal conduct to the arena of politics.</p>
|
|
<p>In our personal conduct, few of us would feel morally right in
|
|
forcibly preventing a buyer from leaving our respective
|
|
business establishment until he paid the price we wanted him
|
|
to pay. Nor would we feel morally correct in taking a sum of
|
|
money out of another's pocket without his consent simply
|
|
because he considered our price for our products or labor
|
|
services too high.</p>
|
|
<p>Yet this is done all of the time through the political
|
|
process. Not until we come to accept that the rules of
|
|
morality that apply in personal conduct must be the same rules
|
|
we follow in politics will the age of democratized privilege
|
|
and plunder come to an end. And, alas, we seem a long way off
|
|
from seeing that day!</p>
|
|
<p>Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
|
|
Economics at Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan, and also
|
|
serves as vice-president of academic affairs for The Future of
|
|
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.</p>
|
|
<p>------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
From the March 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
|
|
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
|
|
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
|
|
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
|
|
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.
|
|
</p>
|
|
</div>
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|