Read this. On the one hand, community benefit and local awareness is part of the reason economic central planning doesn't work; there are factors and reactions that a disconnected planner doesn't see, and in some cases, no one actually sees. Smith's "invisible hand" isn't a love-poem to supply and demand; it's just a recognition that Johnny-Bob buying a hamburger has lots of effects that Johnny-Bob and the guy who sold it to him don't intend and wouldn't be aware of. Beneficial effects, that is. On the other, there could be something obviously negative if the only judgment we used to assess an economic arrangement was how efficiently scarce resources were conserved. Then again, that's what markets are supposed to do. That's what economics does: manage scarcity. I don't have all the answers, but there had better be more support for localism and small firms than sentiment and nostalgia.
Is there actual proof that Wal-Mart (for instance) harms the common good, or is that just economically illiterate prattle? How do we decide what a "just wage" is? When should intervention take place? When are we actually unwittingly creating injustice by attempting to act for the common good? That's a fun one.
Don't ask me.
Is there actual proof that Wal-Mart (for instance) harms the common good, or is that just economically illiterate prattle? How do we decide what a "just wage" is? When should intervention take place? When are we actually unwittingly creating injustice by attempting to act for the common good? That's a fun one.
Don't ask me.
Comments