This is a copy of the email I just sent to Charlie Sykes--who gets a large bunch of well-deserved props from me (and others.) But he does have a couple of blind spots.
So this morning he becomes a little concerned when he learns that some Communist Chinese front company wants to buy Unocal lock, stock, and barrel(s.)
How can the John Galt eonomics-types argue about this? We all know that:
"1) Under Capitalist 101, the highest bidder gets the prize. Now we have a problem, eh?
"2) Under Capitalist 101, the lowest priced comparable good should be preferred, right? But this is NOT a problem, regardless of what factors enter into the pricing (slave labor, no labor/enviro/safety/tax concerns…just for example…)
Somewhere along the line, Galt’s Capitalism 101 should be recognized for what it is: a false god.
Personally, I like ‘national interest’ interventions. Now if we could only find a Congress which understands THAT term."
No comments:
Post a Comment