RateItAll: The Opinion Network

I generally believe in this theory but I draw the line on the regulation of dihydrogen monoxide. I am strongly in favor of the government doing something about the control of this chemical.

It is unrestricted generally in our economy. Industry is allowed to use it willy-nilly mostly without consequences. It falls into the hands of unwitting civilians without proper warning as to its use. This is a shame!

We know studying history that this compound has killed millions and caused untold billions of current dollars in property damage. Countless souls have lost everything they own because of this combination of two dangerous elements. When, I ask, is Uncle Sugar going to do something to stop this threat?

(Oh, yeah, dihydrogen monoxide is H2O, water.)

As Eschew has noted, conservatism is not, nor has it ever, served as an influence on economic strategy. Rather, the opposite is true. A fundamental belief of conservaties is to limit the federal government from gaining to much control over those who know themselves best- the people. Thus, when one applies this core belief to economic policy, the logical conclusion would be to let businesses that follow the law run themselves while the government focuses on something it actually has some authority over. Ergo, limited government regulation.

Limited is the important word here. The government that governs least, governs best. Unfortunately, we're living in an era where no government program ever goes away or even stops growing. Neither of the major political parties are interested in reducing the intrusion of government. And as Joseph Sobran says, both parties violate the Constitution. The Republicans just do it at a slower pace.

It needs to be understood that most people are completely in the dark about the true essence of conservatism. What this boils down to is how you believe freedom is best created and maintained; and what positive laws best promote the common good. A conservative therefore doesn't believe that there is some overriding right to property above all else, or to keeping all your money, or to limited regulation. The constitution itself allows property to be taken with due process. What a conservative believes is that by limiting government and promoting individual ownership society cultivates positive virtues for the betterment of the civilization on a whole. These principles are balanced against various other principles including altruism and compassion. My belief, therefore, in the free market (and I am an ardent defender of it), is that it is the best way to achieve the greater good. No other system in the world has risen more people out of poverty, brought the best health care to the most needy, allowed more people to attain a higher standard of living than any other system than the free market. The United States has an unemployment rate below 5.3% while nations like Germany and France have unemployment rates over 10%. Our annual grown rate is around 3.5% while in Europe it has dipped below .6% in some nations. Our inflation rate is below 4% while it's upwards to 10% in many nations. The average real take home income in America is highest in the world- along with the upward mobility rate as well. Products that are common place for the poor in America like air conditioning, automobiles, and various electronics are not for the middle class in Europe. It is simply a matter of fact that growth rates and low unemployment are a direct correlation to lower taxes and regulation. Libertarians seem to simplify this discussion to a matter of property rights and jurisdiction- that simply doesn't address the complex needs of our society nor will it achieve the goal of bettering society in the end. Libertarianism has a degenerative effect on individual behavior and supports culturally accepted vice by removing man from nature itself and elevating choice above all else. Humans can choose things that are not in their best interest or the best interest of society on a whole. Competition for profits promotes a greater variety of improved products that are brought to society on a whole for lower prices- that is a good thing. It also promotes the virtues of work ethic, individual responsibility and fulfillment of natural obligations i.e. to your family and society. But lust for ONLY profit without regards for the system in which a corporation is working is not. How these competing principles are balanced is a complex issue that is best left to a deliberated public discussion within a devolved republican system with a myriad of levels. Liberals and libertarians try to settle all the issues prior to any discussion and force it to comport to some preexisting rules: I have a right to this, you have a right to that. Things aren't that simple. To be a true conservative you need to view all the competing principles within the context of a natural order of things and determine what course is best for the Greater Good.

Belief in the market economy really is unrelated to conservatism, which is not an economic theory, nor does it espouse any economic system over another. Conservatives tend to like life under a market economy but would clamor for limited government intrusion into whatever economic system there was, resulting in lower taxes, greater economic independence and less centralized government control. With greater government control comes higher taxes, to fund its activities, greater corruption and a less efficient economy regardless of the type. Government should deal with bad guys. Domestically, with a police force and judicial system, internationally, protecting its citizens from invasion with a strong well-managed military.

The primary tenet of economic conservatism. The only fair price is a market price - good companies will thrive, and lousy companies will disappear. People will adapt their skills to the free market conditions, and the pie will expand for everyone.