|
|
|
|
|
|
by bsder
3878 days ago
|
|
|
> According to the likes of Paul Krugman Americans should have been eating dirt and living in caves by 1913, but the exact opposite happened. Growth that the Keynesian technocrats have yet to match. And my grandfather walked picket lines and got shot at. Robber barons were at the peak of their power. Children were exploited as laborers. Let's also quote Anthony Trollope, a Victorian Londoner who was no stranger to pollution: “Pittsburgh without exception is the blackest place which I ever saw, the site is picturesque, even the filth and wondrous blackness are picturesque.... I was never more in love with smoke and dirt than when I stood and watched the darkness of night close in upon the floating soot which hovered over the city.” And that was in the 1860's! It only got worse from there until the 1940's. Your rosy assessment of the country prior to the 1920's has no basis in historical fact. |
|
|
Which has been true since the beginning of time. Children worked hard labor on farms instead of factories, and there was more rural poverty instead of city poverty. On average things were improving.
But that's not even the point. Parent comment is talking about the health of the economy and the federal reserve. You are talking about the distribution of wealth. We could implement something like a basic income to redistribute wealth, without getting rid of free markets and capitalism.
The goal of economic policy should be to generate the most total wealth. Then we can decide what to do with that wealth.