[illuminate]

"If you are arguing for the restriction of that behavior, you are arguing for the restriction of opportunities to leave behind poverty."

That doesn't follow. Laissez-faire capitalism does not necessarily lead to greater class mobility. The idea that one must abandon "restriction" of capitalism to offer the greatest benefit to any individual is ridiculous.

[mseebach]

There are bucketloads of empirical evidence for "one of the main avenues for the poor to leave poverty is through capitalistic action". GP didn't appear to argue against any and all restriction on capitalism, but that those (like AdBusters and Occupy[1]) who argue broadly against capitalism (rather than specific shortcomings), implicitly (and probably involuntarily) argue against "opportunities to leave behind poverty".

1: At least many of them

[rohern]

We are talking about different things. I am not talking about class mobility. I am talking about the wealth of nations.

[illuminate]

Why are you stating that Capitalism must not be restricted or impeded if the wealth of a nation is to increase?

[rohern]

I never made that statement. I did, however, claim that a major cause of the increase in the wealth of nations is capitalism. I made this claim because I have studied economics and history and I have read and heard multiple compelling arguments supporting this claim.