Conservatism or Corporatism?

[bord-du-rasoir.livejournal.com]

What accounts for the spikes in these graphs? Conservative (free market) policy or corporatist (government intervention) policy?









Why'd average Wall St. bonus pay recently quadruple average annual salaries? Why'd the financial sector recently triple the nonfinancial sector? Why'd the highest incomes recently increase 36 times faster than median family income?

Provide concrete explanations as to how X (policy) caused Y (economic indicator). Point to specific legislation or executive orders.

The liberal position is predictable: The unprecedented extreme growth in the financial sector and increased inequality is bad. Free market policy (deregulation of banks --> derivatives market expansion --> collapse) is to blame.

I'm more interested in the conservative position: How do you explain the unprecedented growth in the financial sector and the increased income inequality? What're the causes? Is corporatism (government interventionism) responsible? If so, how? Do you draw a connection between the above figures and the financial collapse?

I honestly don't understand the conservative position.

Comments

Re: I think you need to check your adages

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

The "adage" is Power TENDS to corrupt, Absolutely power corrupts absolutely.

But even so it is an adage, not an absolute sent down from Olympus. Altho like most adages that last (I believe this was Lord Acton in the 1890s) tend to have more than a modicum of truth to them :D

Re: I think you need to check your adages

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Well of course the adage is speaking in generalities, and I wouldn't personally read too much specific into the word "tends". It's interesting to note that Lord Acton also admonished, seperately:

"And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

What I suppose we can fairly conclude from all this, is based on the same historical record that Lord Acton was mindful when he made these pronouncements, is that power certainly has a reliable tendency to create corruption, and that the level of this corruption correlates strongly with the level of power.

Re: I think you need to check your adages

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Indeed, but what is not necessarily true in modern western economies is that power strongly correlates with wealth.

Also this more than anything is a reason to lessen government's ability to meddle in the economy (and yes, that includes it's power to regulate) because that power draws those who would abuse it until they inevitably control it and become like the "gangsters" Acton referred to.

Re: I think you need to check your adages

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Another thing we can agree on, when we get down to clarity :D