Last week I argued that we need a government that is willing to step in and regulate the market for the sake of economic equality. Of course most Republicans are willing to accept the idea of occasional government intervention in draconian cases, but their usual mantra is “Stay outta the marketplace!” I think this attitude is unacceptable, at least if you believe as I do that the main standard by which all societies will be judged is by how they protected the vulnerable. Those who are great capitalists are typically not bad people – they are simply being as selfish as possible because that is exactly what capitalism requires of them – capitalism is only successful if the business world is populated with people who are greedy! If all capitalists decided to practice the virtue of contentedness starting on Monday, then we would have the Great Depression Part II by Friday. But that is exactly why we must have a government that is willing to tell those successful and greedy capitalists, “This far ye shall come and no farther.”
Also, last week I promised to analyze another big reason why we need a government willing to legislate the marketplace: the protection of the environment. Capitalism by itself offers absolutely no incentive to maintain environmental standards. In fact, the situation is quite the opposite. The capitalist marketplace demands that the producers produce as much material for the lowest cost possible. And, since it costs a lot of money to dispose of waste properly, to forest responsibly, to harvest and plant in a way that will nourish the soil, etc., etc., these things are actually discouraged by the capitalist marketplace. Since the motivation to protect the environment does not come from the market itself, it must come from government regulations.
I have heard conservatives say of Al Gore that business would never survive his presidency, if he were to become President. I hope that this is not true. But I happen to know that it is true that if we continue to use our natural resources irresponsibly, then things will go badly for all of us and all of our decedents. Take the example of American automakers: they really hate it whenever the government increases the minimum fuel efficiency rating. Let the market decide, they say – let the people decide what they want to buy, and we will supply their demand. The problem is that it is quite rare that an individual will do what is in their own financial worst-interest in order to “help” with something as abstract as the environment. For example, if Company A and Company B produce the same product, but Company A’s version costs more because they spent a lot of money on proper disposal, then the usual person will buy the product from Company B. And if someone comes running up to them and says, “Don’t buy that! Company B disposes of their waste improperly,” the common person will just point out that Company B’s product costs less. The way to solve this problem is to actually make it illegal for Company B to dispose of their waste improperly, rather than to hope that Company B’s board of directors becomes populated by tree-huggers.
There are many situations in which the government must interfere for the sake of protecting the environment, because people will always do exactly what capitalism tells them to do: buy the product as cheaply as you can! The burden of making companies change their environmental policies is not the responsibility of the consumer, but of the government. In Bush’s first week, he repealed an astounding number of environmental regulations that were established by the Clinton administration, all in the name of “freeing the marketplace.” We need a government that, while sensible about protecting big business where they can (because we all need big business, even though we may not like to admit it), has the will and the courage to regulate the market by making certain practices illegal.
