Sacred Wolf
Overview of economic models
Homeland inSecurity Blanket
Justifiable Measures
Project 112 fact sheets
What Every American Doesn't Need To Know
America's New World Order
Thoughts on September 11, 2001
Other observations
Fundamental American Politics
About the Idiot Running This Site

The more involved a government is in the lives of the people, the closer its economic model is entwined with the State.

            The government-economic model runs in a spectrum from complete governmental control to no governmental control.  Unlike politics, this is closer to a true spectrum, with few exceptions.

            At the extreme left, the state controls all aspects of the economy.  There is no way to separate the two, since the government controls all goods and services.  From each individual's salary to the car that they drive (or the type of transportation that they use) to the food that they eat.  There is no real way for the individual to improve his or her lot in life, unless it is deemed necessary by the state.

            Moderate socialism is more open.  While many goods and services are regulated, there is more economic freedom.  The individual has more choices of goods and services.  Instead of the government allotting bread and cabbages, the individual can choose what food they buy (or receive) or what they use for transportation.  This system also typically cares for those who are unable to take care of themselves.  While there is more room for personal and financial growth, many of the common needs and services are pre-paid in the form of high taxes.

            In an anarchistic economy, each person contributes what they are able to for the welfare of the common society.  There are no ruling bodies, such as a government or board of directors, to dictate who gets what.  Each person contributes what they can, and they all share the wealth of the group.

            Capitalism is based on the ideal that each person earns according to his or her worth, rather than based on his or her need.  By worth, I mean the contribution that an individual is able to make to society.  Those who are skilled in labor contribute to the production of goods, while those skilled in service contribute to the welfare and well-being of society.  (Those who are neither become lawyers.)  There is always opportunity to move out of the class that a person is born into, and ones position in society can change as their skills change.  Free enterprise is regulated and assisted by the governing body, buy the government doesn't control business.  With a little time and money, and enough ambition, anyone can become a business owner if they so desire.

            On the far right is the free-market economy.  The government takes a hands-off approach to business and enterprise.  The economy is driven by businesses, without any checks in place for the rights of the workers.  Those who run the businesses control the wages and the prices.  The citizens who can't contribute (for whatever reason) are ignored by the economy, since they are outside of the system.  While there is endless opportunity for those with ambition to carve out their own piece of the economic pie, Murphys Golden Rule is absolute.  "He who has the Gold makes the Rules."


            Most real-world economic systems fall toward the middle of that spectrum.  They are a blend of the systems, utilizing the most effective parts to fit the needs of the populace. or the government.  The former Soviet Union attempted Communism, but that experiment failed when the centralized economy (and government) collapsed.  China has been moving toward capitalism since then, taking a lesson from the reason why communism failed under the Soviets.  (It wasnt Reagan's doing.  He took credit for the collapse of communism, but it fell under its own weight.)

            In the US, the increase of large corporations that are growing unchecked, driven by greed and the desire for control, has proven almost as disastrous as the centralization of the economy and government in the USSR.  The mega-corporations are collapsing under their own weight, and bringing down millions of workers.  Since the collapse of Enron (followed by the fall of other giants), billions of dollars (one billion looks like this:  1,000,000,000) have been lost by investors and workers whose retirement accounts were tied into those corporations.  Huge companies are laying off employees by the thousands, displacing the middle-class and working-class poor.  The institutions that have been built up on the dreams of the workers have fallen and crushed the builders.

            And the few who wiped out the future of millions of people are walking away as billionaires. 

Stuffing the matress with fifties is starting to look like a sound retirement plan...