Why would a conservative only care about the wealthy?

Post Reply New Topic

Few people care only about the rich. I think conservatives and classical liberals think one or both of the following:
A) Everyone is entitled to what they earn; taking from one (rich or poor) for the sake of others is unjust.
B) The economic policies they propose lead to faster economic growth than egalitarian policies, so on the long therm they are better for everybody (including the poor).

You may agree or disagree with them, but they are not the same as only caring about the rich.

If South Korean production is indeed more efficient than American, then restricting or applying tariffs on Korean imports would conserve higher American wages only at the cost of similarly higher prices, so it wouldn't have any benefit on the real wages. (I don't think Korea is more productive though - otherwise their real wages would already be higher, which they are not.)
If South Korea is only better in some industries and worse in others, then trade will result in both countries focusing the industries they are good at and downsizing the ones where they are inefficient, benefitting both countries.


As long as companies compete, a large part of any advantages to businesses will appear as advantages to workers and customers. If profits grow above the typical rate, companies expand and new companies appear trying to reap the profits. The greater demand for labor and greater supply of products drive wages up and prices down until the profit rates go back to normal.
This only requires antitrust regulation for enforcing competition. And that only in sectors with high barriers to entry, since cartels are naturally unstable in sectors with low barriers.

Then where are those high paying jobs that were supposed to have replaced the ones that skipped out on the American people? I think the plan for capitalism works great in theory, but in reality it only makes the few wealthy - unless the government or organized labor twists them by the proverbial t*tties to make them share in their prosperity with their workers.

How am I supposed to point them out to you? Anyway, outsourcing is going on for decades and hasn't raised the unemployment levels. The crisis did, but by now they are back to normal levels except in countries with strictly regulated labor markets. The outsourcing scare is similar than the scare about machines (Luddism) 200 years ago, turned out to be baseless.

The average profit on stock investment hasn't changed much in the long term, hovering around 7% per year, despite huge advances in technology and organization. This can be observed through P/E ratios, with data available since the late 1800s.
Profits as a percentage of the GDP have risen as the ratio of total amount of investment to GDP has grown, but it's still at 11%, and some of it may be profits earned abroad. The rest is going in wages and taxes.

Btw in my opinion any outcome, including inequality, resulting from voluntary transactions is just, but I don't expect you to agree with that.

Of course there's going to be financial inequality between workers and employers, but there has grown such a class chasm between the two that can hardly be justified by anyone.
And point out what jobs you will, but the fact remains, wages have not grown with corporate profits, benefits are shrinking to nothing, and there is too much unemployment. Even if you're right that outsourcing can't be blamed for all of it, still the blame definitely lies with those so called job creators who are guilty of outsourcing and putting profits before people.

Conservative policy benefits the wealthy disproportionately. A more progressive policy benefits all.

Uh huh, but the rest of your reply indicates otherwise......

Looking at the current state of the world, I am failing to see how the poor are benefiting from conservative economic policies in the long run. Also as they say the middle class is getting smaller, well I am quite certain it is not because they are becoming wealthy.

The current system cannot sustain itself and is likely to collapse....may as well sit back, have a beer and watch the show

Again, I'm pretty certain I did understand - and my response was that businesses shouldn't find it so easy to jump ship to get away from regulations, as much as they have a hard on to do so.

A good indicator of the impact of income inequality on the middle class is the difference of the mean and the median (50th percentile) income. It is around 20% in the US and 10-20% in most countries.
This means that the most typical middle class people would only benefit from a communist system based on complete equality if it decreased the total earnings by less than 20%. Considering a social democratic system that would halve the inequality, they would only benefit if it decreased the total earnings by less than 10%. The US economy is more than 20% ahead even of most social democratic Western European counrties, let alone countries that have ever tried communism.

It is easy to say that the middle class is shrinking (everyone feels poor as they could easily spend more income), but it's not backed up by data.

Say what you will, but most Americans do not enjoy the prosperity of their parents. Home ownership is rarer and rarer, and people are struggling without getting anywhere. Maybe we're ahead of other western countries economically, but that doesn't mean that many Americans haven't lost ground with no apparent hope of regaining it.

Conservatives worship the wealthy. Being rich is a sign of God's favor.

Home ownership has been shrinking since the crisis, but it's still as high as before the unsustainable bubble. As for the general sentiment I can't comment since I'm not American.

I'm not sure that's even the case as much as you think. Besides, did people's parents carelessly throw money around like people do now?


China and other Asian nations are where most consumer goods are made now. End of story.
Read again what we talked about before \/

Just because I agreed with you that electronic stuff are made in China and other neighboring countries hardly means that it's a good thing. I agreed that we need to think of another approach to getting Americans high paying jobs again.

But I am an American, and I'm right in the middle of this mess.