1pg (never read Rand, but does think properly regulated capitalism is impossible to beat - the "properly regulated" being the tricky bit)

I have tried reading Rand a few times, but it is fairly repulsive. It reminds me of what the old tom cat said while making love to the skunk under the back porch. "I've enjoyed about as much of this as I can stand."

The "properly regulated" part is not all that tricky. Difficult, yes. Sensitive, yes. But can be based on some basic moral principles.

Whereas Randians and Friedmanians believe that markets should come first above all else and good will trickle down to all, the flaw is in putting people's welfare second to anything. NO system will be to the benefit of all humankind that doesn't put humankind at the top, first. If you need profits in order to benefit humankind, then fine. There will be profits. But if profits come before people, people are.. duh, let's see... put second to profits!

Capitalism is a good system for creating material well-being, but lousy at creating human well-being. Remember, it doesn't CARE about human well-being, and according to Friedman, shouldn't care. All the good that comes to the masses via capitalism is just chance. Whether something helps people or hurts people is not part of the decision making process of the market.

THAT'S what govt is for. The govt should strive to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. In order to do that it must naturally set limitations on the market so that it cannot harm the people, either by exploitation or pollution or using wealth to manipulate the govt.

So how much brains does it take to see that a huge number of people are out of work and/or have no healthcare, mostly through no fault of their own, and that the govt should step in and alleviate those conditions? Fine, use the market to create those jobs, but the market can't, won't, and I agree, SHOULDN'T create jobs just to create jobs.

There need to be govt ideas (meaning national consensus of the people) on what direction the country should go in. Infrastructure, healthcare, education creates jobs and promotes health and promotes business growth. When the govt starts a mission such as landing on the moon or going to war, jobs are created as well as new technologies. Govt spending DOES create jobs. Double Duh!

(Please skip the ConRep Free Marketeer replies about how all those poor people are poor due to bad choices they made - like being born poor, being born into a discriminated against group, being born into a family that doesn't value education because it hasn't had any. Yep. Stupid choice to be born there.)

If the govt would just perform it's job set out in the Constitution, it would naturally regulate the market. Unfortunately, those in power don't always see the market as potentially injurious to those tasks. Maybe because so many of them got wealthy in the current system??

In fact, many see put the market before all of these tasks, and even before the govt and the Constitution itself. And in a way, I agree. I don't want the "market" to decide on the best way for the govt to fulfill it's role. That's what we have now.

But I don't want anything, including the "market", to come before the Constitution and the people of this country. People come first. THEN the people use the market to provide material goods. The market is a tool, not the end product. People should use tools, tools should not use people.