Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Denver Mods 7/26/84) 6/24/83; site drutx.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!mtuxo!drutx!dlo
From: dlo@drutx.UUCP (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Politics and Ethics -- Socialism, ...
Message-ID: <318@drutx.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-Jan-86 17:58:14 EST
Article-I.D.: drutx.318
Posted: Tue Jan 21 17:58:14 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 24-Jan-86 22:29:12 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 64

[]

>The market is only an accurate measure of people's
>ability to provide *money* for their wants, which in turn depends
>upon the distribution of income and, more importantly, wealth.
>The people starving in Africa and in other Third World countries
>throughout the world have one most fundamental want and *need* :
>food.   Yet because they have no money they count for nothing
>in the market.
 
>There have been theoretical economic articles written which demonstrate
>that the market is only a reasonable reflection of people's actual
>wants *given a relatively equal distribution of income*.
>If a few people control most of the income and the wealth and most
>people control nothing then only the wants of the wealthy will be
>measured by the market.
>This is one of the worst flaws of laissez faire economics.
> 
>To put it in Michael's graphic terms - "it only forces people to
>put their money where their mouths are *if they have money*".
 
>And anyway what the starving throughout the world really want is
>FOOD in their mouths, not money.


For agencies like C.A.R.E., World Vision, C.C.F., as well as Live Aid,
the appeal has not been for food.  i.e. they do not say, "Send us an
apple." or "Put some grains of wheat into an envelope and mail them to
us." The appeal is for cash money in order to purchase food in the
market place.

Further, just because there are people in Africa who need food, does
not mean that, say, your nutritional needs are any different.  i.e.
although your risk of starvation may not be as imminent, unless your
nutritional needs are met, (pardon the melodrama) you will starve to a
death that is just as dead as those in Africa.  Yet, I assume that you
purchase the food that you eat with the money you make.  I assume that
the same holds true for your other necessities like energy and shelter.

Thus, fulfilling needs (as well as wants) is a market function.  Even
though many people may not realize it (or even care), their wants and
needs most definitely make them count as a part of the market.  They are
a part of what Adam Smith called the "invisible hand".

Another point: your concept of wealth control bothers me.  The market
is not a zero-sum game.  Just because someone became wealthier, does not
*necessarily* mean that someone else became poorer.  Because some people
control more wealth, does not mean that others *must* control less.

For instance, I have a garden in my back yard that produces much of the
food (a form of wealth) eaten at my home almost all year long.  Because
my garden flourishes, does not mean that someone else's garden has to
perish.  Because I control my garden and enjoy food that comes from it,
does not mean that someone somewhere in the world has been made hungrier.

>                    tim sevener   whuxn!orb


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

David Olson
..!ihnp4!drutx!dlo

"To laugh at men of sense is the privilege of fools". -- Jean de la Bruyere