So the talk is moving to make the moral case for even-freer-market capitalism, with books being published. Yeah, these are the same ideas I've discussed and worked to refute: taxation and regulation restricts liberty, income redistribution is thievery and undermines the incentives that drive capitalism. And capitalism has been "the best system for freeing large masses of human beings from lives of misery and poverty." So what could be more moral than that?
Steven Pearlstein of The Washington Post doesn't refute those ideas (alas!). But he does note the rough time Romney had running on them and that Obama is beginning to join the debate. Good, says Pearlstein. It is time to grapple with these ideas and a debate will lift flabby arguments out of easy slogans.
A commenter named Fiat500 explains the national economic debate this way:
An anology i often use when explaining political-economics to younger people is to look at society as a vehicle. The economy is the engine. We want a strong engine, but the purpose of the car is get us collective to our chosen destination, not just to go as fast as possible. Republicans want a ferrari, big engine, goes really fast, is a lot of fun, but only for two people. Democrats want a tour bus, same big engine, but lots of comfy seats, driver (govt) goes where passengers want him to go. The economy is not an end in itself, but rather a tool for achieving the public good, and it should be managed as such.