Boudreaux on Populism and Corporatist Capitalism

Lynne Kiesling

Just a quick note to bring your attention to, and endorse, the point Don Boudreaux made in a recent letter to the editor of the Washington Post:

To the extent that trade – both national and international – is restricted, incumbent capitalists are shielded from what Joseph Schumpeter called the “gale of creative destruction.”  Subsidies and tariffs always protect established capitalists from having to compete with new rivals, new products, and new ways of doing business.  Such “anti-capitalist” protection harms not only upstart entrepreneurs; most importantly, it hurts the countless unseen and unrepresented consumers who are denied the gains they would have enjoyed from the innovation and competition that are squelched by the “anti-capitalist” restrictive policies that seem so in vogue today at Davos.

One thought on “Boudreaux on Populism and Corporatist Capitalism

  1. Agreed. In particular, it is essential that lawyers, doctors and financial professionals no longer be shielded from competitive sources overseas. Licensing rules limit the ability of Costa Rican health clinics, Indian lawyers, and overseas financial analysts from competing with US providers. The consumer interest requires that US professionals be subject to competition from low-cost providers anywhere in the world. There is no reason why the JD, MD, and MBA should be shielded from $1000/month Bangalore competition; their earnings in the US are way out of proportion to their value. (That includes the ones that attend Davos.)

Comments are closed.