If we look at all the economic models that societies have used, it seems they can all be reduced down to one simple premise: there is always one group in society that has too much money. Where the difference of course, is which group had or has too much money; Marxists would rail against the rich, and the bourgeois, neo-cons complain bitterly about social benefit dollars going to “lazy welfare bums” etc. The other similarity, at least in the last couple of centuries, is that each economic model that has been used has been shown to be defective, to a greater or lesser degree, when human nature gets in the way of abstract economic theory.
Capitalism has taken a beating recently; greed and recklessness have trumped the work ethic. Those who did work hard and save, and did everything they thought they were supposed to do are finding their savings battered, and he prospect of retirement bleak.
It wasn’t supposed to work out this way, was it?
I wonder, when we do hit bottom, and the rebuilding begins, will it take place on the questionable foundation of defective old-school assumptions, or is there room for new post-millenial ideas? More sustainable development? Conspicuous consumerism ditched in place of a greener value system? Neo-subsistance? I hope so; we can’t go back to business as usual.
