The idea that political freedom can be preserved in the absence of economic freedom, and vice versa, is an illusion. Political freedom is the corollary of economic freedom.
Ludwig Von MisesRead
For it is an essential difference between capitalist and socialist production that under capitalism men provide for themselves, while under Socialism they are provided for.
Interpretation
This quote highlights the distinction between capitalism and socialism in terms of how individuals provide for their needs.
Ludwig Von Mises contrasts capitalism with socialism by emphasizing that in a capitalist system, individuals take personal initiative and responsibility to meet their own needs, whereas in socialism, individuals rely on the system to fulfill those needs. This fundamental difference shapes the nature of production and the role of personal agency in society.
In practice
In a discussion on economic systems, this quote can illustrate fundamental differences between capitalism and socialism.
The idea that political freedom can be preserved in the absence of economic freedom, and vice versa, is an illusion. Political freedom is the corollary of economic freedom.
Wars of aggression are popular nowadays with those nations convinced that only victory and conquest could improve their material well-being.
Only stilted pedants can conceive the idea that there are absolute norms to tell what is beautiful and what is not. They try to derive from the works of the past a code of rules with which, as they fancy, the writers and artists of the future should comply. But the genius does not cooperate with the pundit.
The most serious dangers for American freedom and the American way of life do not come from without.
The public firm can nowhere maintain itself in free competition with the private firm; it is possible today only where it has a monopoly that excludes competition. Even that alone is evidence of its lesser economic productivity.
Each epoch has found in the Gospels what it sought to find there, and has overlooked what it wished to overlook.
Wherever there is great property there is great inequality. For one very rich man there must be at least five hundred poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many. The affluence of the rich excites the indignation of the poor, who are often both driven by want, and prompted by envy, to invade his possessions.
Industry entirely left to itself, would soon fall to ruin, and a nation letting everything alone would commit suicide.
We can no longer prosper by increasing human productivity. The more we try to do, the more poverty we will create.
Those on the downside of rising economic inequality generally do not want government policies that look like handouts. They typically do not want the government to make the tax system more progressive, to impose punishing taxes on the rich, in order to give the money to them. Redistribution feels demeaning. It feels like being labeled a failure.
The social object of skilled investment should be to defeat the dark forces of time and ignorance which envelope our future.
If you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows (referring to "trickle down" economics).
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.