I agree that there were many causes of poverty in England. However, the fact is that poverty was the general and accepted norm for most of England’s and the world’s history for centuries. It was when capitalism appeared — and only then — that poverty began to be reduced for the general population. And wherever capitalism has been able to be planted and take root, the general economic condition of the populace has flourished.

As for your objection to Ayn Rand, I think you need to explain exactly what that objection is. I have found that the primary objection to Rand is not so much what she proposes, but the way she states her case: Greed is good, for example, can be fairly inflamatory. When followed through to their logical conclusions, however, most if not all her views prove reliable.

As a capitalist and a Christian, I see no incompatibility between the two. I give generously of my own free will (and, yes, I suppose this also makes me feel good about myself, so it is in my own self-interest) and cherish (most of, at least) my fellow man. However, the best way to show that love of others is not to give them a crumb from my table, but to build a solid business and hire them to work for a wage they honestly deserve. And as a wealthy capitalist, also, I can then donate many thousands or millions of dollars to charitable causes…if I choose.

JRI

That’s not good. I would not trust a rocket scientist who cited Aristotle’s model of the universe, nor do I trust an economist who cites Rand (and indeed, is a strong supporter of her theories).

This strikes me as a worrisome historical whitewashing, but then again, I’m a far-cry from Libertarian. I will certainly give this book a read — if only to critique it thoroughly.