Hackers like to point out the flaws in all kinds of systems. So be prepared to be ashamed at least some of the time. Some people just like to think about how to improve the systems.
I like hackers who point out flaws in any system, but this article does not do that.
When was the last time a poor person build a railroad, a factory or a library?
Edit: cleaned up.
Being an entrepreneur isn't incompatible with social capitalism. Just because you want to start a business and earn buckets of money yourself, doesn't mean that you must be against a social safety net. Why would it?
You're right, it isn't. And, of course, nothing is stopping a pacifist from joining the military. After all, he can get a desk job. What I want to know is why.
Certain personality types are attracted to specific ideologies and in turn, specific careers. Why is somebody who is fascinated with wealth redistribution and income equality spend his time on a site which is devoted to the exact opposite on a personal level?
Simply drawing a dividing line between society and the self is not an answer. Most people have a congruent perspective when it comes social policy and their personal policy.
Why are these people different?
see: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/bush.asp
Things like this make me question the veracity of every other statement in the article.
a) the talk / book b) added by the blog author
On top of that, even if it was from talk, you don't know whether it was added in jest or in earnest..
> The reason this (entrepreneurship in developing countries) > doesn’t result in wealth is entrepreneurship is rarely an > individual event now, if it ever was. You need social > infrastructure; corporate, legal and financial systems.
I read this as saying that the whole system needs to change for development to really happen. Unfortunately, a number of rich and powerful vested interests, want to and are able to preserve the status quo quite successfully.
For example, Hazlitt shows how inflation, even if not too high, is harmful for the economy and basically his arguments did not seem weaker - which confuses me even more. One thing Ha-Joon Chang does really good when arguing is showing a lot of statistics. That is definitely a very strong point of this book which even the most ingenious free-market economists would find difficult to stand.
