Tea Party Economics: Distributism

Tea Party Babies!

I want to talk economics with you. In the annals of the American Economy there was a golden age where we did not face a choice between Big Government and Big Business.

Back before FDR, there was a real economic theory that has died and we need to resurrect it, pat it on the back, and cheer for it like we cheer for Rick Perry.

It was called Distributism. Yes, yes, I know it sounds like something a commie would cough up while we were waterboarding him. It is an “ISM.”

Fear not. It really is an old fashioned good idea. And it is old. Any given spell checker says, “distributism,” it isn’t even a word.

Defintion: “According to distributism, the ownership of the means of production should be spread as widely as possible among the general populace, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism) or a few large businesses or wealthy private individuals (plutarchic capitalism). A summary of distributism is found in Chesterton’s statement: “Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists.”

In my last post I argued that what matters is that we cut the taxes of the Tea Party. Tea Partiers tend to be Small Business Owners. Small businesses create all the new jobs. So, when the GOP negotiates Tax Reform, what we should really mean is:

1. The bottom half of America must pay at least as much as they pay now.
2. The Wall Street investor class and the Fortune 1000 management can pay more.
3. The owners of small businesses across the US, the savers, the scrimpers, the Tea Party faithful pay MUCH LESS.

There is a real economic thought behind this approach.

The Catholics invented it. Who knew, right? Maybe we should forgive them some of their more eggregious sins. According to the Catholics, we shouldn’t treat the Fortune 1000 as well as we treat Small Business owners.

If you call yourself a Tea Partier, please go give it a quick read.

Please tell me in the comments if this stuff rings true.