We need to lay out some ground rules here. The first is the basic assumption at the root of all economics. Human desires and wants are unlimited, the resources from which we can satisfy them are scarce. And yes, in this context labour is one of those scarce resources. We can check this: my garden needs work on it. No one will come and do that for free: I must pay someone to do it. Labour is, therefore, scarce.
Business leaders often talk a good game about free enterprise. But they’re frequently first in line when government starts handing out other people’s money, or writing rules that restrict the competition, such as occupational-licensing regulations and import tariffs. They’re also frequent champions of public education, but not necessarily because of a benevolent desire to see people flourish. Vocational instruction, including STEM programs, is a good way to socialize the business cost of workforce training.
That’s worth bearing in mind the next time you hear business leaders complain about burdensome regulation. The objection often amounts to an argument of convenience. And those businesses that benefit from a governmental hand up lose any standing to complain when that hand starts to tie them down.
John Tamny explains the core economic ignorance that underlies Hillary Clinton’s plan to structure tax rates to penalize investors who do not hold on to their assets for time periods as long as Ms. Clinton has – through some miracle of divination – determined that they ‘should’ hold on to their assets.