Tinkering with 'free enterprise'

The Trailwatcher/G. George Ostrom

"If all the money in the world was distributed so that everyone had the same amount, what would it be?"

That question was asked of Marilyn vos Savant last summer and her answer has caused me to ponder.

Millions are vaguely acquainted with the name, Marilyn vos Savant because she is reported to have the highest IQ of any person in America … maybe on earth.

I loyally read her weekly column in the Sunday Parade newspaper magazine because she seems pretty smart.

Here is what Marilyn said about dividing the wealth: "The global money supply is about $60 trillion. (Economists call this figure the M3 value, which includes much more than currency.)

"Say we take it all – which means that you and Bill Gates would have nothing in the bank – and then distribute it equally among every individual in the world, about 6.8 million people. Each man, woman and child would receive about $9,000.

"So, if your household now has less than $9,000 per person, you would gain. If you have more, you would lose."

During studies of history in college, I read about a government in China hundreds of years ago that did divide up the money among all the people as evenly as they could.

The result was that within three generations, uneven shares of the money had been accumulated by a small percentage of those who were shrewdest, most ambitious and some probably devious.

I do not know if that history is well documented, but it does sound believable because … that's the way people are.

The never-before-attempted concept of "free enterprise" for gathering personal wealth by a nation's individuals was made legally possible by the U.S. Constitution. That concept is called " laissez faire," from a French phrase, "Let people do (as they please). The policy of letting people act without interference or direction; i.e., letting the owners of industry and business fix the rules of competition, the conditions of labor, etc. as they please, without government regulation or control."

In the late 1700s, that was a daring and untested concept and it produced the most commercially successful nation in world history; however, it did not produce the perfect economic paradise.

Why is that? I pondered. We all know the answer, "the human weakness of greed." Right from the start of America's great experiment, problems began showing up.

The country had to deal with a huge existing violation of "free enterprise" because of a commercial dependency on slavery. That was addressed by the tragedy of Civil War. Hundreds of examples, big and small, were to follow.

Teddy Roosevelt had to get out his "Big Stick" and clean up monopolies and cartels that were choking the free enterprise system.

Brutal sweatshops took advantage of hapless women and children, all in the name of "free enterprise."

The government moved in when John D. Rockefeller bragged that people who wanted the wondrous new fuel "kerosene" had to pay what he asked or go without, because he controlled the nation's supply.

Here is our own state of Montana; there were examples galore, like the Copper Kings running 12-hour shifts of miners in terrible working conditions then fighting the introduction of labor unions with dynamite and Pinkerton thugs.

Everywhere in our nation there were those who went far beyond being shrewd and ambitious to accumulate personal wealth.

They were ruled by greed.

The latest abuse of the "free enterprise" concept and possibly the worst since slavery, was the 2008 shame uncovered among some of Wall Street's biggest players in the banking, insurance, and related investment fields.

Other than "greed," does any other explanation work for you?

Not for me.

The laissez faire, free enterprise system is still a workable and desirable concept but in the development of its advantages we have learned the part that says, "without government regulation or control" just doesn't work.

Many political debates and legislation are centered around the tricky how much and what kind of government control is necessary while keeping the desirable core of free enterprise alive.

We've done it before and we'll do it again … but maybe I'll ask Marilyn.