This is the first Encounter Broadside that hasn't made me roll my eyes, mutter under my breath, and think less of the author at the end than I did at the start. It is the only book in the series that I've come across so far that isn't shrill, insulting, and full of wild conspiracy theories. In fact, Epstein starts off, in his very first paragraph, with an acknowledgment that those who disagree with him are not in fact possessed by devils, bent on destroying America, in league with the Illuminati Epstein's brief but complex addition to the Encounter Broadside series is a wonderful examination of the shortfalls and failings of the progressive agenda, most especially regarding economics hence the title's "Unsustainable" inclusion and the financial lacking of progressive thinking.
Epstein, in his usual style, offers up a complex argument against progressivism and its concomitant problems that can easily overwhelm the reader due to his style of writing: very legal and dense.
However, the r Be the first to ask a question about Why Progressive Institutions are Unsustainable. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia.
Add this book to your favorite list ». Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. Start your review of Why Progressive Institutions are Unsustainable. Sep 29, Jim Thompson rated it liked it. This is the first Encounter Broadside that hasn't made me roll my eyes, mutter under my breath, and think less of the author at the end than I did at the start.
It is the only book in the series that I've come across so far that isn't shrill, insulting, and full of wild conspiracy theories. In fact, Epstein starts off, in his very first paragraph, with an acknowledgment that those who disagree with him are not in fact possessed by devils, bent on destroying America, in league with the Illuminati This is the first Encounter Broadside that hasn't made me roll my eyes, mutter under my breath, and think less of the author at the end than I did at the start.
In fact, Epstein starts off, in his very first paragraph, with an acknowledgment that those who disagree with him are not in fact possessed by devils, bent on destroying America, in league with the Illuminati. But this unanimity of ends gives way to a fierce difference of opinion on means.
It's an acknowledgment that his Encounter peers are unable to make, and I appreciate it. The majority want something good and disagree on how to get there. That disagreement is important and sometimes worth fighting bitterly over, but it is not necessary to demonize everyone with a different view.
So thank you Mr. Epstein then fills the 56 pages of this little volume with an argument for Classical Liberalism as opposed to Modern Progressivism. Here's what that boils down to, at least on these pages: 1.
A Flat Tax 2. Tight restrictions on what the revenues raised through the Flat Tax can be used on 3. Loosening of regulations of all sorts in the markets, a return to "free contracts" There is more in here, and the "more" is at times significant, but these are the three major themes.
These are not bad themes. I think there are serious flaws here, but to be fair, these are flaws that would perhaps be worked out in a longer examination of the topic. Epstein may have fixes, it may be that he simply doesn't have room to present them here I am, however, skeptical.
So let's start with the Flat Tax. I like this idea. I'm not in favor of this idea. But I like it. Epstein argues that a "progressive tax"-- in which people with higher incomes pay not only more dollars in tax but pay at a higher rate-- is creating more problems than it solves. Epstein argues that while this will cause individual pain in some cases at least he admits that much that it is overall healthier for the system to have everyone contributing at the same rate.
This will, he argues, help toward healing the class rifts so often exploited by the political parties-- the Democrats yelling that the rich don't pay their fair share, the Republicans yelling that the poor are freeloaders. He may be on to something here, but a cynical view says that this is ending class warfare by just declaring that the rich are the victors. The bits that come up in the next section make it worse.
The second argument that Epstein makes is that taxes collected should only be spent on things that benefit ALL individuals, more or less equally or that could potentially be of equal benefit to all.
Taxes should be collected "to provide those classical public goods that no system of market transactions can generate, such as infrastructure, police, and defense. It's underlying benefit theory is designed to benefit all individuals taxed, regardless of their wealth. Probably prisons. Maybe schools, community colleges. He doesn't specify every "legitimate" expense, but this seems to be the thinking.
This, again, is to prevent class conflict, more or less. What that would leave out is any government support of disadvantaged groups. It would mean, from my reading, no funds spent on assisting individuals with disabilities; no funds spent on alleviating homelessness; no financial aid programs for the poorest students; no affirmative action programs; no housing assistance; no food stamps; no unemployment payments.
I imagine it would also mean no subsidies to pork farmers; no subsidies to oil drillers; no subsidies to coal miners, though it's possible that Epstein would manage to wiggle into an explanation whereby he imagines that those subsidies benefit everyone. By getting rid of all these benefits for the poor, Epstein imagines himself alleviating class warfare. But again, it seems that he is alleviating it by declaring one side the winner.
Cutting all social support programs while at the same time raising taxes for the poorest doesn't seem like it's likely to elevate those in the most need.
It's not clear how he imagines that people who are currently struggling will be better off in this new reality, unless he believes in the myth of the benevolent rich man who will suddenly share so much more of his wealth when his taxes are cut. Since this has never, ever happened, it's hard for me to share this belief. Epstein acknowledges that a transition to his ideas will not be "elegant or costless. And I have to question if these programs of universal benefit really exist, or at the very least if they can be said to benefit everyone equally.
Edition 1st American ed. Extent 1 online resource 56 pages. Isbn Label Why progressive institutions are unsustainable Title Why progressive institutions are unsustainable Statement of responsibility Richard A. High marginal tax rates expose the political system to strong factional strife that stifles initiative, adds uncertainty and reduces ove Member of Encounter broadsides, no. U6 LC item number E67 eb Literary form non fiction Nature of contents dictionaries bibliography Series statement Encounter broadsides Series volume no.
Label Why progressive institutions are unsustainable, Richard A. Library Locations Map Details. Curtis Laws Wilson Library Borrow it. Library Links.
0コメント