Free Markets versus Big Government

By David Rogers

A critical review of the Trump and Biden platforms reveals more than just two differing visions of America, they involve two very contradictory paths to govern America in the future. One involves deregulation and the further release of free-market capitalism. The other involves tighter controls and a rapid swing to government-sponsored Socialism.

The Biden platform is concerning. The one hundred and twenty-page platform document reads at times like the Communist Manifesto. It is, in essence, the Bernie Sanders “Democratic Socialism” playbook wrapped in a new cover, championed by the furthest left elements of the Democrat Party which are clearly now in charge of the entire Democrat agenda. In every instance, the Biden solution to critical issues is more government intervention, more regulation. Socialized health care, elimination of private property, and government control of industry all find footholds in the Biden platform.

Biden’s stances include numerous changes that would fundamentally alter the way America is governed and the way we do business. These initiatives are cloaked in the age-old shibboleths of “fairness and equality”. But they are designed to accomplish one goal: consolidate power into a one-party government monopoly that can eventually control everything we say or do in America.

The Green New Deal would eventually give regulatory control over all energy to government bureaucrats. Under this system,  an individual could be told how far (or if) they can drive. Home energy consumption would be carefully monitored. Leisure travel would be restricted. Under the AFFH, the federal government would seek to control zoning in all cities and local suburbs. Under a restoration of the TPP and Paris Climate Accord unaccountable foreign bureaucrats would have the final say in how we conduct much of our domestic business and policy.

The elimination of the Filibuster, packing the Supreme Court, trying to add additional states and congressional districts would tilt the balance permanently in Congress to a Democrat majority while simultaneously creating a third legislative branch in the courts. With activist courts, unconstitutional legislation or executive actions could remain unchallenged or easily be sustained when challenged. This is a transformation indeed, and all aimed at eliminating a two-party system and stifling any voice of constituent opposition.

Trump on the other hand would undoubtedly continue on a path to deregulation and renewal of open markets. Contrary to Harris’ claim that Republicans want to take away health care from millions of Americans, true deregulation of the health care industry would open up numerous new alternatives for more cost-effective plans and providers. A Biden “national health care system” would have costs spiraling and access shrinking. As with most economic functions, less government and freer markets almost always yields more numerous and cost-effective alternatives.

In contrast to roving, destructive mobs labeled “peaceful protestors” by the left, Trump would offer support to local law enforcement and provide strong incentives for cities to get control of their situations. When you tolerate violence you usually get more violence. And blaming Trump for this mystical “racist America” does not make justification for such violence any more palatable for the average voter. Quite the contrary, these events illustrate the failure of a monopolistic one-party system on a local level when a one-sided agenda is sustained by native legislative inaction.

It should be noted that Trump’s policies, his investment in traditional black colleges, criminal justice reform, and other incentives are aimed directly at helping minority communities lift themselves through new opportunities. Again, this would be the natural course for encouraging a free market versus a big government approach. Trump and his acolytes should point out that during Biden’s tenure as a Washington politician, trillions of dollars have been poured into “the war on poverty” with little tangible results.

In just three years one could argue Trump’s opportunity zones in inner cities have done more to create jobs and reduce poverty than any number of government programs. This may explain why Trump is trending to more than 25% approval among black communities. And the actual numbers may be even higher. Proof positive that opportunity, as described by the free market, works.

If America is to remain a world economic leader, Biden’s agenda must be voted down. The Biden platform seeks to restrain America to create more “equality” internationally. Free markets are fair and efficient. Free markets know no race creed or color. Free markets provide an opportunity to lift all who will work and engage in a productive product or service. True, unfettered innovation and entrepreneurship created the America that has led the world for a century. Government control is inefficient, ineffective, and often corrupt. If we want a future that has any chance of economic recovery, the choice is clear this November.

Liked it? Take a second to support Utah.Politico.Hub on Patreon!

Related posts