Webber 1

Edward Webber
12 October 2015
Socialism: A Vilified Economic Savior
When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no
food, they call me a communist. Hlder Cmara, in Essential Writings, reflected on a strange
dichotomy in modern society where giving charity is considered a moral and respectable act, yet
to inquire into the necessity of charity meets with derision and sweeping admonition of
character. For Americans it began with the Cold War. Soviet Russia had been threatening the US
with nuclear war for nearly a decade and the nerves of both sides were frayed from numerous
close calls. Each side was sure the other was out to end their way of life. The anti-Soviet
propaganda was paraded on television, in classrooms, on the front page of newspapers
nationwide. The boogieman of choice? Godless communism and the socialist economics which
propelled it. And while the Cold War has long since ended, Americans have yet to shake off the
quiet disdain of all things socialist, even when the preponderance of evidence shows creating and
expanding socialist projects could improve their lives in a number of ways.
In 2015, while Americans spend their time being courted by a number of politicians and
choose sides leading up to the 2016 presidential election, there is little debate as to the problem
of crime in America. The US prison system has long been overflowing with inmates. The US
now holds the infamous distinction of both the highest per capita prison population in the world
and the largest number of current prisoners in the world. (Blumstein) Even China, with a
population over ten times that of the United States, has thirty percent less prisoners overall. In a
time when highly socialist democratic countries such as Sweden and the Netherlands are closing
prisons due to underuse, the US continues to build more. A main driver in this disparity? Income

Webber 2
inequality. Rates of violent crime, the driver of most long-term prison sentences, are far higher in
countries with high inequality. (Ulmer 799-819) This finding holds true in a multitude of
contexts, even when confounding factors such as unemployment are controlled for.
While crime is a critical factor in capitalism driven inequality it hardly stands alone in
harming the whole of society. Citizens of countries with few or underfunded social programs live
shorter, lower quality lives overall. Mental illness rates are far higher in countries due to higher
stresses in everyday life, lack of affordable mental health services and a general perpetuation of
mental stresses passed on from parent to child. In countries where healthcare is fully socialized,
known as single payer, and considered a right for all, lifespans are longer, obesity of lower and
even infant mortality is greatly reduced. (Navarro 481-591) The preventative measures afforded
by regular doctors visits allows those in highly socialized countries to avoid the debilitating
diseases which lead to the early demises of citizens of more capitalistic societies. All of this
leads to not only longer lifespans but a higher quality of life throughout that lifespan.
If living a shorter life was not enough to consider different options, the fact those in
countries with greater inequality are less likely to succeed adds salt to an already festering
wound. No matter where people are born on the social spectrum, inequality retards their social
mobility. The main driver in this social stagnation is education, and people in highly socialized
countries have more of it. (Altbach) Test scores in highly socialistic countries are noticeably
higher than their counterparts who suffer from economic inequality. This correlation holds true
even between US states. (Gamoran 135-153)
Correlations, however, can only bring us so far in the search. And statistics only represent
correlations, never causation. Mark Twain once quipped, "There are three kinds of lies: lies,
damned lies and statistics." Statistics, he offered, can be molded to fit almost any argument, even

Webber 3
an incorrect one. That where math comes in. On a scale of evidence mathematics is at the far
right. In fact, math trumps every other form of evidence. And the math shows socialism is not
only more efficient but in some cases necessary.

MR is marginal revenue, MC is marginal costs ("ECON 150: Microeconomics.")

The image above shows the deadweight loss (DWL, the yellow area) which occurs
without a socialized monopoly. Deadweight loss is the loss in efficiency an economy suffers
when capitalism is allowed to run without the checks of regulation in place. This is why
libertarianism (unchecked capitalism) is objectively worse than highly regulated capitalism.
Where MR intersects with D is the most efficient use of production, but that only happens
when regulations are put into place forcing it. Capitalism naturally leans toward oligopoly and in

Webber 4
some cases (where natural resources or geography are limited), monopoly. In unregulated
capitalism you have companies which try to make MR=MC because that is where the highest
profits are, but you suffer deadweight loss as a result. These both suffer an overall loss in surplus
because production is artificially held back in order to create more demand and, subsequently,
higher prices. The lost surplus is never recovered and the economy suffers as a result compared
to if regulations were put in place. Socialism becomes a necessary part of efficient national
production.
The other, lesser known part of socialism is the minimum income. The reason minimum
incomes are the best course of action is a matter of specialization and trade. It's more efficient for
an economy to specialize in a small subset of goods, even when you take into account the
opportunity costs of unused specialized labor for goods no longer produced, than it is to be
autarkic, or generalized. With autarkic countries, like the Soviet Union was, even though all
specialized labor was utilized the amount of goods produced were below what they would have
produced by limiting production to a small subset and trading for the missing goods. The cost of
paying unused labor (specialized labor such as farmers when the economy is, say, technology
based) to simply not work is lower than the losses which would result from sticking with an
autarkic structure simply for the sake of being protectionist or lowering unemployment.
Unemployment numbers are a tricky subject, in order to keep to the highest efficiency
some specialized labor (e.g.: farmers in a technology economy) must remain out of the
workforce. Therefore the best means to ensure the highest profits for everyone involved is to pay
people to not work. Otherwise, by employing everyone, you end up with lost efficiency and
opportunity costs beyond that which you'd have if you simply paid people to stay home. It's the
wall the global economy is hitting with capitalism right now.

Webber 5
Put simply, socialism is about removing profit motivation from a service which benefits
the whole. Take electricity, there is no benefit in profit when everyone needs it. Everyone paying
more for a few to get rich only hurts the many who get fleeced. Socialism is about the state
taking over production of anything which profit motivation would be counterproductive or
actually hurt production. The math proves this, it isn't debatable.
The prison system is another great example as there is no societal benefit in designing a
prison system which has the highest possible population. Private prisons, run for profit, are
always trying to keep every bed filled and in doing so are always lobbying to make unhelpful
laws or increase recidivism or prevent early release or enact mandatory minimum sentencing.
None of these things benefit society, only the bottom line for a select few shareholders. The
profit motivation actually does the maximum amount of harm, costing taxpayers the most
possible money and decreasing the chances of actually rehabilitating the people under its care. A
successful private, profit-driven prison system is as mythical as a unicorn. They are directly
competing interests and therefore impossible.
After learning the facts behind socialism it's no surprise the countries with the highest
well-being, best educated, lowest violent crime, lowest poverty, lowest infant mortality, lowest
prison population, longest lifespan, best healthcare and lowest poverty rates are all socialist
countries. They dominate in every category. Where is the US or any primarily capitalistic
country? Nowhere near the top 10. Libertarian countries? All near the bottom. Socialism is
demonstrated to be the best method in both math and real life scenarios. It's a fact, and one we
must all embrace if were to succeed in this global economy.

Webber 6
Works Cited

Altbach, Philip G., and David H. Kelly. Higher Education in International Perspective: A Survey
and Bibliography. Mansell Publishing Limited, 950 University Avenue, Bronx, NY
10452., 1985.
Blumstein, Alfred. "Bringing Down the U.S. Prison Population." Prison Journal 91.3 (2011):
12S-26S. Academic Search Complete. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
Camara, Helder, and Francis McDonagh. Dom Helder Camara : essential writings. Maryknoll,
N.Y: Orbis Books, 2009. Print.
"ECON 150: Microeconomics." ECON 150: Microeconomics. BYU Idaho. Web. 21 Oct. 2015.
Gamoran, Adam. "American schooling and educational inequality: A forecast for the 21st
century." Sociology of education (2001): 135-153.
Navarro, Vicente, and Leiyu Shi. "The political context of social inequalities and health." Social
science & medicine 52.3 (2001): 481-491.
Twain, Mark, and Michael J. Kiskis. Mark Twain's own autobiography the chapters from the
North American review. Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010. Print.
Ulmer, Jeffery T., Casey T. Harris, and Darrell Steffensmeier. "Racial And Ethnic Disparities In
Structural Disadvantage And Crime: White, Black, And Hispanic Comparisons*." Social
Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell) 93.3 (2012): 799-819. Academic Search Complete.
Web. 20 Oct. 2015.