Robert Lawson - Socialism Sucks: Two Economists Drink Their Way Through the Unfree World

PRAISE FOR

SOCIALISM SUCKS

What a captivating idea Socialism Sucks embraces! A worldwide tour guide written in plain English by two high-end economists. An invasion of the worlds most highly regulated hot spots where they cant even efficiently produce or distribute something as simple and lovable as beer. A down-to-earth, almost fable-like lesson showing socialisms failures for all the world to see. And it even has some sidesplitting hilarity thrown in. I knew these guys were great; but I didnt know this side of them. Buy this book. Give it to your children and grandchildren, and to anyone who touts the nonsensenow fashionable in some American circlesthat government power somehow produces more happiness than personal liberty.

JUDGE ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO , senior judicial analyst for Fox News

Every country that enters socialism gets more miserable; every country that leaves it prospers: thats the lesson of history so far. Robert Lawsons and Ben Powells light-hearted book drives home this message in a refreshingly readable way. From Venezuelas immiseration to Georgias liberation, the authors sample every socialist, ex-socialist, semi-socialist and supposedly socialist experiment, beer by beer.

MATT RIDLEY , author of The Evolution of Everything

Professors Robert Lawson and Benjamin Powell do a yeomens job in proving that socialism sucks, the apt title for their new book. They show why theres no stampede into countries like Venezuela and Cuba and other socialist darlings of the U.S. leftists. Whats more, over a couple of drinks, Lawson and Powell prove that Sweden is not as socialistic as portrayed by our leftists.

WALTER E. WILLIAMS , professor of economics, George Mason University

In theory, socialism sucks and economists know why. Here are two economists who ventured far beyond the ivory tower to discover that in practice, the theory is right. This is the tragic story of mass suffering in the name of an insane idea, told with sympathy, insight, and no small amount of black humor. Read it and weep; read it and laugh; read it and learn.

STEVEN LANDSBURG , professor of economics, University of Rochester, and author of the Armchair Economist

What is socialism? And do countries that overindulge in it wake up with bad hangovers? You bet they do. Robert Lawson and Benjamin Powell give you the hair-of-the-dog cure. They provide a dose of political economy knowledge mixed with an understanding of the benefits of economic freedom, add a strong dash of humor, and top it off with a cold beer. Have a Bob & Ben Eye-Opener and youll feel like (and live in a place where you can make) a million dollars!

P. J. OROURKE , author of #1 New York Times bestseller Parliament of Whores and Holidays in Hell

Copyright 2019 by Robert Lawson and Benjamin Powell

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who wishes to quote brief passages in connection with a review written for inclusion in a magazine, newspaper, website, or broadcast.

Regnery is a registered trademark of Salem Communications Holding Corporation

Cover design by John Caruso

Cataloging-in-Publication data on file with the Library of Congress

ISBN 978-1-62157-945-8

ebook ISBN 978-1-62157-946-5

Published in the United States by

Regnery Publishing

A Division of Salem Media Group

300 New Jersey Ave NW

Washington, DC 20001

www.Regnery.com

Books are available in quantity for promotional or premium use. For information on discounts and terms, please visit our website: www.Regnery.com.

For Tracy, Lisa, Keri & Raymond

In appreciation for your patience with our travels

I n 2013, Venezuela was the poster child for socialism.

It was the standard against which celebrities and politicos alike measured the United States economy, which they found wanting.

At Salon, David Sirota let us know that yes, this was socialism, and yes, it should incite envy in Americans. Venezuelan president Hugo Chvez, said Sirota, with his full-throated advocacy of socialism, had racked up an economic record that... American president[s] could only dream of achieving.

Fashionable opinion couldnt say enough about Venezuela and its president. Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Oliver Stone, and Michael Moore were the tip of the iceberg.

And then, by 2017, Venezuelathe very country these commentators had been lecturing everyone about, and which Sirota had praised for its full-throated advocacy of socialismsuddenly became not real socialism , even though nothing about it had changed.

Well, I guess at least one thing changed: by 2016 nearly three out of four Venezuelans lacked a diet that researchers considered optimal (thats a generous way of putting it), and nearly 16 percent had resorted to eating garbage.

Oh, we dont want Venezuela, say our democratic socialists today. Why, we want Sweden!

This kind of claim might be more believable had so many of the people making it not cheered Venezuela right up to the moment that starvation and chaos were everywhere.

Theres plenty to say regarding Sweden: (1) its socialist policies were made possible by wealth created under an essentially capitalist economy (as recently as the 1950s, remember, government spent less as a percentage of GDP in Sweden than in the U.S.); (2) Swedes earn about 50 percent more in the U.S., in our supposedly wicked economy; and (3) since Swedens explosion of social welfare spending there have been zero jobs created on net in the private sector.

No, thanks.

In recent years, sympathy for socialism in the U.S. has grown rapidly. No doubt one reason was the financial crisis of 2008. Critics felt certain that this episode revealed a profound sickness at the heart of American capitalism. Yet the crisis would certainly not have happened without the twin evils of government policy and Federal Reserve intervention, both of which are something like the opposite of capitalism.

And theres another, more fundamental reason: its an easy argument to follow. (1) Those people over there have lots of money. (2) You would like some money. (3) We are happy to facilitate the transfer.

The rich, meanwhile, are caricatured and despised as a matter of routine. And while its true that some people have come by their wealth in disreputable ways, made possible by government, socialist critics are not making fine distinctions like this. It is wealth per se, no matter how acquired, that is to be condemned.

Not a moments thought is applied to wondering what the rich might actually do for the economy. We are to believe that they roll around in their cash until it sticks to their sweaty bodies.

Not a word about investment in capital goods, which make the economy more physically productive and increase real incomes. Nothing about capital maintenance, which keeps the structure of production up and running. Nothing about saving at all, since most popular critics of capitalism appear to think consumption is what really contributes to economic healthas if simply using things up could make us rich.

From this standpoint, socialism seems to make sense. There are no unintended consequences of government intervention worth thinking about. We have rich people over there, and things wed like to do with their money over here, so whats the problem? If theres an outcome we want, why, we simply legislate it into existence! Want higher wages? Just pass a law!