And the difficulties.
New wisdom is often the result of new knowledge viewed from various perspectives. Each perspective is personal and usually combined with others of similar views. The most active viewers will present these ideas frequently in the form of a book or other presentations. The object is to gain broader acceptance of new developed notions.
From a political standpoint into which my views often resolve themselves, as that is the principle means for the carrying out economic theories, we in this country have developed two political parties. In a sense each of these parties is made up of a number of what might be described as lesser parties.
One party as we know is referred to as the party of the right and the other the party of left. In the not to distant past both parties had a way of coming together in the middle and often even with overlapping views where one could convince members of the other party of certain common realities.
Our government however functions best when one of the parties dominates the various branches.
Today the political system has evolved in effect as though there were two football teams, one against the other and every move aimed at the final win of the game, no room for compromise.
In fact, a sub party in one of the main parties has vociferously announced that it will not compromise and forced this approach on the whole party.
Both parties operate mainly on the basis of their generally held economic convictions, normally on the role of government and today one party especially claims that these views are closely linked to their religious interpretations of politics and economics.
The study of economics relates to the general system that gives a basis for earning a living within a national society. Each party has its own perspective of how society should function and the manner in which government is to make the economy work.
One party’s general beliefs have developed in the direction where government’s main role is to serve the “earning-a-living” function, especially of the lessor economic groups.
The other party is more concerned with the role of the “free market” and the conditions of an open functioning system where individuals and corporations are free of government interference.
Although there are common interests in maintaining a dynamic and active system, role of government is where both parties have developed such a chasm between them that there seems no bridging of the gap.
What is needed is a more solid common interest where both parties can come together. Lacking this commonality, government will have to be modified so that one of the parties is the winner and at each election, more like the parliamentary system, one becomes the definite victor and runs the government.
Otherwise whatever economic lessons are learned from tine to time and whatever theories develop, they must necessarily fit into the framework of each and of both parties’ beliefs, today an impossible task.