“Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest” seems like just another way of describing "trickle-down economics" (or at least of describing the results o

“Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the rest” seems like just another way of describing "trickle-down economics" (or at least of describing the results of that strategy in western economies). To be clear, you can do a lot worse than western economies have done over the last 50 years, but I agree with Friedman that we need to refocus our efforts so that the wealth-gap does not continue growing out of control. This, of course, does not have to mean doubling down on the welfare state, but as Friedman said: "cash assistance to only the most vulnerable and more investments in infrastructure that improve productivity and create good jobs." But the tricky part is to do this without unfairly rewarding/propping up anti-consumer monopolies. We need a new era of trust-busting! My main measure for the long-term success of any economic theory is whether or not it causes a distribution of power across the middle class. If the middle class does not grow in size (relative to the whole population) and in its percentage share in the total wealth/power then I don't think you have a very good system.