Solar Entrepreneurship

Here in America, we are rightfully proud of our free market system. We won out over the Communist menace that threatened the word, and free enterprise prevailed. The world recognized the justice and sanctity of private property, and we have upheld it everywhere, from land to natural resources to ideas. But an unspoken socialist threat still lingers beneath the surface. Or, should I say, up in the sky. Yes, the sun glares down upon our free soil, mocking us with collective ownership. How is it that in a society that recognizes that natural resources are best left in private hands that we could be so foolish as to leave such an important celestial object to the commons?

Well, enough of it! I intend to put this socialist nightmare to an abrupt end. I, Jonathan Cobb, intend to claim my personal ownership of the sun. Our brightest economists insist that it is best for society that all natural resources remain in private hands, to prevent a tragedy of the commons, and as a good capitalist American, I feel it is my civic duty to right this wrong. To seal the deal, I can assure you that a satellite carrying a flag with my name on it is headed straight for the sun, and as soon as it is planted on the sun(or is incinerated, which still counts), I will officially be the sun's owner.

The Law of Rent and You

Economics has always been rather esoteric for most people. Most people's knowledge of the subject is limited to the law of supply and demand, of which they have the most vague understanding. Any understanding beyond that is usually aligned with their political ideology. If they're conservative, they follow the supply side theory that lowering taxes create more jobs and helps the economy. If they're liberal, they follow the Keynesian idea that government spending projects can stimulate the economy. But there's one important economic principle that even economists today have long forgotten or ignored, at the expense of their discipline. That principle is the law of rent.

Before I lay out the law of rent, it bears mention that "rent" in the economic sense is not the same as what is meant in its common usage. We commonly apply the term to apartments, cars, videos, and various other commodities. In economics, its focus is more narrow. It is applied mostly to land, though it can also be applied to things like natural resources or the radio spectrum. Rent is the difference between what a factor of production is paid and what it would need to be paid to remain in current use. Applied to land, it essentially refers to the profit to be gained by virtue of its ownership. Essentially, land rent is equivalent to land value.

Poverty

We've all seen the scenes of bony-looking children in some desert surrounded by makeshift huts that we wouldn't dream of living in, accompanied by some announcer's appeal to our sense of guilt. "For just $1 a day you can sponsor a child like this," they say. While such philanthropy may give us peace of mind with the sense that we're doing something about the problem, such gestures of kindness do little to address the wider causes of poverty and hunger. This individual child you sponsor may gain a competitive advantage over his peers, but he will still live in a poverty-stricken area, and his peers will be no better off.

So what is the cause of poverty? In the conservative mindset, poverty is the fault of those living in it. Many a cynic has implored that these poor hungry people might have a chance for success if only they would stop having so many children. In our own country, they claim that they are "lazy" and simply don't want to work. Sometimes they will claim that our welfare system has made them dependent and given them a disincentive to work. Without completely discounting all of these explanations, suffice to say they do not explain sufficiently the extent of poverty that exists in the world, nor its distribution.