At its core, it's about reducing suffering so that we all have the economic freedom and opportunities to pursue better lives for ourselves and our families.
Income increases are causing reduced mortality... the deaths of about half a million children in 1990 would have been averted if Africa's growth in the 1980s had been 1.5 percentage points higherEconomic growth isn't easy but it isn't nearly as complicated as some make them out to be. Over time, you'll probably find that I'll be quoting (probably over-quoting, and incessantly recommending) the following books and authors:
William Easterly's "The Elusive Quest for Growth"
Hernando De Soto's "The Mystery of Capital"
Brink Lindsey's "Against the Dead Hand"
Each in their own way, they look at what's worked and what hasn't - and ultimately, why the West developed when much of the rest of the world has lagged behind. They've built on the work of those like Milton Friedman and Adam Smith. While there are those who deride "capitalism"/"market failures" in its present state, it is demagoguery to suggest that the present state is the ideal when it is often government interventions and mismanagement that cause as many if not significantly more of the disruptions/injustices that exist.
I think we're all looking for the same results but the traditionalists and those who seek development from the bottom up, pursue very different means. Traditionalists resist market-based solutions in the name of anti-globalization, protectionism, environmentalism or just plain arrogance that they, being the elites must know better. The results can be devastating to those in whose names they champion their initiatives. As I blog, I hope to be able to explore each of these themes.