Yang the Libertarian?

Entrepreneur, Human Centered Capitalism, and Individualism. These are the words that come to mind when I hear the words "Andrew" and "Yang" in the same sentence. In fact, many libertarians claim that they would prefer him over Trump. Yang has been subliminally campaigning to libertarians and moderates all throughout his race. He isn't the typical democrat who is obsessed with race and social justice. He is pragmatic, smart and competent and many libertarians claim that he is one of us.

At the third Democrat debate in Houston, Yang began by making a pitch to the UBI idea that has been the center of the media's attention. But the way he pitched it wasn't the typical democrat method. He didn't ploy of of the values of "empathy" and "social justice" that are key to democrat values. Instead, he sounded much more than a Libertarian than a Democrat. "When you donate money to a presidential campaign, what happens? The politician spends the money on TV ads and consultants and you hope it works out," said Yang.  "It's time to trust ourselves more than our politicians." He continues and says "We have to see ourselves as owners and shareholders of this democracy rather than inputs into a giant machine."

He may be just appealing to the fence sitters, moderates, Libertarians or the Never-Trump Republicans in a desperate attempt to get ahead in the polls. If you follow the Bearing Liberty Instagram page, you may recall that his LibertyScore was 48.4%. However that wasn't a wholistic review of his platform. Granted, Tulsi gained a whopping one more point higher than him. From a Libertarian purist point of view, he is pretty bad. But when you look deeper, you may notice that his core values are very libertarian. However, those values manifest themselves in a somewhat destructive way.

Yang is a capitalist. Not in the same sense as us bleeding yellow libertarians are, but unlike his contemporaries in the Democratic Party, he has an emphasis on innovation, change and market forces. He has coined a term called "Human Centered Capitalism." And is as follows.

1) Humans are more important than money

2) The unit of a Human Capitalism economy is each person, not each dollar

3) Markets exist to serve our common goals and values

As Yang said. "We need to make the markets serve us rather than the other way around. Profit-seeking companies are organized to maximize their bottom line at every turn which will naturally lead to extreme policies and outcomes. We need government leaders who are truly laser-focused on the public interest above all else and will lead companies to act accordingly."

His main problem with the market as it is now is as follows.

"At present, the Market systematically tends to undervalue many things, activities, and people, many of which are core to the human experience."

This is where he is wrong. The "Market" doesn't place a value on anything. People create value. As consumers and sellers, people move under the "Invisible Hand" of the economy. If Yang is right in that the market doesn't place value on the "Human Experience" it is because (economically speaking) there is no value. However, the market does place value on the human experience. That is what the market focuses on. It takes the materialistic and the spiritual and transforms our deepest passions into a product that can be sold and bought.

Selling tools for personal development, foods for healthier lifestyles and theme parks to create family bonds the market caters to our desire for a "human experience." Just look around. Even the art of advertising is the attempt to tell the buyer that the product will create fulfillment and joy in their life.

Humans ARE more important than money. That is why people control their own money. What Yang is talking about is, the emphasis on capital at the expense of the well-being of the individuals. (Big Pharma selling drugs at high prices.) What Yang doesn't understand is that it is the government involvement that caused the "unfair" prices to begin with. See this Mises.org article HERE.

Another one of Yang's complaints on modern capitalism as it is now is that it "benefits only the wealthiest." This is also untrue. By purchasing any good voluntarily, you are inadvertently saying that you value the good more than you do the money. This is a basic tenant of economics. In essence, you and the company both become richer. For example. You buy a Starbucks Coffee for $5. By buying the drink, you affirm that your coffee is more important than your five dollar bill. Buy selling the drink, Starbucks is affirming that the five dollar bill is more valuable than the coffee. Both parties are richer.

In the end, he is still a Capitalist. On his page regarding human centered capitalism, he goes in depth about the history of "Capitalism." He ends up claiming that because a "pure Capitalist system" has not existed then therefore comes to the conclusion that Adam Smith was wrong. He claims that a market is "steered not by an unseen hand, but by clear government policy." However, he deliberately refutes Marxism as ineffective on a utilitarian standpoint but not on the moral standpoint. He wants to create a better world through regulation. In all fairness, he's not a libertarian as many would want or wish. But that doesn't mean he's "bad." Sometimes, as much as we all hate to admit it, a competent centrist is all we need.