Over my Christmas I had the pleasure of reading Robert Reich’s new book, Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few. Reich, in case you’re not a 90’s kid and therefore don’t remember the 90’s, was Secretary of Labor during Bill Clinton’s first term. Now he’s a public speaker, author of fourteen books, and Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley.

Reich begins by bemoaning the state of affairs for working and middle-class families in America, recalling fondly how his father’s small business was able to provide for their entire family to live comfortably in the fifties and sixties. Since the 1970’s, however, Reich argues that the market has been restructured so that the vast majority of economic benefits are going right to the top earners, leaving wages for most Americans stagnant and upward mobility more and more unsure.

The most interesting part of Reich’s argument is his firm rejection of “market-vs.-government” thinking. Anyone who’s ever debated their conservative uncle (or maybe their liberal niece-or-nephew) is familiar with this problem: which is more efficient, the government, or the free market?

Reich contends that the free market vs. government debate is a purposeful distraction meant to obscure the reality of who is reaping economic gains. The market is inherently dependent on a system of controls in regards to five “building blocks,” which Reich identifies as property, monopolies, contracts, bankruptcy, and enforcement. In essence, since a free market depends on the existence of these five building blocks, and since these building blocks require the existence of a system of external controls to ensure they are maintained, the issue is not about government vs. the free market, but about how the free market is organized by and through government, and who has the most influence over those decisions.

It is an interesting point and surely worth thinking about, but the problem is that when it comes to specific industries, such as healthcare, education, and prisons, it is very much worth talking about the pros and cons of privatization versus socialism. Reich mostly ignores such questions in favor of a standard but engaging treatise on income and wealth inequality and the way large corporations, special interests, and wealthy individuals have gamed the system in their favor against the best interests of the majority of working and middle-class Americans.

Reich provides plenty of examples and even graphs and numbers to back his claims up, but he seems to be operating under the premise that this is an issue that vast numbers of people on both sides of the political spectrum can and will come together to solve. The reality today just doesn’t bear this out; according to Pew research, 60% of Americans still believe anyone can make it if they just work hard, and major Republican presidential candidates still say things like, “We have never been a nation of haves and have-nots. We are a nation of haves and soon-to-haves.”

Because of this, the most glaring issue with Saving Capitalism seems to be Reich’s unwavering optimism. Reich very correctly identifies that the only real long-term solution to the problems we face from globalization and overpopulation is the implementation of a universal basic income, but offers no reason why anyone should believe that the politicians that ostensibly lead us will get their heads out of their asses quickly enough to tackle the problem before the collapse of society or utter annihilation of the planet. He trusts that Americans can come together across political divides to form a new countervailing power network of groups such as unions, political action committees, small businesses, and even new political parties, which will lead to a major restructuring of our economic rules so that benefits are shared more equitably. Unfortunately, there is no word on how or when this is supposed to take place.

Reich also spends a good deal of time explaining how the proliferation of money in politics has gamed the system, but offers nothing but naïve optimism that the problem will be solved. None of the Republicans currently running for president will do a damn thing about this, nor will Hillary Clinton, who is one of the biggest recipients of campaign contributions from these wealthy interests. Since it looks very much like one of them will become the next president, the issue of money in politics looks no closer to being solved than it ever has.

In the interest of impartiality, I won’t let my pessimism about these issues affect my opinion of the book. Saving Capitalism is a well-written, thought-provoking book by one of America’s leading economic thinkers and progressive champions. Despite Reich’s sometimes unfounded optimism, I greatly enjoyed the book and highly recommend it to anyone interested in learning about the reality of income inequality and money in politics. Buy it on Amazon here.

9/10

By the way, I have my own book out. Buy my debut novella as an ebook here and paperback here.

  Books