The headline says it all, and the article gives the details.
What’s curious for me, though, is the organisation that sponsored the research. On its ‘about’ page, the Organization for Competitive Markets advertises itself thus:
We are “pro- business” because we believe in free markets and the law of supply and demand to allocate resources properly. We are “conservative” because we view American values such as honesty and morality should be demanded of our businesses and politicians. We are “liberal” because we believe government has a regulatory role to create and enforce the rules of doing business, thereby avoiding crony capitalism. We are “populist” because we have determined our nation is made economically and culturally wealthy by preserving the ability of independent families to produce our food without fear of the economically dominant firms in agribusiness.
In other words, they think that capitalism would be great if it weren’t for the capitalists. It’s something that my libertarian readers might like to chew over and, if they’re libertarian, agree with. Oo, and that reminds me, I know I owe Luddhunter a fuller response, and I’ll try to get to that in a couple of weeks time (I’m married to a lapsed libertarian, and have a rehab system that I’m happy to share). Until then, though, I get to post my favourite libertarian joke, as told to me by the excellent Martin O’Neill:
Q: What’s the difference between anarchism and libertarianism?
A: Under anarchism, poor people get to shoot back.