Building Something Already Gives Us More Than We Contributed

President Obama’s recent “you didn’t build that” comments have been the cause of much discussion lately. Of course, the general idea of what Obama has said is nothing new to liberal thought. Elizabeth Warren uttered a very similar sentiment last September, albeit much more eloquently. The notion that you owe much thanks to those that have contributed to your success in life is far from absurd. We all have that special teacher, friend, or loved one that has inspired us to become more. We all have benefited from the level of progress society has achieved and the hard work of those that have come before us. I don’t think anyone would argue against that, but the debt that we owe to our society and the price tag attached is something entirely different.

Taking credit for someone’s success also assumes the credit for someone’s failure. If a business is built by society then is it also society’s fault when the business fails? I grew up in a family environment of entrepreneurship and run a non-profit focused on starting businesses, and I can tell you that the biggest part of why 9/10 businesses fail isn’t because of the market or society, it’s because of the failure of the leadership in the company to correctly gauge the needs of consumers and to run an effective business model. A successful business is one that understands failure and pivots in the directions towards success. The market, society, customers, distributors, and all the necessary components of a business remain the same regardless of the businessman’s failure or success. So, then why would the success be contributed to them. We are all individual components that work together to make something better, but the quality of what we contribute and the success of our contributions is mostly determined by our individual ability.

Of course, President Obama’s argument is more that the advances and services of society have personally contributed to the level of knowledge and benefit that a businessman contains, whether directly or indirectly. This ignores that a successful businesses does give back more to society than it consumes by meeting the needs of consumers and providing the best possible quality as determined by consumers, ultimately advancing society and providing a better world for us all. Who is better off, Henry Ford or society? While Ford went on to be a juggernaut, it is hard to argue that society didn’t receive further benefit by gaining the knowledge of superior business practices, ideas, and products. Under the idea of free trade, both parties benefit from the goods received. I buy a vehicle or most goods for a significantly cheaper price than I would ever be able to construct on my own, but the ideas of a better business model also spread to many competitors and other industries, creating a benefit that extended beyond the initial trade. While Ford is easily a clear example, we receive the same beneficial relationship from all successful business no matter the size. All businesses work together unknowingly to drive prices down, bring quality up, and advance our culture. That is the benefit we as a society receive from business, and it is more than a fair deal.

The argument of a social debt or contract at a determined value to be paid by the individual is speculative at best. This assumes the knowledge of all costs rendered and benefits paid. Without an objective, methodical, and scientific way of determining this, such a determination of debt takes into assumption the incalcuable under the limited perception of individuals. Without distinct parallel observations of the alternative conditions, paths, and results, it is purely measuring what can only be seen and not what is unseen. Furthermore, any attachment of such a debt is to bind someone to the servitude of others without their consent. Without the willing and knowledgeable choice made by an adult mind to consent to such an exchange, such actions perpetually bind children to a debt they can never pay. If the parents of such a child consented to the creation of such a debt and contributed to its funding, wouldn’t they instead be the bearers of such debt and have already paid it by the time the child reaches adulthood? Shouldn’t it be up to us as individuals to freely choose to make the debts and contracts that we are bound to? Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine argued that any social contract must be redefined with each generation. I argue that it must never be centrally defined, but left for us to determine as individuals.

I can appreciate the argument people like Obama and Warren are making to some extent. I live my life in accordance with the belief that I should leave the world a better place than I found it, but the manner in which I do so should be up for me to decide. To claim that success comes with a debt ignores what created the success in the first place. Capitalism is a system of servitude. A business fills a need by providing a valued service to individuals at a lower price than they are able to achieve on their own. A person that gains success from a business has provided something valuable to society and their success is evidence of that contribution, not the other way around. This should be what all of our contributions as a society try to create, something that gives us back more than we are able to do on our own.