Letter to the editor: Pencils, capitalism & socialism | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Pencils, capitalism & socialism

I read with great interest Tom Purcell’s column “Erasing capitalism? Consider the pencil first” (March 19, TribLIVE) and his references to Leonard Read’s essay “I, Pencil.” Contemplating how such an item as seemingly mundane as a pencil could be produced — the basic idea, the type of wood, discovering that graphite was best to use, the design and adaption of the various machines needed throughout the entire process, all done without interference from government — truly does point to how socialism will not work in our country.

To quote Purcell: “Even more amazing is this: No one person could possibly manage the millions of decisions made by the millions of people who produce pencils’ ingredients.”

Read had a firm grasp on capitalism vs. socialism. I could take one more — and, quite possibly, the most important — principle from Read’s treatise: Consider the teamwork and compromise needed to produce the pencil. From original idea to final product, teamwork and compromise in every phase had to be phenomenal for an item that we, today, find so very commonplace.

“I, Pencil” should be required reading for all politicians for each to understand capitalism vs. socialism and also to learn that teamwork and compromise work better than party against party.

George A. West

Ligonier Township

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.