Jim Pethokoukis writes that he “would advise Republicans not to ignore income inequality (not that I’m saying Ramesh is recommending that).” He needn’t have worried about misrepresenting me; I basically am recommending that. I want conservatives to stand for some policies that would probably increase inequality, some that might reduce it, and some that would have unpredictable effects on it.

Jim wants Republicans to take on crony capitalism, and I agree that they should. But: 1) The main reasons I want them to do that are to reduce unfairness, stand for sound principles of what government should do, and let the market allocate resources. Reducing inequality is not a major reason I want them to take on these fights. 2) I don’t think their public case for anti-cronyist policies would be more persuasive or attractive if they sold them on the basis of combating inequality. And 3) I’m skeptical that success against cronyism would have any significant effect on the income-inequality statistics.

I think we’re basically in the same place, though, even if we’re taking slightly different routes there.