As a man of religion, Archbishop Denis Hart is well-placed to understand the thought processes behind the free-market fundamentalism which has dominated economic policy in the Angloshere for decades (The Australian, “By making economy more personal, money will serve us and not rule”, 23/12).

With their mystical belief in the “Invisible Hand” – but not in the quite visible society of humans – neoliberals eschew modern mathematical knowledge which shows, not surprisingly, that just letting economies run on their own may result in academically satisfying equilibria, but is unlikely to produce optimal outcomes for humans.

Rather, these supply-side disciples prefer the folksy wisdom of their 18th century Messiah, Adam Smith – but only selected parts of it, for Smith himself advocated progressive taxation, public education and government infrasructure, all heresy to the modern young radical conservative. It seems that like most religious extremists, neoliberals have little regard for their own holy texts.

Yet Merv Bendle (Letters, 24/12) plays Scrooge to Hart’s Ghost of Christmases Past, giving a “Bah! Humbug!” to the latter’s plea to put people before markets. In the process, Bendle makes some extraordinary claims, denying the existence of any successful managed economies in terms of both production and distribution of wealth (ignoring the many affluent European social democracies), and equating non-market economies with poverty (overlooking the many laissez-faire disaster zones in the developing world).

Research shows that what wealthy nations have in common includes transparent democracy, high education levels, natural resources, and less edifying things like colonial history. Their choice of economic system has little if any relevance.

None the less, Bendle concludes that the Catholic Church should throw its weight behind free-market capitalism. There is a very good reason why this will never happen, and why in the poorest parts of the world the opposite has occurred: the market notoriously fails to justly distribute wealth and in many poor countries is the cause of shocking inequality. Particularly with a Latin American incumbent in Rome, the Church is unlikely to join the neo-liberal cheer squad.

The Australian’s editorial (“Despite challenges, the spirit of progress endures”, 2/1) acknowledges that on most average long term economic measures, life is improving globally, including here in Australia, despite the groundless carping we endure from our insatiable “aspirational class”.

However, the suggestion that increased incomes have resulted from declining union membership is the opposite of what global data shows. In fact, the decline in collective bargaining has softened the link between productivity and pay, meaning that workers benefit less from improvements in the economy.

The editorial cites a real wage rise of about 50% since 1984, but given that real per-capita GDP rose by about 85% in the same period, it could just as well be argued that had more Australians remained in collective bargaining, we may have received more of our fair share of the increased wealth.

The Australian’s editorial warns us to “expect tax increases on the long-term retirement savings of workers” (“Political interest rates are highest in the wrong areas”, 3/10). From what quarter should we expect this? It can’t be from this government, whose proposal is to reduce the anomalous tax concession for the wealthiest 1%, to the same level as the rest of us enjoy.

It’s time for some perspective to balance the “hands off our super!” hysteria. Australia’s richest 1% currently receive a 30% tax break on their contributions, almost twice what those on ordinary incomes get, and at an annual cost to the taxpayer of $30 billion and rising. The government’s proposal to reduce this concession to 15% will partially level the playing field. But the 30% perk will still apply to those earning from $180,000 to $300,000 a year, indicating that, if anything, the changes do not go far enough. Super was never intended to be a tax shelter for the super-rich.

Peter Jacobsen (The Australian, Letters, 12/7) informs us that “Creeping socialism is responsible for most of the woes of Europe”. And here I was thinking that profligate behaviour by unregulated banks was more of a, you know, capitalist kind of thing.

Dennis Shanahan’s story “Swan’s class war lifts Labor vote” (The Australian, 15/5) is labelled an “exclusive”, but somewhat redundantly: only The Australian would use such overblown language to describe a few minor reductions in welfare for the wealthy.