Except, of course, for economics, where the only way to spur growth is to increase the spoils for the victors and any suggestion that barrier reduction could be a good investment makes you dumb and wrong and anti-growth. Why are you anti growth? Don't you want to grow the economy?
(/s -- which is important to say, because this line of thinking isn't just common, it's consensus)
The Chicago School likes to imagine and behave as if it has a monopoly on economic thought. It does not, and I certainly agree that it would be inappropriate to cast all economists in the same light, but it is not inappropriate to needle Chicago School propaganda from both of these angles.
(/s -- which is important to say, because this line of thinking isn't just common, it's consensus)