As Opposed To Political Gamesmanship?
Right now the concept of stimulus packages being passed by Congress or not passed by Congress is a political idea that has very little to do with economic reality, and much more to do with one party or the other scoring political points. It is certain that hundreds of billions of dollars, perhaps trillions, are in play — but very little attention is being paid to the larger questions of what we expect to receive from those dollars. Barney Frank will tell you that he never saw a bridge built without a tax increase, and John Boehner will ask how contraceptives stimulate the economy, and those might be interesting sound bites, but they’re very narrow. In much of what I’ve read in the past several months, most of the analysis (or what passes for it) has been for entertainment value and gamesmanship: who is on offense and who is on defense. Which pol is getting slammed and which pol is looking sharp. Which party is “winning” and which is “losing”.
Very little of it has had to do with economic reality, and I don’t know about you, but the general sense of unease that so many people (from both parties) are feeling has everything to do with the fact that at some level, large numbers of people in this country correctly sense that their lives are burning while the politicians fritter. That social unease will get worse unless we take positive steps to change it.
To advance that aim, I’d like to ask people to please read something that could instead get them thinking about what our real priorities in an economic recovery should be. This is not something that politicians or people who are primarily interested in fiscal policy as an extension of politics are very good at doing, and that fact alone is one of the more disappointing aspects of all the recent calumny. It’s going to be a shame to spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars without people talking about the real issue. So let’s start a new discussion based on something approaching a view of reality that describes the situation, asks some questions, sets some goals, provides some rationale, and explains what that rationale and those goals would require. In other words, let’s look at this as a problem we’d actually like to try to solve.
I recommend the following article and I want to offer it up for discussion here at Redstate:
Economy Recovery Plan for the United States by Philip Greenspun, November 2008.
I have no idea which political party Philip Greenspun belongs to, aside from the Party of Smart People, and hopefully reading that article will start some debate about the ideas and the concepts, not the partisanship. Greenspun is asking the right questions here, offering tangible suggestions, and most importantly, he understands how to make the distinction between the political debate and the economic debate. Politicians are not business managers — their entire world operates according to different rules, with different goals. If we listen to the politicians instead of telling them what to do, we will truly deserve what we get from the various and sundry “stimulus packages.” And what we might get, in the end, is a national economy that looks like Michigan writ large.
The ideas in this essay have virtually nothing in common with those one hears from politicians. Why? The perspective of a politician is completely different than that of a business manager. For the politician, U.S. citizens and corporations are an endless reserve of potential tax dollars ripe for the taking. The politician’s career goals are generally 2-6 years ahead. An increased tax today will yield an instant revenue increase. It might take businesses or individuals subject to the tax 5 or 10 years to move their factories or otherwise adjust. By that time the politician will have moved up to the next office. Giving public employees a more costly pension may avoid a strike and will cost almost nothing in the short run. By the time the pension obligation has buried a city or state, the politician has moved on to a national office.
How about federal politicians? They spend all of their time in Washington, D.C., surrounded by wealth and beautiful marble architecture. They give speeches every day where they refer to the U.S. as the greatest country in the world. Humans are highly suggestible and we eventually begin to believe our own rhetoric. A person who is constantly saying how the U.S. is the world’s best country is unable to imagine that a multinational company might move its headquarters to Ireland or Dubai and turn the U.S. operation into one of many local subsidiaries.
The business manager sees a newspaper article about how South Korea public school graduates have the highest math achievement of any nation worldwide and thinks “Maybe we should set up a laboratory over there.” The politician thinks “How can I use this number to damage my opponent in the next election?”
Please read the rest and treat this as a comment thread. As a Republican I find a lot to like in many of the things Greenspun is saying, and I think you will too. Even if I weren’t a Republican, I would recommend this article because I respect Greenspun’s intelligence and I also truly, deeply know that the only way to move America on a path toward economic recovery is to really understand what is being said here. More importantly, we will get a lot of things we didn’t ask for from the “stimulus packages” and none of the things we want, unless we think about what we want in the context of economic reality. All of the “shovel ready” projects in the world will not change the very high unemployment rate that America will suffer from if our politicians from both parties are not forced by the voters in both parties to grasp the basic facts of what will make our economy recover over the long term. It’s time to stop the partisan fighting for its own sake, or at least tone it down. Let’s get down to understanding what a real economic recovery will require.
Humbly submitted for your comments and criticism.
Steve Maley
Neil Stevens
Daniel Horowitz
I can't argue with this guy's proposals either.
Brian Hibbert (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 8:35AM EST (link)They read like they are influenced by Uncle Milton’s writings which I consider the most common sense economics in history.
Candidate for Trustee of Illinois Central College
Socialism doesn’t work. It looks nice on paper, but it’s been tried and it’s failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Take back our party!
Check out Unified Patriots
If you really read that article
kowalski (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 11:19AM EST (link)If you really read that article over a few times slowly and you’ve ever run a business or even worked for a business, then you know in your bones that most of the things he’s talking about there make sense.
The details are going to be important but one of the purposes of this post is to try and get people thinking in terms that apply to the problem. A discussion of unions, product liability laws, tax rates, depreciation, education, and all the rest of the subjects in that post aren’t going to help us if we treat those subjects as means to a political end: they’re simply the facts of life.
It’s about time more people started to think about the economy in terms of economics, not politics. We’ve drifted a long way from that in the past several months, and we’re poised to spend several hundred billion dollars based largely on a political contest. The reality is that if the “stimulus” doesn’t work, the politicians know that they’ll live to have another political contest.
Defend Liberty — Join the NRA | Live in Massachusetts? Join GOAL.
Greenspun's comment about our
beaming Tuesday, February 3rd at 12:51PM EST (link)military overseas is something I’ve wondered about for some time now. I realize we have allies that we would like to help, but if for instance Europe was left to pay 100% of their own defense would their Euro-socialism be sustainable without America’s capitalist dollars ? It may put an end to the debate about ” socialism works “.
Maybe it’s time to worry about ourselves and make capitalism work and make the world see what we have done for them.
Surely Europe [ and I use them as an example only, with 550 bases worldwide ] feels safe because of our military paid for with our tax dollars. It doesn’t take long to mobilize if need be.
It’ about the economy not getting reelected.
Well I think that part was a bit glib
kowalski (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 1:04PM EST (link)The part about still being able to bomb people who didn’t like us was one of the few really glib points in an overwhelmingly thought-provoking article.
If we want to cut some money from the defense contracting business and still have enough left over to make sure our defense needs are met, I have it on good authority that we should begin with a lot of the waste in Washington.
It’s funny that so much of the waste emanates from there, but it really shouldn’t surprise anyone. America needs to have the strongest military in the world, and I think everyone around the world (even the people who gripe and moan about us) enjoy the fact that the American people spend so much and rely so much on the strength and capability of our military.
But there’s a lot of money to be saved, and a lot of that starts inside the Beltway. I would have written that section of Greenspun’s commentary differently because I know through osmosis just how profligate the contracting process can be. Once again, politicians use that to score political points.
I say that we should examine military expenditures with as much scrutiny as we should with Health and Human Service budget expenditures, particularly in the area of contracting.
Look at this piece of $200,000 delapidation, for instance: You can buy one of these down at the local Yamaha dealer for a whole lot less, just without the tough-guy wheels and tires.
And the trailer version costs more than a million dollars.
Somewhere in Washington there are a bunch of people laughing all the way to the bank.
Defend Liberty — Join the NRA | Live in Massachusetts? Join GOAL.
BTW the redesigns let it
kowalski (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 1:07PM EST (link)Travel up to 45 miles per hour on a highway. For $200,000 the Department of Defense might be procuring the fastest vehicle ever designed by committee.
Defend Liberty — Join the NRA | Live in Massachusetts? Join GOAL.
Here's the Yamaha
kowalski (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 1:21PM EST (link)It goes for $12,000 MSRP. Now it is true that the new “Growler” vehicle is tougher.
But almost 17 times tougher?
I think about 15 of those 17 times of toughness wound up in the pockets of people overpricing the project.
I know, people will get angry because I’m picking on a military vehicle: but as Tom Daschle knows very well, some of the same lobbyists for military contracts also work on H&HS contracts. A whole bunch of them, in fact.
Defend Liberty — Join the NRA | Live in Massachusetts? Join GOAL.
That Yamaha looks like a camo golf cart
Beaglescout (Diary) Tuesday, February 3rd at 11:48PM EST (link)The Growler looks like a jeep with GI Joe wheels. They look like two very different beasts.
The reason why so many military contracts are over budget is the services and Congress continue to mess with the project scope and design throughout the design and build phases, and even later. When the majority of pieces for a ship are custom designed and built, and precious little is standard issue that can be produced again and again, then costs skyrocket. When production gets cut short the cost of each goes even higher, because you’ve got to pay for the capital expense of building that production line somehow. It’s not quite as bad with aircraft, but the design phase is just as bad. Just think of what has happened to the supposedly “affordable” JSF35, that is now the second most expensive fighter plane the US has and several times the cost of competitive planes like the Gripen and SU30. It may be better than those competitive planes, but not the same way the F22 is. The F22 can defeat any of those competitor planes without much worry. The JSF35 pilot does not have a game changing advantage like the F22, and if we ramp up production of the F22 we can get it for not all that much more than the JSF35. That’s what other countries are thinking too. They don’t want the JSF35 when they can get a near equal for lots less, and maybe the US will sell some F22s if they grease the right palms; the point being “what is the point to the JSF35 anyway?”
American ships are almost all over a billion each. And Humvees and MRAPS all cost multiple hundreds of thousands. New US rifles cost several thousand each. In the American military, the perfect is the enemy of the good. And it is driving costs into the stratosphere. In the meantime, it took a revolution in military affairs to relearn the lessons of Algeria and Vietnam and apply them to Iraq.
I tend to think it’s all those lawyers. They infest the Pentagon and the services these days in a way they never did back in the days when the US used to decisively win every war it ever even thought about fighting. Our new president and his wife are both lawyers, as is the VP and Secretary of State. Almost every Democrat in congress is a lawyer, and too many Republicans are as well. Every command decision that comes out of Washington has to have legal approval. The oligarchy of the judiciary is strangling the military the same way it’s strangling every other part of this great country. And the biggest beneficiary of the lawfare waged against the US military is our enemy, the eternal world-wide Jihad, that does not obey any laws but its own cruel ones, but laughs at and despises both us and our laws.
“A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.”