October 11, 2009
Britain's Central Planning Death Panels
October 11, 2009
Free Market M.D.
October 11, 2009
Economies of Scale in Compliance
October 11, 2009
Balan's Challenge
October 10, 2009
The Pleasure of Telling Others What to Do
October 10, 2009
Gonick the Great - and How He Could Have Been Greater
October 9, 2009
More Scott Sumner
October 9, 2009
Not From The Onion
October 9, 2009
Thoughts on a Second Stimulus
With "unilateral disarmament", special interest groups that compete with new imports are disadvantaged and complain, while special interest groups that would export do not gain any benefits and shut up. The majority of people get a tiny benefit and also shut up.
Thus, there is a significant overall political cost to whomever would promote such a policy. Politicians tend to shy away from this.
Because economists don't spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions; uncompetitive and inefficient domestic industries do.
"Because economists don't spend millions on lobbying and campaign contributions; uncompetitive and inefficient domestic industries do."
Agreed. There's no sense in overcomplicating the obvious. The special interests can dictate policy because our system makes it exceedingly difficult for the common person to take them to task. The latter is compelled to act altruistically against those who are often well compensated for their efforts. Am I therefore advocating for the per se system to be substantially changed? Nope, I’m afraid that we will likely not improve very much upon our present form of government. The real only answer is for all of us to cease being hypocrites! We must inform our elected officials that their primary job is not bringing home the most bacon to our respective districts.