Arnold Kling  

Come Back July 20

Social Security Privatization ... Comment of the Week, 2003-07-1...

I will be on vacation until July 17, and I presume it will take me a few days to get back to blogging.

Meanwhile, TechCentralStation has a couple of articles of mine that they may run while I am away. One concerns the issue of outsourcing to India as an example of free trade. The other concerns the Howard Dean campaign's support from Walden Puddle, as I describe those who applaud decentralization in the form of the Internet and who decry decentralization in the form of free markets.

And, of course, the comment threads are available.

Comments and Sharing

CATEGORIES: International Trade

COMMENTS (7 to date)
Brad Hutchings writes:

Nice insight in the Walden Puddle essay. We definitely need the same fervor for an "end-to-end" approach to economics as there is among the Internet crowd for the net. Now there is an interesting thought if I can quietly break my arm patting myself on the back... End-to-end economics. Keep government out, and encourage the middle actors (corporations, ala ISPs in the net model) to act transparently as much as possible. Kinda like how it's acceptable for ISPs to block port 25 because of the spam problem, but we don't want Sky Dayton (founder of EarthLink) blocking access to all the fun anti-Scientology sites.

Another totally unrelated thought... Shouldn't the essay have been posted to


Brad Hutchings writes:

Here's another great example of Walden Puddlers...

The argument is that file sharing should be end-to-end without interference from the RIAA or government, but the file sharing moguls would support a tax on CD burners to compensate the record industry for lost sales. Gee, how considerate.


David Thomson writes:

Howard Dean virtually guarantees a Democrat disaster. He is far too the left on many key issues---and more importantly, his supporters will not tolerate his eventual pragmatic repositioning to the political center. These folks are ideological true believers who refuse to be kind towards those who become “mealy mouthers.” A Ralph Nader type is likely to take full advantage of the situation. Furthermore, the other Democrat national candidates are compelled to match Dean’s liberal zeal. Even if Dean fails to capture the nomination, he will have severely damaged the ultimate nominating victor.

Why are so many Democrats acting so stupidly? My guess is that they sense the inevitability of President Bush’s reelection. Thus, they might as well opt for ideological purity. Allow me to be blunt: the Democrats only chance in 2004 is if our country is faced with an economic or foreign policy calamity. They literally have to get up in the morning and pray for a national disaster.

I also hope that Arnold Kling and his family enjoy their vacation. What will the rest of us do during this time? We can perhaps rob gas stations or mug old ladies. Oh well, I’m sure we will think of something.

Eric Krieg writes:

As a True Believer myself, albeit on the conservative side, I can see the appeal of a Dean. It's nice to have somebody who says EVERYTHING you believe. That's the way I am with Newt.

The problem is that we True Believers are a small part of the electorate, and guys like Newt and Dean have a habit of saying things that don't appeal to the majority of the electorate and, in fact, can be used by their enemies to get the majority to loathe them.

They can get themselves into a situation where what they say is simply written off as something from a lunitic off his meds. That's what happened to Newt, and I think that's where Dean is headed very quickly. Ann Coulter falls into this category too.

Dean is Karl Rove's wet dream. That in and of itself should turn the True Believers off of Dean. After all, there is no one more hated by big time liberals than Karl Rove.

David Thomson writes:

I cannot see any of the Democrat candidates as national figures able to entice voters across the political spectrum. Every last single one of them seems like they are restricted to mere regional success. The Democrats also have another serious obstacle: Terry McAuliffe and his cohorts have set up the nomination process to finish in the very early part of next year. This places far too much emphasis on prematurely raising enormous sums of money. The hard core ideologues inevitably dominate the contest. What about the claim that Howard Dean actually represents the political middle of the road? Where do you want the Brooklyn Bridge you just bought delivered?

I am not being even slightly hyperbolical or indulging in tongue in cheek rhetoric when asserting that the Democrats must pray for a national disaster. That is there only real chance for victory in 2004.

Eric Krieg writes:

Yeah, it's hard to believe that a Governor of Vermont is going to play down South. Worse than that, Dean isn't even a real Vermontian. He grew up on the upper east side of Manhattan. He comes from old money. His family is a bunch of Rockafeller Republicans.

Again, I just don't see that playing out. Nobody from Texas or Florida is going to vote for that.

Lieberman would be a fine candidate, but the True Believers can't stand him. I don't think that he can raise the money needed to be competitive.

Jawan writes:

I think it is too premature to think that what will be the situation in Nov 2004. First things come first and Dean needs to get Dems nomination. If he gets it by being left of the center, he will have a good chance to give Bush a good fight. I think by 2004, Bush and company will start harvesting their own crop, which does not look very promising. It will be fun to watch.

Comments for this entry have been closed
Return to top