David R. Henderson  

Henderson on Responsibility for Sequestration

PRINT
The Minimum Wage and Monopsony... "Low-Immigration, Pro-Immigran...

Sam Brock of the NBC affiliate in San Jose came down to Monterey on Wednesday to interview me about the coming sequester of government spending. I didn't realize to what extent the interview would be about "who is to blame." I made the point that although this is not the ideal cut in government spending, or, more correctly, the ideal cut in the growth of government spending, at least it is a cut. So I favor it over doing nothing and over the smoke-and-mirrors solutions that Congress and the President often come up with it. My advocacy of the sequester is somewhere on the cutting-room floor.

Sam, however, made it about who is to blame. I would never use the word "blame" to describe responsibility for a good policy. Here's the video. I make the point about "responsibility" rather than "blame" at about the 1:34 point.


Comments and Sharing


CATEGORIES: Fiscal Policy



COMMENTS (7 to date)
Eric Hanneken writes:

Sam Brock makes your stature seem . . . Friedmanesque.

David R. Henderson writes:

@Eric Hanneken,
I trust that that's "Friedmanesque" in the sense of "statuesque?" Not.
It took a minute but I got it. :-) One of my favorite pictures of Uncle Milty and George Stigler was of them walking down a street at U. of C. They used it on their Ph.D. econ recruiting pamphlet in 1972 and despite the fact that they offered to cover only my tuition (vs. UCLA offering tuition plus TA stipend), that picture almost got me to Chicago. The contrast in heights was comparable. Sam also managed to show my unneat office.

Eric Hanneken writes:

@David Henderson,
At least you were on TV, speaking intelligent sentences. That's the important thing.

Ted Levy writes:

Amazingly parochial presentation by journalist Brock. Is that the best kind of news analysis you get in California, David?

Infopractical writes:

When I watch that news report, I feel certain that your presence is intentionally set up in such a way that those who believe sequestration to be bad would believe your participation to be in support of the negative portrayal of sequestration.

Your authority appears to have be used to support an agenda you disagree with.

Were I in your shoes, I would feel more offended than you have here displayed.

David R. Henderson writes:

@Ted Levy,
Amazingly parochial presentation by journalist Brock. Is that the best kind of news analysis you get in California, David?
It is true that Sam played small ball on this one. I was disappointed. So it's not the best we get but it's not the worst either. This one was one of his best.

R Richard Schweitzer writes:

All forms of intermediation seem to atrophy eventually and decay. This has been true of ideologies, religions, cults, financial services, and especially of communications.

Intermediation in the print media has passed atrophy and is now in decay. Intermediation in the visual broadcast media is in the process of atrophy. In the oral broadcast media it is bifurcating.

The availability of direct communication currently reflected on sites such as this on the Internet remove the perversions and distortions of media intermediation.

Here, the perception of David Henderson that he wishes others to have can be presented; as can others. If anyone wants to demonstrate a different perception of that person, they will have to do it without the tools of intermediation.

Comments for this entry have been closed
Return to top