Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Walter E. Williams :: Townhall.com Columnist
Stupid, Ignorant or Biased?
by Walter E. Williams
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Sarah Palin make a run at the GOP Nomination in 2012?


President Franklin D. Roosevelt's closest adviser and architect of the New Deal, Harry Hopkins, advised, "Tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect, because the people are too damn dumb to know the difference." Professor Bryan Caplan, my colleague at George Mason University, sheds some light on Hopkins' observation in his new book, "The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies."

Caplan is far more generous than Hopkins. Instead, he says people harbor economic biases, several of which he discusses. There's the anti-market bias, the failure to believe that market forces determine prices. Many believe that prices are a function of a CEO's intentions and conspiracies. If a CEO wakes up feeling greedy, he'll raise prices. They also believe that profits are undeserving gifts. They fail to see that, at least in open markets, profits are incentives for firms to satisfy customers, find least-cost production methods and move resources from low-valued to high-valued uses.

Then there's the make-work bias, where many believe that labor is better to use than conserve. Thus, the destruction of jobs is seen as a danger. Technology, as well as outsourcing, throws some people out of work. Caplan reminds us that in 1800 it took nearly 95 of every 100 Americans, working on farms, to feed the nation. In 1900, it took 40. Today, it takes three. Workers no longer needed to farm became available to produce homes, cars, pharmaceuticals, computers and thousands of other goods. Caplan doesn't make the equation, but outsourcing, just as technological innovation, frees up labor to produce other things as well.

Next is the anti-foreign bias. Caplan explains that there are two methods for Americans to have cars. One is to get a bunch of workers into Detroit factories. Another is to grow a lot of wheat in Iowa. You harvest the wheat, load it on ships sailing westward on the Pacific Ocean, and a few months later the ships reappear loaded down with Toyotas. We have cars as if we produced them. In other words, exchange is an alternative method of production.

Added to the anti-foreign bias is the balance-of-trade fallacy. Caplan says that nobody loses sleep over whether there's a trade balance between California and Nevada, or between him and iTunes. Trade balance fears arise only when another country is involved. The fallacy is not treating all purchases as a cost but only foreign purchases as a cost. There might be another bias as well. Caplan reports that, according to an opinion survey, 28 percent of Americans admitted they dislike Japan but only 8 percent dislike England and a scant 3 percent dislike Canada.

People have a pessimistic bias where they believe economic conditions are not as good as they really are and things are going from bad to worse. This is the message of doomsayers, but the reality is quite different. By any measure of well-being, Americans at the start of this century are far better off than Americans at the beginning of the last century. Perennial doom-and-gloom predictions about resource depletion, overpopulation and environmental quality are exaggerated and often the opposite of the truth. Preaching doom and gloom has been beneficial to the political class. They use it to gain more power and control.

Caplan is one of George Mason University Economics Department's up-and-coming young scholars. In fact, I'm proud to say, he was hired during my department chairmanship. "The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies" is a highly readable and interesting political-economic discussion of why we choose bad policies. Those policies are harmful to the general public but beneficial to particular interest groups who gain from restrictions on peaceable, voluntary exchange. Maybe that's why our founders loathed a democracy and gave us a republic -- which we've lost.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics and is the author of More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Walter Williams' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
The Response
SJ Doc, Ernest Will is right. This is your argument; you defend it. I can provide a "short list," (quantum computing, proliferation of broadband, greater tolerance of gays, grassroots activism through the World Wide Web) but the same thing that was apparent to Ernest Will is apparent to me. You're not looking for a list of unfeared changes; you're looking for a list of favored changes that matches your own. That's why he asked you to provide your preferred list up front. He also suspected something that I'm strongly suspecting: that you are confusing change with progress.

Here are some significant changes I'd like to see that will probably never happen. Would these ever make your "short list," or are these "reactions against socialist meddling" rather than "changes which empower the individual human being?"

Impeachment of judges/justices who invoke foreign court decisions, or indeed anything other than the U.S. Constitution, in their rulings.
Stepped rollback of ALL entitlement programs. Charity is an individual responsibility; not a scheme whereby a politician spends someone else's money in order to get re-elected.
Repeal of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. There was a legitimate reason for not directly electing Senators that was apparently forgotten.
A "Sense of Congress" affirming that this is a republic, NOT a democracy, and legislation directing all American History instruction to explain the difference between the two.

The setup
SJ Doc wrote:

"... Can inkling_lite - or any other such other putatively conservative observer in this forum - put up a short list of significant societal, political, or technical changes you *don't* fear? ...
I would genuinely delight in seeing something among the conservatives on Townhall that is not a reaction *against* socialist meddling in the marketplace or sexual deviants' flouting their pudenda but rather *favoring* significant changes in American life, changes which empower the individual human being to do with his life, his liberty, and his property just whatever in hell he bloody well pleases. ..."

Ernest Will wrote:

'... Since you're the one making the accusations, perhaps you wouldn't mind retaining the burden of proof which is rightfully yours.

Please provide me your "short list of significant societal, political, or technical changes" that you want to unleash on society, and I'll tell you if I fear them or not, and why. ...'

SJ Doc wrote:

"... ...he's missing the point.

Deliberately, if my diagnosis is correct.

Y'see, Earnie, the problem with conservatives' gibbering, inchoate fear of change is that it is a species of free-floating anxiety that they are avid to fix upon any goddamned thing that comes into their ken.

Coupled with this fear of change - this intrinsic terror of the new - is a COMPLETE LACK OF VISION regarding innovation of any kind, or even the possibilr benefit derived from innovation. ...

So what's the conservative's ideal of civilization? Something like...

The long dynasties of Phaoronic Egypt? Imperial China? Japan under the Tokugawa Shogunate? The antebellum South?

But not America! Certainly not! Not with America's inherent possibility of frightening, unsettling, horrible *change*!
"
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.