Preface
Because this isa book for the general public the usual footnotes
or endnotes are omitted. However, for those readers who want 9
‘verify whet is sid here, or to read further on some ofthe subjects
‘covered, the sources of the many fies discussed ee are fisted in
theback ofthe book.
THOMAS SOWELL
"The Hoover Inston
Stanford University
Chapter 1
Politics versus Economics
en we are talking about applied economic polices, we are
no longer talking about pure economic principles, but
about the interactions of politics and economics, The principles of
‘economics remain the same, but the Ukelibood of thote principles
being applied unchanged is considerably reduced, because politics
thas its own principles and imperatives, It isnot just that polii-
cians’ top prorty is getting elected and re-elected, or that their
time horizon seldom extends beyond the next election. The gea-
‘eral public aswell behaves differently when making political deci-
sions rather than economic decisions. Virtually no one puts as
uch time and close attention into deciding whether to vote for
one candidate rather than another as is usually pu into deciding
Whether to buy one house rather than enother—or perhaps even
one car rather than anothet.
The voter’ politial decisions involve having a minute influence
on policies which affect many other people, while economic
decision-making is about having a major effet on one’ own per
Sona well-being. It should not be surprising thatthe quantity and
‘quality of thinking going into these very different kinds of deci-
sions differ correspondingly. One of the ways in which these
decisions differ isin not thinking through political decisions
beyond the immediate consequences. When most voters do notthink beyond stage one, many elected officials have no incentive
to weigh what the consequences will be in later stages—and
considerable incentives to avoid getting beyond what their con-
stituents think and understand, for fear that rival politicians can
dive a wedge between them and their constituents by catering t0
public misconceptions.
“The very way that isues are coaceived tends to be diferent in
sand in economics, Pliccal thinking tends to conceive of,
polices, institutions, or programs in terms of their hoped-for
result—"deug prevention” programs, “profi making” enterprises,
*publicinterest" law firms, ‘gua contro” laws, and so forth. But
for purposes of economic analysis, what matters isnot what goals
are being sought but what incentives and constraints are being cre-
ated in pursuit of those goals. We know, for example that many—
if not most—'profit-making” enterprises do not in fact make
profits, as shown by the high percentage of new businesses that go
‘out of business within a few year after being created. Similarly, it
is an open question whether drug prevention programs actually
prevent or reduce dug usage, whether public interest law firms ac-
‘ually benefit the public, or whether gun contol laws actually con-
trol guns, No economists likely to be surprised when rent contol
laws, for example lead to housing shortages and fail to control
rent, so that cities with such laws often end up with higher rents
than cities without them, But such outcomes may be very supris-
jing to people who think i terms of political rhetoric focussed on
desirable goals
"The point is not simply that various polices may fil to achieve
their purposes. The more fundamental point is thet we need to
lenow he actual cboractrite of the processes st in motion—and
the incentives and constrains inherent in such characterstics—
rather than judging these processes by their goals. Many of the
“unintended consequences" of polices and programs would have
‘
'
|
Politics vera Beonomics
been foreseable from the outset if these processes had been sna~
lyzed in terms of the incentives and constetnts they created, in-
stead of in terms ofthe desirability ofthe goals they proclaimed.
‘Once we start thinking in terms of the chain of event set in mo~
tion by particular poicies—and following these events beyond
stage one—the world begins to look very different.
Politics and the market are both ways of geting some people to
respond to other people’ desires. Consumers choosing which
‘goods to spend their money on have often been analogized to
voters deciding which candidates to elect to public office. How-
eves, the two processes are profoundly different. Not only do
individuals invest very different amounts of time and thought in
making economic versus political decisions, those decisions are
inherently different in themselves, Voters deside wheter ta vote
for one candidate or another but they decide Bowe much of what
kinds of food, clothing, shelter, et. to purchase In short, politi-
‘al decisions tend to be categorical, while economic decisions
tend tobe incremental.
Incremental decisions can be more fine-tuned than deciding
wiich candidate whole package of principles and practices comes
closest to meeting your own desires. Incremental decision-making
also means that not every increment of even very desirable things is
ikewise necessarily desirable, given that there are other thing that
the money coud be spent on afer having anquiced a given amount
‘of a particular good of service. For eximple, although i might be
‘worthwhile spending considerable money to live in a nice home,
buying a second home in the country may or may not be wrth
spending money that could be used for sending a child to college or
for recreational travel overseas. One consequence of incremental de-
You might also like
Fixing Everything: Government Spending, Taxes, Entitlements, Healthcare, Pensions, Immigration, Tort Reform, Crime…Fixing Everything: Government Spending, Taxes, Entitlements, Healthcare, Pensions, Immigration, Tort Reform, Crime…
No ratings yet