Here’s a letter that I sent yesterday to The State (of Columbia, SC):
Asked why he failed to
disclose his receiving, free-of-charge, $250,000 worth of renovation
work on his private residence, Sen. Ted Stevens explained, as you
summarize it, "that some details may have gotten lost amid the busy
life of a senator: the committee meetings, the long hours and the
challenges that come with representing a state four time zones away"
("Stevens combative in questioning during trial," October 17).
I
see the problem. And it suggests that Sen. Stevens (and his overworked,
travel-weary colleagues in Congress) must also be unaware of the
details that permeate those massive bailout bills, omnibus spending
statutes, and other such pieces of legislation. No busy mortal can
possibly keep track of these details. So it would be only right for
Sen. Stevens and those Senators who’ve testified in his defense as
character witnesses to renounce the vast bulk of legislation that
they’ve passed as being filled with provisions too numerous and
detailed for such busy pooh-bahs to have carefully pondered – or even
to have noticed.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
I can no more imagine myself behaving as a successful politician behaves — kissing babies in public; telling strangers that I feel their pain; assuring strangers that I’m to be trusted to spend their money more wisely than then will spend it — than I can imagine myself being a mosquito or a venus fly trap. It is simply inconceivable that any decent human being would behave in ways that the typical politician behaves.
And yet, so many people — so many decent people — believe in (or at least crave, child-like) secular salvation through secular saviors. It’s no surprise, then, that persons unashamed to act deceitfully and disingenuously crawl out from under their rocks to pose as saviors.
Podcast RSS Feed
Full EconTalk Text
{ 18 comments }
Don,
Would you consider reading the part of Coriolanus in an audio production?
Feigning sincerity is the mark of a con man.
"I'm to be trusted to spend their money more wisely than then will spend it "
It's not just about politicians spending your money for you. As Obama put it, 95% of the population should make him the head of the mafia, because he will extort 5% of the population and distributed it to the rest of the population.
If you are greedy and have a myopic view of costs and benefits you should form a majority and vote for a Don that will steal from the minority.
And yet, so many people — so many decent people — believe in (or at least crave, child-like) secular salvation through secular saviors. It's no surprise, then, that persons unashamed to act deceitfully and disingenuously crawl out from under their rocks to pose as saviors.
I agree. But I have to wonder, isn't this supply trying to meet demand, just the way a free market is supposed to work?
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings. Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I Sc 2
People keep electing these trolls. They get what they deserve.
Bill K – there is nothing free market(supply/demand) about government. It's legalized extortion.
Don,
Methinks thou art coming closer and closer to my level of cynicism and disgust.
Just keep in mind, if you give it to them, they will squander it.
I speak of both money and trust.
Crusader – I agree with you and said it in jest. It is extortion, nothing free about it, and yet… the "con men" to use Sam's term wouldn't be able to "sell" their nefarious wares if we didn't "buy" what they are selling, which I think was Don's point. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice… I'm not sure who has more cynicism and disgust, vidyohs or me. But it's not merely disgust at "them", it's disgust at the nature of all men which I also share.
I hope that politicians are con-men. Con-men can be shunned and punished when their scheming is exposed. The scary thought is that they aren't con-men, because that means the voters know what they're "selling" and mean to "buy" it.
"…isn't this supply trying to meet demand, just the way a free market is supposed to work?"
Bill K,
I think you're absolutely spot on, and there's no reason to jest. There is a market for secular saviors, and those in the market to be saviors are bidding up the cost. The cost keeps rising, so I guess we haven't found the clearing price yet.
I'm not talking about cost measured in money. Their currency is liberty and they'll take all you're willing to give.
But Lee, are you hoping that when Obama says, "95% of people will not have to pay higher income taxes under my plan", we voters don't know what we are trying to "buy"? Is Obama really conning people when he offers "hope" like this? I would maintain that we people know exactly what we are "hoping" for. I don't think Mr. Average Voter is so stupid that he does not calculate where his own personal advantage lies, politically speaking.
Well, they don't have to actually raise taxes to get more out of us.
The printing press at the US Mint will do the job.
"The printing press at the US Mint will do the job"
My favorite load of BS coming from people supporting flooding the system with dollars is "we'll worry about inflation later, we need liquidity now". So when it it comes time to start reducing money to combat inflation what's that gonna do to the economy? Oh yeah, same thing it did 2 years ago, bring us to where we are today?
I don't mean to be disagreeable here.
But I do think that there are some people, on the political Left and the political Right, who enter politics for idealistic reasons.
Perhaps we should be more concerned about those who support higher taxes and more government intrusion into the economy for idealisitc reasons than those who support these policies for reasons of self-interest.
TC,
What's the difference? It seems to me that the effect is the same.
Amen borther!
But it's not merely disgust at "them", it's disgust at the nature of all men which I also share.
Posted by: Bill K | Oct 19, 2008 10:21:03 PM
A pig never sees his own trough as an entitlement. It is all the other troughs that he can't get to that bothers him most.
I'm with Bill K. I'm actually amazed it has taken American democracy this long for the majority to do this, but here we are. The only question for the politicians at this point is how much do you have to feed the golden goose before it starves (they won't consider the possibility that it goes somewhere else).
But I do think that there are some people, on the political Left and the political Right, who enter politics for idealistic reasons.
No doubt, but when they get into office, they learn the ropes if they want to be "effective" and to advance in stature.
Ron Paul is as you describe and it took many years and much abuse, and a confluence of circumstances before the media began to show him as anything but a flake.