I heart Tim Harford. He does great stuff in popular economics. Too bad his lessons won't be heard in the capitals of deficits and grand designs.
Perhaps we can call it evolutionary economics for dummies. Think of the organization -- any organization -- as an organism. This organism is the basic unit within some evolutionary fitness landscape. That organism is going to live or die -- unless of course it's a heavily subsidized zombie (like General Electric).
Lately I've noticed a cliche meming about in the chatterscape: one side accuses the other of not engaging in "grown up" conversation. It's used so much lately that - if you read - you'll already be tired of it by now.
But Kevin Williamson says something a little subtler in this video. He's not using this tired old trope about people who disagree with him being puerile. He's actually saying that people disposed to socialism have certain psychological characteristics one normally associates with adolescence. It's probably still insulting to a socialist, but the point has a little more substance than the "grown up conversation" meme.
So has the political response to global warming ever been about mitigation? It doesn't appear so. Whatever you think about science of climate change, one cannot deny that:
Political triangulation around climate change has been primarily about resources transfers to the above groups. Notice how these groups reinforce one another: Environmental groups provide the moralistic veneer, climate scientists provide the "consensus" and special interests provide money to politicians who, in turn, pass climate bills that benefit the above. As I've written elsewhere:
Of course, the mainstream media and all those, like Timmer, who sip from the climate information cascades, want to believe the master narrative. They don’t want to think there are some nefarious forces behind this venal and wasteful web of relationships. Indeed, even if Michael Mann was able through computer models magically to limn our climate future to the last detail, we would still have to look at the Climate Industrial Complex and shudder. So here we go again, offering the lessons of public choice theory. Climate change like most issues in Washington is an object less in what Nobel Laureate James Buchanan calls “politics without romance:”
If the government is empowered to grant monopoly rights or tariff protection to one group, at the expense of the general public or of designated losers, it follows that potential beneficiaries will compete for the prize. And since only one group can be rewarded, the resources invested by other groups—which could have been used to produce valued goods and services—are wasted. Given this basic insight, much of modern politics can be understood as rent-seeking activity. Pork-barrel politics is only the most obvious example. Much of the growth of the bureaucratic or regulatory sector of government can best be explained in terms of the competition between political agents for constituency support through the use of promises of discriminatory transfers of wealth.
Al Gore notwithstanding, it’s Buchanan’s work that won him the Nobel. We should pay attention.
The Climate-Industrial Complex is a perfect term. I wish I could take credit for it. (In Michaels's talk above, he discusses Eisenhower's warning about the technocratic/scientific elite. Prescient, indeed.)
WARNING: Free or Equal peek. If you want to wait till Fall 2011, public television will air this in its entirety... Otherwise, enjoy this extensive 15-minute preview.
Yesterday I reminded readers about Milton Friedman's Century. Some of you will want to celebrate by inviting a speaker. Others will want to write op-eds. But some may be at a loss for what to do. If you're struggling to think of a way to celebrate the Friedman centennial, we have an easy answer: Screen Free or Equal for an audience in your area.
Free or Equal, hosted by Johan Norberg, lets you walk in Professor Friedman's footsteps around the world and consider his legacy thirty-plus years after the airing of the original Free To Choose. This one-hour documentary will be the perfect conversation starter for your group and a great way to celebrate the man whose ideas have had such a transformative effect on humanity.
Whatever you decide to do, you can let us know here.
Here in 2011, we're starting to see the first stirrings of interest in Milton Friedman's Century. The momentum is building. Organizations like the John Locke Foundation, the Seasteading Institute and Reason have committed to celebrating in some way.
Now it's your turn. Will your organization:
Like 1980, 2012 will be a critical year for the shape of things to come. What better way to help in that shaping than by celebrating the man whose ideas saved millions of people from poverty? Why not talk about the ideas of the person who embodied the liberty movement? If we can sing from Friedman's hymn sheet, our chorus will be be heard.
Interpelando o novo Ministro da Educação, Ana Benavente, no Público de ontem, perguntava:
Tem afirmado publicamente a sua conceção de uma Escola centrada em três pilares: exames (muitos), que servirão para avaliar alunos e professores, conteúdos disciplinares estritos e prova de entrada na profissão docente. Como garante que tais orientações trarão melhores aprendizagens para todos os jovens face aos desafios do mundo atual?
Esta notícia, apesar do seu título, comporta duas versões para o (muito) provável emagrecimento da actual rede ferroviária pelo que haverá que aguardar para sabermos da real extensão do encerramento de linhas. A propósito dela, Luís Menezes Leitão, escreve:
"Confesso que não consigo deixar de encarar esta medida como um símbolo da decadência nacional. Uma das grandes realizações do fontismo em pleno séc. XIX foi o desenvolvimento do caminho-de-ferro. (...)
Agora vamos assistir a mais um enorme encerramento das linhas. Lá ficarão os carris sem comboios a testemunhar as realizações de épocas passadas, incompatíveis com a dura realidade do tempo presente.
Fontes queria fazer obra. Diziam-lhe que não havia dinheiro. Fontes, ignorou esse pequeno detalhe indo buscar o dinheiro (empréstimos) onde ele existia (bancos externos). A reprodutibilidade do investimento foi miserável. A coisa acabou na bancarrota de 1892.
Recent Comments