21 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in constitutional political economy, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: British general election, British politics, Leftover Left
Jeremy Corbyn had 30 years to split from the Labour Party, which he voted against 25% of the time, establish his own party and receive the same reception presumably he would have got without needing to have to run for leader of the Labour Party.
The reasoning Corbyn never split from the Labour Party, and the reason why the left never splits from the Labour Party, is the left knows that it would get far fewer votes on its own rather than piggybacking on the right wing of that party.
The right split from the British Labour Party in the early 1980s to form the Social Democratic party. The right-wing split from the Australian Labor Party at least four times over its history.
The left is never split from the New Zealand Labour Party because it knows that it could never get anywhere even under proportional representation without the image of being part of the traditional Labour Party, centre-left, social democratic, not socialist. Jeremy Corbyn and the rest of the left of British Labour are practising mild mannered entryism. By stealing the brand of the Labour Party, the left obtains far more power than it ever could standing on its own two feet as true believers.
The working hypothesis of the far left everywhere is if the Labour Party were to adopt hard left policies is many more votes.
Labour would win many more votes because the offer of a genuine socialist alternative would shake voters loose of their false consciousness.
The left of the Labour Party never went out on its own to test that hypothesis because they knew in their hearts be lucky to not to lose their deposits.
This is despite the strong rise in third parties in British politics despite first past the post.
The remnants of the communist parties do well at elections in countries such as France, Germany (Linke or Left Party) and Japan and are in government in Greece.
- 53 communist and anti-capitalist parties have been elected worldwide to freely elected parliament in 39 countries.
- The Trots regularly get 4% in French presidential elections while the British SWP is still in the same league as the monster raving loony party.
The right wing of the Labour Party was willing to take its chances under first past the post voting in the House of Commons because it knew that a large part the electorate would vote for it in preference to the remnant of a left-wing run Labour Party.
The combination of these splitters from the British Labour Party and the Liberal party won 25% of the vote, two percentage points behind the British Labour Party.
20 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, human capital, income redistribution, labour economics, labour supply, politics - USA, poverty and inequality, Public Choice, rentseeking, sports economics
Tags: expressive voting, Left-wing hypocrisy, Leftover Left, mass kidnappings, Occupy Wall Street, rational ignorance, rational irrationality, superstar wages, superstars, top 0.1%, top 1%
20 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, economics of bureaucracy, income redistribution, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: antiforeign bias, antimarket bias, bootleggers and baptists, green rent seeking, Henry Hazlett, makework bias, methodology of economics, philosophy of economics
18 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, entrepreneurship, industrial organisation, Public Choice, rentseeking, survivor principle
Tags: competition as a discovery procedure, economics of science, industry policy, losers, picking winners, R&D, The meaning of competition, The pretence the knowledge
18 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in economic history, energy economics, entrepreneurship, environmental economics, global warming, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: Big Solar, creative destruction, green rent seeking, renewable energy, renewable resources, solar energy
15 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in constitutional political economy, economics of crime, environmental economics, global warming, law and economics, liberalism, politics - New Zealand, Public Choice, Rawls and Nozick, rentseeking
Tags: civil disobedience, climate alarmism, expressive voting, Greenpeace, John Rawls, Justice Scalia, Leftover Left, rule of law
The Greenpeace vandals who trespassed at Parliament, climbing up to put signs down the front in flagrant disregard of the most ample possible options for peaceful protest right outside at least had the integrity to plead guilty. That shows some sort of fidelity to law and an acknowledgement that what they did was a criminal offence.
John Rawls makes the point that the purpose of civil disobedience is not to impose your will upon others but through your protest to implore them to reconsider their position and change the law or policy you are disputing.
Rawls argues that civil disobedience is never covert or secretive; it is only ever committed in public, openly, and with fair notice to legal authorities. Openness and publicity, even at the cost of having one’s protest frustrated, offers ways for the protesters to show their willingness to deal fairly with authorities. Rawls argues:
- for a public, non-violent, conscientious yet political act contrary to law being done (usually) with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government;
- that appeals to the sense of justice of the majority;
- which may be direct or indirect;
- within the bounds of fidelity to the law; and
- whose protesters are willing to accept punishment. Although civil disobedience involves breaking the law, it is for moral rather than selfish reasons; the willingness to accept arrest is proof of the integrity of the act.
Rawls argues, and too many forget, that civil disobedience and dissent more generally contribute to the democratic exchange of ideas by forcing the champions of dominant opinion to defend their views.
Legitimate non-violent direct action are publicity stunts to gain attention and provoke debate within the democratic framework, where we resolve our differences by trying to persuade each other and convince the electorate.
Too many acts of non-violent direct action aim to impose their will on others rather than peaceful protests designed to bring about democratic change in the laws or policies of the incumbent government. That ‘might does not make right’ is fundamental to the rule of law. As United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said
The virtue of a democratic system [with a constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech] is that it readily enables the people, over time, to be persuaded that what they took for granted is not so and to change their laws accordingly..
Both sides passionately but respectfully attempt to persuade their fellow citizens to accept their views. Win or lose, advocates for today’s losing causes can continued pressing their cases, secure in the knowledge that an electoral loss today can be negated by a later electoral win, which is democracy in action as Justice Kennedy explains:
…a democracy has the capacity—and the duty—to learn from its past mistakes; to discover and confront persisting biases; and by respectful, rationale deliberation to rise above those flaws and injustices…
It is demeaning to the democratic process to presume that the voters are not capable of deciding an issue of this sensitivity on decent and rational grounds.
The process of public discourse and political debate should not be foreclosed even if there is a risk that during a public campaign there will be those, on both sides, who seek to use racial division and discord to their own political advantage. An informed public can, and must, rise above this. The idea of democracy is that it can, and must, mature.
Freedom embraces the right, indeed the duty, to engage in a rational, civic discourse in order to determine how best to form a consensus to shape the destiny of the Nation and its people. These First Amendment dynamics would be disserved if this Court were to say that the question here at issue is beyond the capacity of the voters to debate and then to determine.
John Rawls’ view that fidelity to law and democratic change through trying to persuade each other is at the heart of civil disobedience reflects the difference between the liberal and the left-wing on democracy and social change as Jonathan Chait observed this week:
Liberals treat political rights as sacrosanct. The left treats social and economic justice as sacrosanct. The liberal vision of political rights requires being neutral about substance.
To the left, this neutrality is a mere guise for maintaining existing privilege; debates about “rights” can only be resolved by defining which side represents the privileged class and which side represents the oppressed…
Liberals believe that social justice can be advanced without giving up democratic rights and norms. The ends of social justice do not justify any and all means.
15 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in development economics, economic history, economics of bureaucracy, economics of regulation, growth miracles, inflation targeting, liberalism, macroeconomics, Milton Friedman, monetary economics, Murray Rothbard, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: Hong Kong, The fatal conceit, The pretense the knowledge
15 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, development economics, economic history, industrial organisation, politics - USA, public economics, rentseeking, survivor principle
Tags: Puerto Rico
Arindrajit Dube
(Co-authored with Ben Zipperer. Posted at Washington Center for Equitable Growth)
Puerto Rico today faces a serious debt crisis, recently defaulting on a bond payment. The proximate cause is a slowdown in economic growth since the mid-2000s, which has reduced tax revenues, and a declining labor market, where employment growth has been mostly in the red since 2007.
There are many explanations for the economic downturn and the resulting fiscal crisis, but some commentators have incorrectly blamed the island’s high minimum wage. To be sure, the federal minimum wage—which has applied to Puerto Rico since 1983—is much more binding there than it is on the mainland. Because hourly wages are substantially lower in Puerto Rico compared to the U.S. mainland, the federal minimum wage policy affects more of the workforce there. In 2014, for example, the federal minimum wage stood at 77 percent of the median hourly wage in Puerto Rico…
View original post 117 more words
12 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, environmental economics, global warming, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: Australia, China, climate alarmism, climate change treaties, free-riders, game theory, global warming, international free riders, international public goods, public goods
12 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking, urban economics
Tags: Director's Law, expressive boating, green rent seeking, housing affordability, land supply, land use planning, Left-wing hypocrisy, NIMBYs, rational ignorance, rational irrationality, zoning
All homeowners have an incentive to stop new housing because if developers build too many homes, prices fall, and housing is many families’ main asset. But in cities with many Democrats and Green Party members, environmental concerns might also be a factor. The movement might be too eager to preserve the past.
Matthew Kahn
via Why Middle-Class Americans Can’t Afford to Live in Liberal Cities – The Atlantic.
10 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, currency unions, economic growth, economic history, economics of regulation, entrepreneurship, Euro crisis, fiscal policy, global financial crisis (GFC), income redistribution, labour economics, labour supply, macroeconomics, Marxist economics, poverty and inequality, Public Choice, public economics, rentseeking
Tags: British disease, entrepreneurial alertness, Eurosclerosis, France, German unification, Germany, growth of government, sick man of Europe, social insurance, Sweden, taxation and entrepreneurship, taxation and investment, taxation and labour supply, welfare state
The Washington Centre for Equitable Growth recently tweeted that inequality harms growth in the USA as compared to Sweden, France, Germany and the UK. It was relying on some dodgy OECD research.
The Washington Centre for Equitable Growth did not check their inequality ratios they tweeted against trends in economic growth and economic policy since 1970, which I have reproduced in figure 1. Germany is not included in figure 1 because German data on growth is thrown askew by German unification.
Figure 1: Real GDP per British, French and Swede aged 15-64, 2014 US$ (converted to 2014 price level with updated 2011 PPPs), 1.9 per cent detrended, 1970-2013
Source: Computed from OECD Stat Extract and The Conference Board. 2015. The Conference Board Total Economy Database™, May 2015, http://www.conference-board.org/data/economydatabase/
Figure 1 shows that France has been in a long-term decline since the late 1970s despite the blessings of a more equal society than the USA as championed by the Washington Centre for Equitable Growth. In figure 1, a flat line is growth in real GDP per working age person, PPP, at the same rate as the USA for the 20th century, which was 1.9% per year. A falling line in figure 1 indicates growth of less than 1.9% while a rising line indicates growth in real GDP per working age person, PPP, in excess of 1.9%. In figure 1, France hardly ever grew at the trend rate of growth for the USA of 1.9% per year and was frequently well below that rate.
Sweden tells a slightly different story in figure 1 because of regime change in the early 1990s when Sweden adopted more liberal economic policies where taxes and government spending were reduced:
The rapid growth of the state in the late 1960s and 1970s led to a large decline in Sweden’s relative economic performance. In 1975, Sweden was the 4th richest industrialised country in terms of GDP per head. By 1993, it had fallen to 14th.
That regime change reversed a long economic decline since 1970 under the egalitarian policies of the Swedish Social Democratic Party. Under the Swedish Social Democratic Party, Sweden was almost always growing at less than the trend rate of growth of the USA, which was 1.9%. That position reversed only when there was a turn away from big government and high taxes.
Figure 1 tells a similar story for the British economy: a long economic decline in the 1970s when Britain was the sick man of Europe. Under Thatchernomics, Europe had a long economic boom for 20 years or more – see figure 1.
In the 1970s, under the high taxes of the Heath, Callaghan and Wilson administrations, as figure 1 shows, Britain was the sick man of Europe. With the election of the Thatcher Government, Britain soon grew at better than the US trend growth rate for nearly 20 years through few exceptions.
09 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in economics of regulation, environmental economics, environmentalism, health economics, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: antiscience left, expressive voting, GMOs, green rent seeking, Greenpeace, Left-wing hypocrisy, precautionary principle, rational ignorance, rational irrationality
09 Aug 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied welfare economics, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: coal power, electric cars, green rent seeking, hydroelectric power, nuclear energy, nuclear power, offsetting behaviour, The fatal conceit, The pretense to knowledge, unintended consequences
- The benefit is large and positive in many places in the west because the western electricity grid is relatively clean – primarily a mix of hydro, nuclear, and natural gas.
- The benefit is large and negative in many places in the east because the eastern electricity grid primarily relies more heavily on coal and natural gas.
via Economist’s View.
Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries
Recent Comments