Spending of Taxes– Perceptions vs Reality (UK 2014)

https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/559988446107009024

Image

Cause Célèbre – Gender Split behind Celebrity Charity Work | Information Is Beautiful

image

HT: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2014/cause-celebre-gender-split-behind-celebrity-charity-work/

PJ O’Rourke on the Tea Party

Image

Reason for UKIP’s success?

https://twitter.com/david_mentiply/status/535718297766207488

Image

It’s not just Ed Miliband. Labour’s on the wrong side of history » The Spectator

left-in-the-lurch

Politicians can’t be heroes any more. Instead, they have to operate within the tightly drawn tramlines of the global economy.

This is true for those on the left and the right, but the pressure that this places on countries to adopt a low-tax, light-regulation regime is something with which the right is far more comfortable.

via It’s not just Ed Miliband. Labour’s on the wrong side of history » The Spectator.

Why does the Left oppose higher petrol prices?

https://twitter.com/uRntUs/status/533093857307529217

Can millionaires buy their way into Parliament? Lessons from the recent New Zealand election

Two millionaires, one on the left and one on the right, set up parties to get into Parliament in the recent New Zealand election. The millionaire of the left failed abysmally. The millionaire on the right made progress towards getting into Parliament in the 2017 election.

Each spent vast sums of money by New Zealand standards on their party:

  • Kim.com gave $4.5 million to his Internet – Mana party; and
  • Colin Craig gave about $1.5 million to his Conservative party with another millionaire giving $750,000 to the Conservative party.

By way of context, the maximum that a political party can spend on campaign expenses in the three months prior to the election is $1.1 million, plus $25,000 per electorate seat It is contesting. None of this is spent on radio and television advertising because this is allocated for free by the electoral commission based on previous election performance.

One of the major rationales for election finance regulation is to stop the rich buying elections by flooding the airways and billboards with their call to arms and buying politicians short of campaign donations:

Conventional wisdom holds that money plays a central and nefarious role in American politics.

Underlying this belief are two fundamental assumptions:

(1) elective offices are effectively sold to the highest bidder, and

(2) campaign contributions are the functional equivalent of bribes.

Campaign finance regulations are thus an attempt to hinder the operation of this political marketplace.

John Milyo

New Zealand is a good example of how difficult it is to buy votes if you’re underlying message does not work. This is a key point to remember.

The millionaire of the left, Kim.com, gave money to a far left party in New Zealand, recycled a couple of middle-aged lefties, ran a hard left campaign, and won all of 2000 extra party votes over last time out of electorate of about 2 million.

He came unstuck because his sitting electorate MP lost 3000 votes and lost his seat. If he had kept his seat, his party would have been also entitled to a List MP seat because his party won 1.3% of the party vote. Under the New Zealand system of mixed member proportional representation, if you win a seat in Parliament, you’re entitled to list seats to ensure that your representation in Parliament is equal to your party vote.

The millionaire of the right, Colin Craig, ran a socially conservative, economic nationalist campaign and won 4% of the vote. A party needs 5% of the party vote to get into Parliament if your party does not win an electorate seat.

Both of these parties that did not get into Parliament outspent the winning national party which won 60 of the 121 seats in Parliament.

The failure of Kim.com and Colin Craig to buy their way Parliament should be no surprise. Most systematic studies find no effect of marginal campaign spending on the electoral success of candidates.

For example, see Steven Levitt, “Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the Effects of Campaign Spending on Electoral Outcomes in the U.S. House,” Journal of Political Economy 102 (1994): 777–798.

Levitt noted that previous studies of congressional spending have found a large positive effect of challenger spending, but little evidence for effects of incumbent spending. Those studies did not adequately control for inherent differences in vote-getting ability across candidates.

  • His paper examined elections in which the same two candidates face one another on more than one occasion; differencing eliminates the influence of any fixed candidate or district attributes.
  • His estimates of the effects of challenger spending are an order of magnitude below those of previous studies. Campaign spending has an extremely small impact on election outcomes, regardless of who does the spending.

Jeff Milyo also found that a more systematic analysis of the electoral fortunes of wealthy candidates found no significant association between electoral or fund-raising success and personal wealth. For example, see Jeffrey Milyo and Timothy Groseclose, “The Electoral Effects of Incumbent Wealth,” Journal of Law and Economics 42 (1999): 699–722.

A range of rich candidates have attempted to buy Senate seats and gubernatorial posts with little success if they were themselves unappealing candidates.

The best explanation to date for the minor effect of campaign spending on electoral success is competent candidates are adept at both convincing contributors to give money and convincing voters to give their vote.

The finding that campaign spending and electoral success are highly correlated exaggerates the importance of money to a candidate’s chances of winning.

Campaign donors give more money to the expected winners because they want to be on the winning side. What lobbyist doesn’t want to be that the best new friend of the incoming minister?

Legislators tend to act in accordance with the interests of donors, but this is not because of a quid pro quo. Instead, donors tend to give to like-minded candidates. See Steven Levitt, “Who are PACs Trying to Influence with Contributions: Politicians or Voters?” Economics and Politics 10, no. 1 (1998): 19–36.

It is a much surer thing  to give donations to a party that already agrees with you, rather than persuade someone to change their minds with campaign donations. That is a much less certain bet.

Studies of legislative behaviour indicate that the most important determinants of an incumbent’s voting record are constituent interests, party, and personal ideology. These three factors explain nearly all of the variation in incumbents’ voting records. See Steven Levitt, “How Do Senators Vote? Disentangling the Role of Party Affiliation, Voter Preferences and Senator Ideology,” American Economic Review 86 (1996): 425–441.

As an aside, the hard left campaign was instructive in another regard. The hard left honestly believes that there is a large number of people out willing to vote hard left if only their message was properly funded and got a hearing. These would be hard left voters are currently parking their vote  elsewhere, such as with the right wing  parties, apparently.

A massively funded hard left campaign in New Zealand won 1.2% of the party vote. In the 2011 election, the same hard left party, when woefully underfunded, won 1.1% of the party vote. Getting the message out appears to have absolutely no effect on the party vote of the hard left. The median voter theory rules.

The Conservative party was much more successful because the Christian parties in New Zealand usually get about 4% of the vote, except when they’re fighting with each other over who was following the Word of God better, which is rather common.

Furthermore, about 10-15% of the New Zealand election is both socially conservative and economically nationalist. They used to be called working-class Tories. Much of this vote currently votes for the New Zealand First Party– a one-man party – and its leader will be 72 at the next election.

HT: Jeff Milyo

The more accurate opinion polling question

“Regardless of whom they supported, which candidate did people expect to win? Americans consistently, and correctly, said that they thought Mr. Bush would.

A version of that question has produced similarly telling results throughout much of modern polling history, according to a new academic study.

Over the last 60 years, poll questions that asked people which candidate they expected to win have been a better guide to the outcome of the presidential race than questions asking people whom they planned to vote for, the study found.”

Via http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/us/politics/a-better-poll-question-to-predict-the-election.html

the beauty of proportional voting is that even if they don’t vote for you, you’ll probably still get in.

HT: Kiwiblog

Video

Attack Ads uplift democracy

I love attack ads. About the only time you find out anything about the downside of opposing parties and rival candidates is through these attacks ads.

attack ad

A favourite web site is the Attack Ads Hall of Fame where John Geer rightly argues that when candidates attack each other, raising doubts about their respective views and qualifications, we voters benefit. Positive ads are fluff.

Geer collected clips of the best, worse and boomerang attack ads in the post-war presidential elections from his Hall of Fame at his book site In Defense of Negativity Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns

Both web sites are a must view for political junkies. Most of the Attack Ads are based on the truth and they are highly creative and focussed messaging.

Next Newer Entries

The Market Monetarist

Markets Matter, Money Matters...

Darwinian Business

A blog exploring business from an evolutionary perspective, by Max Beilby

Spin, strangeness, and charm

Politics, media bias, science, and psychology

Moneyness

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

Family Inequality

by Philip N. Cohen

What Paul Gregory is Writing About

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

Woman's Place UK

Violence against women and sex discrimination still exist. Women need reserved places, separate spaces and distinct services.

TVHE

The Visible Hand in Economics

Kids Prefer Cheese

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

PILEUS

A Classical Liberal Blog on Political Science, Economics, Philosophy, Law, and More

George Mason Economics Society

Provoking discussion by publishing economic writing

Club Troppo

Economic, legal, political and social commentary

Offsetting Behaviour

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

JONATHAN TURLEY

Res ipsa loquitur - The thing itself speaks

single sex spaces

Single sex spaces are a question of consent

Adventures of a Tudor Nerd

Tudor History from the Wars of the Roses to the Death of Elizabeth I

Weapons and Warfare

History and Hardware of Warfare

Escape Velocity

Visions Of A Freer Future

Economist's View

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

No Punches Pulled

Laughter – the best medicine

TannerOnPolicy

Politics and Policy with a Libertarian Twist

Notes On Liberty

Spontaneous thoughts on a humble creed

Mostly Economics

This blog covers research work in Economics with focus on India.

Map Dragons

Written by map lovers for map lovers

New Historical Express

(Formerly Hatful of History)

FondOfBeetles

a developmental biologist in a gendered world

CONVERSABLE ECONOMIST

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

Barrie Saunders

Thoughts on public policy and the media

The Victorian Commons

Researching the House of Commons, 1832-1868

Coyote Blog

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

American Enterprise Institute – AEI

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

The History of Parliament

Blogging on parliament, politics and people, from the History of Parliament

Catallaxy Files

Australia's leading libertarian and centre-right blog

Climate Audit

by Steve McIntyre

Books & Boots

reflections on books and art

Legal History Miscellany

Posts on the History of Law, Crime, and Justice

Sex, Drugs and Economics

Celebrating humanity's flourishing through the spread of capitalism and the rule of law

The Long Run

the EHS blog

The Undercover Historian

Beatrice Cherrier's blog

Vincent Geloso

Economics, History, Lots of Data and French Stuff

%d bloggers like this: