Why only Nixon could go to China and Clinton finish the Reagan Revolution

The secret of winning the swing vote is having policies slightly different from your opponent. Recall Tyler Cowen and Daniel Sutter’s Why Only Nixon Could Go to China in Public Choice.

 

File:Nixon Mao 1972-02-29.png

Cowen and Sutter say that a policy could depend on information – on which policies or values everyone could potentially agree, or on which agreement is impossible.

Politicians, who value both re-election and policy outcomes, realise the nature of the issue better through inside and secret information and superior analytical skills (or access to those skills), whereas voters do not have access to such information base or skills.

Only a right-wing president can credibly signal the desirability of a left-wing course of action. A left-wing president’s rapprochement with China would be dismissed as a dovish sell-out. The Nixon paradox held because citizens could vote retrospectively on the issue.

Left-wing parties adopt right-wing policies because they are good ideas that will get them re-elected. Bob Hawke, Tony Blair, and Bill Clinton were firmly camped over the middle-ground.

Only centre-left economic reformers can credibly signal the desirability of their economic reforms because of the brand name capital they invested in distributional concerns and protecting the poor.

Because of their proven record and brand name, they do not jeopardise their support or credibility by seemingly departing from their core values. They must have done so because it was the right thing to do given events and the long-term interests of the lower-income groups they represent.

Bill Clinton balanced the budget and introduced sweeping welfare reforms in 1996 after vetoing two earlier bills because this finally fulfilled his 1992 campaign promise to “end welfare as we have come to know it”. As he signed the bill on August 22, 1996, Clinton stated that the act:

gives us a chance we haven’t had before to break the cycle of dependency that has existed for millions and millions of our fellow citizens, exiling them from the world of work. It gives structure, meaning and dignity to most of our lives.

Jimmy Carter was a bigger deregulator than Reagan. Obama uses drones far more often than Bush did.

Major labour law reforms were passed in Germany under a left-wing government after decades of 10% unemployment rates and average German unemployment spells for about a year. The key part of these reforms came into play just before the global financial crisis hit and was a major reason for the unemployment rate in Germany falling despite the onset of GFC.

Why Only Nixon Could Go to China also explains why hawks such as Reagan and Begin and other right wing party leaders were able to negotiate peace treaties that eluded more dovish politicians who ran on ‘peace now’ slogans.

Reagan signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, walked with Gorbachev in Red Square and seriously offered complete mutual nuclear disarmament in Reykjavik in 1986. Any other American President who offered complete mutual nuclear disarmament would have been impeached.

https://i0.wp.com/www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/photographs/large/c47345-10.jpg

Hawks also have the right negotiating stance. Robert Aumann argues that:

If you are ready for war, you will not need to fight. If you cry ‘peace, peace,’ you will end up fighting… What brings war is that you signal weakness and concessions.

Only then will both sides negotiate because they know that the other side is willing to walk away and perhaps not come back for a long time. Unless it gets reasonable offers that will be binding on both sides for a long time because both win more for honouring their promises rather than threatening war again soon.

Left-wing politicians can deliver economic reforms because they can deliver new voting blocs to the realignment of political coalitions. This new bloc of centre-left voters and some members of existing political and special interest groupings benefit from regrouping and joining new political coalitions that push through the reforms. An ageing society, budget deficits, technological innovations and shifts in production cost structures and in consumer demand can all make the existing political coalitions less rewarding than in the past.

Civil disobedience and political activism are overrated

Most activists take to the streets because if they ran openly for office, they would struggle to get 1% of the vote. Their best options are entryism and branch stacking.

The strength of democracy lies in the ability of small groups of concerned and thoughtful citizens to band together and change things by running for office and winning elections.

That is how new Australian parties such as the ALP, the country party, DLP, Australian democrats and Greens changed Australia. One Nation even had its 15 minutes of fame. Australian state upper houses even have Christian and shooters parties and many independents. Many started in someone’s living room.

Some find democracy frustrating because they cannot win openly at the ballot box even under proportional representation in federal and state upper houses.

When the “shooters” party and “no aircraft noise” party can win ahead of you, it is time to accept that your message of struggle and direct action simply does not resonate with the electorate.

John Rawls, discussing non-violent direct action, argues that in a nearly just society, those who resort to civil disobedience present themselves to the majority to show that, in their considered opinion, the principles of justice governing cooperation amongst free and equal persons have not been respected.

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.

How to negotiate a treaty on global warming

I found the best writer on global warming to be Thomas Schelling. Schelling has been involved with the global warming debate since chairing a commission on the subject for President Carter in 1980.

Schelling is an economist who specialises in strategy so he focuses on climate change as a bargaining problem. Schelling drew from his experiences with the negotiation of the Marshall Plan and NATO.

International agreements rarely work if they talk in terms of results. They work better if signatories promise to supply specific inputs – to perform specific actions now.

  • Individual NATO members did not, for example, promise to slow the Soviet invasion by 90 minutes if it happened after 1962.
  •  NATO members promised to raise and train troops, procure equipment and supplies, and immediately deploy these assets geographically. All of these actions can be observed, estimated and compared quickly. The NATO treaty was a few pages long.

The Kyoto Protocol commitments were not based on actions but on results, to be measured after more than a decade and several elections and a recession or two in between.

Climate treaties should promise to do certain actions now such as invest in R&D and develop carbon taxes that return the revenue as tax cuts. If the carbon tax revenue is fully refunded as tax cuts, less reliable countries, in particular, have an additional incentive to collect the carbon tax properly to keep their budget deficits under control.

No more witty politicians

Did the crowd boo when Gough Whitlam was so ill-mannered as to refer to Kerr’s cur? Did the crowd at the steps of Parliament chant ‘manners, Gough, manners’ rather than ‘shame, Fraser, shame’?

When Gough was challenged by a voter for his view on the contentious issue of abortion, hoping to catch him out, Whitlam replied that he was for abortion and in the heckler’s case, he wished that abortion would be retrospective. Everyone laughed and Gough got off the hook.

30 years ago when public meetings in elections were raucous affairs rather than photo opportunities, being able to give as good as you get was a key political skill.

Public meetings were tests of a politician’s mantle and those that did not fight back were judged to be weak. Stand-up comics had easier initiations.

Wit has lost its place in public discourse.

Robert Muldoon pinged the famous insult “New Zealanders who emigrate to Australia raise the IQs of both countries”.

Consider David Lange:

  • Micheal Bassett was a member of parliament and a cousin on my father’s side of the family. My father delivered him and it became plain in later days that he must have dropped him.
  • To US Ambassador H. Monroe Browne, who owned a racehorse called Lacka Reason: “You are the only ambassador in the world to race a horse named after your country’s foreign policy”.
  • And I’m going to give it to you if you hold your breath just for a moment…I can smell the uranium on it as you lean towards me.
  • …a man whose life is so boring that if it flashed past he wouldn’t be in it.

Paul Keating’s contributions to Australian culture would be lost:

  •  He described his opponents as “mangy maggots”, “intellectual rust buskets”, “gutless spivs”, “foul-mouthed grubs” and “painted, perfumed gigolos”.
  • Keating said of Howard: “From this day onwards, Howard will wear his leadership like a crown of thorns, and in the parliament I’ll do everything to crucify him”.
  • On Andrew Peacock: “A soufflé doesn’t rise twice”.
  • On Wilson Tuckey: “He’d be flat out counting past ten”.

@greenpeaceNZ The expressive politics of action on global warming @RusselNorman

Global warming is part of a political theatre that is made up of the symbols we boo and cheer.

People gain pleasure, excitement and self-definition for cheering for particular parties and worthy causes in the same way as they cheer and boo for sports teams.

Geoffrey Brennan, in Climate Change: A Rational Choice Politics View, Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, July 2009, argues that we will see many countries acting unilaterally to introduce carbon emission policies because expressive voters cheer for such policies.

Brennan argued that the nature of expressive concerns is such that significant reductions in real incomes are probably not politically sustainable in the long term. This suggested to him that much of the carbon reduction action will be limited to modest reductions of a largely token character.

There are many expressive voting concerns that politicians must balance to stay in office and the environment is but one of these. Once climate change policies start to actually become costly, expressive voting support for these policies will fall away.

Abbott’s big bad new tax rhetoric in the last two Australian elections split away the working class and lower-middle class Labor voters who worry more about bread and butter issues.

The inner city Green voters’ high incomes allow them to be more indulgent as to what they cheer and boo for at the ballot box. As a group, Green party voters have the highest average incomes. These high incomes act as a buffer against policies that are otherwise costly to them. But if you scratch an inner city Green voter’s superannuation entitlements, you will find a rather raw hip-pocket middle-class voter.

In Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives: Evidence, Journal of Law and Economics, April 1997, Matthew Kahn and John Matsusaka studied voting behaviour on 16 environmental ballot propositions to estimate the demand for environmental goods.

  • In most cases, rising  incomes and price changes can explain most of the variation in voting; it is not essential to introduce non-economic concepts such as political ideologies.
  • An important price of environmental goods is reduced incomes in the construction, farming, forestry, and manufacturing industries.

Kahn has previously argued that the environmental movement should stop saying that half measures will work and the transition to a green economy will be easy and painless.

The Green parties where I have voted do not sell their message of a green economy and action on global warming as a cause requiring more blood, sweat and tears.

The collapse of the Green vote at the recent Australian federal and state elections demonstrates that many vote Green as a protest vote against the other parties and to feel good about themselves.

The Green vote takes a hammering once Green parties enter into power sharing deals with a government. Green policies are symbols and gestures, not something about half of their voters actually want to see passed into law on a large scale and start paying for in real money.

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.

The economics of the Dallas Buyers Club

Deciding if a new drug is safe is a serious issue. Separate to this is whether the drug is better than existing drugs.

In 1962, an amended law gave the FDA authority to judge if a new drug produced the results for which it had been developed. Formerly, the FDA monitored only drug safety. It previously had only sixty days to decide this. Drug trials can now take up to 10 years.

Who cares if a safe drug works or not? If a new drug does not work or is no better than the existing drugs on the market, the investors in the development of the new drug bear the (unrecoverable) development costs. Capitalism is a profit AND loss system. Losses are a signal that you should try something else.

Sam Peltzman showed in a famous paper in 1973 that these 1962 amendments reduced the introduction of effective new drugs in the USA from an average of forty-three annually in the decade before the 1962 amendments to sixteen annually in the ten years afterwards. No increase in drug safety was identified.

Drugs became available years after they were on the market outside the USA. To quote David Friedman:

“In 1981… the FDA published a press release confessing to mass murder. That was not, of course, the way in which the release was worded; it was simply an announcement that the FDA had approved the use of timolol, a ß-blocker, to prevent recurrences of heart attacks.

At the time timolol was approved, ß-blockers had been widely used outside the U.S. for over ten years.

It was estimated that the use of timolol would save from seven thousand to ten thousand lives a year in the U.S. So the FDA, by forbidding the use of ß-blockers before 1981, was responsible for something close to a hundred thousand unnecessary deaths.”

AZT double-blind trials collapsed in the mid-1980s in the USA because participants sold the drug in the black market.

If memory serves right, Australian drug regulators planned to duplicate these double-blind trials in Australia before approving the drug. Last time I checked, the physiology of Australians was the same as any other human being. What did they plan to find that justified the delay in approving AZT?

The duplicate double-blind AZT trials in Australia were abandoned not because they were mad and evil, but because again the participants sold the drug in the black market. That was to be expected too so the duplicate double-blind AZT trials in Australia in the 1980s were a double evil.

Why call my blog Utopia – you are standing in it?

Welcome to my blog.

My blog reflects where I came from and how I think the world works for better and for worse.

Yes, my background is as a trained economist, but this blog’s title is more to do with how the over-weaning conceit of youth was replaced by an increasingly unreliable memory, a bad back and the odd dose of wisdom.

My mum and dad grew up between the two world wars. Their and my upbringing seem to be light years apart in terms of quality of life.

Longer and healthier life expectancies are obvious. Less obvious are the day to day risks of crippling diseases.

My brother told me a story about how my father, who was a doctor, used to give my older brothers and sisters  the once-over with his eye each morning at breakfast looking for initial signs of polio and the other endemic childhood illnesses of the 1950s. These days, you show your age if you know of these endemic diseases. I was born a few years after mass immunisations of babies started. Was it just lucky me?

I am also old enough to remember when going to an airport was exciting because you were going somewhere. Devonport (in Tasmania) to Melbourne was a big trip when I was a kid. A luxury back then. Now airports are a boring wait that we must endure.

My sister traveled the world a lot. She started in about 1973 when an airfare from Sydney to London was $2,000. That was maybe a year’s income back then for her. For some reason, I kept note of that price. That airfare never increased despite 40 years of inflation.

I first visited Asia in 1993. Lived in Japan from 1995 to 1997.

Although of average height for an Australian, I was tall in Asia back then. Looking over the top of the crowd is really great. There were so few obese Japanese of any age that it really was a cause for comment when you saw one.

No more, no longer. Last time I visited Hong Kong, I was looking up at the young Chinese men serving behind the counters at McDonalds.  Each generation is head and shoulders taller than their parents in Asia.

When I first visited my parents-in-law in the Philippines, that part of Leyte had no sealed roads and no phones. The next time I visited, the road was being sealed and mobile reception was better if you had an arial on the roof. After a five year gap in visiting, not only was mobile reception good, there was cable TV if you wanted it. When I visited in 2012, there was wireless internet if you had outside arial. Last Christmas, we hot spotted off my sister-in-law’s mobile.

These revolutionary improvements in my life in a rich country and in lives in developing countries must have a cause.

This blog will champion the spread of capitalism and the rule of law as the cause of the flourishing of humanity in the 20th century and beyond.

I call this a utopia because it is the heaven on earth that led so many to fall for the siren call of socialism and progressive politics. They did not notice that they were already in paradise.

Joan Robinson noted in her 1942 book An Essay on Marxism that when the Communist Manifesto was published in 1848, its battle cry, which would have had some currency, was:

‘Rise up ye workers, rise up, for you have nothing to lose but your chains.’

The industrial revolution was still in its infancy in 1848.

Alas, 90 years later, Joan Robinson suggested that this battle cry at the barricades would have to be amended to:

‘Rise up ye workers, rise up, for you have nothing to lose but your suburban home and your motor car.’

This optimism was in the middle of a world war and after the Great Depression. (Joan Robinson was one of the first writers to take Marx seriously as an economist).

These days the battle tweet of the progressive Left would have to be:

‘Rise up ye workers, rise up, for you have nothing to lose but your iPad and your air miles’.

Next Newer Entries

Libertarian Land

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

Arin’s Substack

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

David Andolfatto

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

Monetary Non-Neutrality

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

Reason Magazine

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

Coyote Blog

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

Thoughts from the North

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

Fardels Bear

A History of the Alt-Right

Vincent Geloso

Econ Prof at George Mason University, Economic Historian, Québécois

Bassett, Brash & Hide

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

Truth on the Market

Scholarly commentary on law, economics, and more

The Undercover Historian

Beatrice Cherrier's blog

Matua Kahurangi

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

Temple of Sociology

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

Velvet Glove, Iron Fist

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

Why Evolution Is True

Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.

NoTricksZone

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

Homepaddock

A rural perspective with a blue tint by Ele Ludemann

Kiwiblog

DPF's Kiwiblog - Fomenting Happy Mischief since 2003

The Dangerous Economist

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

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

The Logical Place

Tim Harding's writings on rationality, informal logic and skepticism

Doc's Books

A window into Doc Freiberger's library

The Risk-Monger

Let's examine hard decisions!

Uneasy Money

Commentary on monetary policy in the spirit of R. G. Hawtrey

Barrie Saunders

Thoughts on public policy and the media

Liberty Scott

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

Point of Order

Politics and the economy

James Bowden's Blog

A blog (primarily) on Canadian and Commonwealth political history and institutions

Science Matters

Reading between the lines, and underneath the hype.

Peter Winsley

Economics, and such stuff as dreams are made on

A Venerable Puzzle

"The British constitution has always been puzzling, and always will be." --Queen Elizabeth II

The Antiplanner

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

Bet On It

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

History of Sorts

WORLD WAR II, MUSIC, HISTORY, HOLOCAUST

Roger Pielke Jr.

Undisciplined scholar, recovering academic

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

Conversable Economist

In Hume’s spirit, I will attempt to serve as an ambassador from my world of economics, and help in “finding topics of conversation fit for the entertainment of rational creatures.”

The Victorian Commons

Researching the House of Commons, 1832-1868

The History of Parliament

Articles and research from the History of Parliament Trust

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

European Royal History

Exploring the Monarchs of Europe

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Cutting edge science you can dice with