The Politics of Economics
<rant>
I’ve watched the debates, I’ve read the commentary, and I’ve seen the spin doctors at work. We’re all talking about the election right now, and this election has come down to two fronts: foreign policy and economics.
Just so you know, I’m pretty focused on the latter. So let me give a rough paraphrasing of an interview I saw on CNBC recently. Some financial megapundit was questioning an Economic advisor to John Kerry:
INTERVIEWER: So what exactly is John Kerry’s plan for the economy?
ADVISOR: John Kerry is going to grow the economy. He’s going to support jobs here in America. He’s going to give tax cuts for the middle class while rolling back George Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of Americans. He’s going to make sure every American has health care. John Kerry is going to promote energy independence. John Kerry. John Kerry.
INTERVIEWER: How exactly is John Kerry going to promote job growth?
ADVISOR: Let me say first that John Kerry will create jobs by promoting job creation.* We’re going to close tax loopholes. And we’re going to give companies incentives to make jobs here.
INTERVIEWER: Alright! Moving on to a completely unimportant topic…
* This line more or less ad verbatim
I walked back into my dorm about to cry. The interview made no sense. But oh, so what? Why are you being so emotional, Adam? It’s just job creation!
Forget that the livelihoods of so many Americans rest on good economic policy. I was upset because I wanted more from the candidate that I was — and still am — proud to be voting for. This stupid afternoon interview was symptomatic of the discussion of economics throughout the entire election run.
Dishonest, misleading, opportunistic, nonsensical. That’s the economics of Campaign 2004. We’re not watching real economics. We’re watching talking points covered in economics-colored saran wrap. The statements of the candidates don’t reflect reality; instead they reflect what tests well and what sounds good, irrespective of a positive or negative influence on the country.
You can lie all you want when the swing voters won’t call you on it. The candidates have an incentive to tell economic untruths because these lies damage the opposition in a particularly vicious way: for the opponent, they are for all intents and purposes impossible to rebut. Refuting false statements about economics necessitates an appeal to the more complex concepts of the science. Honestly, who has time to consider the short-term versus long-term stimulative effect of tax cuts of varying degrees of progressivity? The lie sticks.
And so we find ourselves in a situation where each candidate has an incentive to tell as many untruths as the swing voters will believe. If he doesn’t, his opponent will, and by that time it’s too late for any defense — no one’s listening to the response. It’s a prisoners dilemma in which the American people perpetually lose.
Is there anything we can do to heighten the level of Economic debate? I’m not sure. Individually, we start by educating ourselves, but not everyone wants or has time to learn the intricacies of economics. Blogs are certainly helpful in providing both a source of information and a forum for debate, but that won’t help if people continue to have other, more important things on their minds. For the casually interested, then, media coverage is critical. It would help if accountability-inducing media outlets became more prominent; FactCheck.org (not FactCheck.com, Mr. Cheney) is all over this one. It also wouldn’t hurt to have economists more involved in the production of media content, although I’m not sure Paul Krugman should be the one doing the reporting.
I’m don’t know where I fit in here. I’d like to do a series of posts about the economic issues of Campaign 2004, but even I don’t trust myself to report about Economics. On the other hand, this post deserves a follow-up. Let’s see if I can’t put together a list of common Bush and Kerry economic untruths. Feel free to respond to this post with a few, and maybe I will discuss them.
If you find errors, poor logic, or lapses of judgement in anything I say, please point them out. In writing all of this, I wouldn’t mind correcting any faults in my own understanding.
</rant>