The Economics Party

My jaw dropped when I heard that presidential candidate Clinton dismissed the unified opinion of every economist on the planet and supported the gas tax rebate. The rebate is John McCain’s proposal. I think that proves both of them are unqualified to be president. Obama isn’t much better when it comes to sorting out economic policy from pandering, although he did avoid that particular landmine.

So I decided to start my own political party. I call it the Economics Party. There’s no paperwork involved, and you don’t even have to stop being a Democrat or Republican or whatever to join. The Economics Party won’t have its own candidates. All we’ll do is agree to vote for the candidate with the best long term economic policy, according to the consensus of leading economists.

The Economics Party would ignore superstition in its decisions. Here are a few things I think would end up on the platform, assuming most leading economists agree:

- Withdraw from Iraq
- More aggressive energy policy (back off on ethanol)
- More sane tax policies
- Limited government
- Legalize doctor assisted suicide
- Keep abortion legal
- Decriminalize marijuana
- Strong education policy

We’d make some exceptions for humanitarian reasons. For example, if a natural disaster hits a poor part of the country, it might be cheaper to let everyone die, but you have to put life ahead of money at some point.

The platform might look Libertarian, but it has differences. For example, a Libertarian might be opposed to the government making people wear motorcycle helmets. The Economics Party would just look at the likely higher cost of insurance in a helmet-free world and decide on that basis. I don’t know which way it would come out.

The Economics Party would be committed to changing its policy recommendation whenever the facts warranted. We’re pro flip-flop when it makes sense. In other words, our brains function properly.

If thirty or forty million people join the Economics Party, all major candidates would have to start paying attention to the consensus of economists. At the very least, voters would become more aware of what the leading economists think makes sense. That seems like a good thing.

Are you in?

Comments

[Kyle P]

I'm in.

[Robert T]

Cool! Call yourselves the "Neodems."

[Patrick]

It would be interesting, especially considering the fact that the rule of good economic policy usually makes for bad politics.

Good economic policy would be for the privatization of education. It is bad politics to cut federal funding for education. Another good economic policy would be the dismantling of the FDA. It is bad politics to say the government no longer ensures the quality of prescription medicine.

I don't assume the population will grow a brain come the formation of this party, but I would be interested to see the politicians dance to accommodate if such a party was sizable enough to matter.

[Planet Apex]

Count me in dude, albeit I oppose these proposals on religious and ethical grounds.

- Legalize doctor assisted suicide
- Keep abortion legal
- Decriminalize marijuana

Otherwise hencefore I'm officially an economics party fan.

[Vijay]

Dear Scott,

I am IN. I like to add one more economic agenda. Stop outsourcing. With so much of outsourcing done, we are doing lot more work in India which is pretty bad.

The economic party rocks.

Did you forgot to add the GO-GREEN agenda? Does it make less economics right now?

Cheers,
Vijay

[Shawn]

I still dont know if I am in or not. Can I have a couple more days to think about it. Please let me know if this is fine or not.

[Kay]

Please, sign me up.
I'm in

[Kay]

- Decriminalize marijuana -

yes! i like this most!

age 4x
Hong Kong

[Popeman]

Wouldn't it make the most economic sense to not campaign at all, thereby saving millions in adverstising, transport, media strategies, employees, random phone calls and bunting?

[sandeep]

So, your idea is to rely on "expert" opinion? The same (or, at least the same category) experts who predicted:
1. Oil will go down to $5 a barrel (The Economist in 1999).
2. We will run out of food and the world will starve (experts - economist and agricultural scientists in the 70s).
3. Mobile phones will be a niche market and there is no point investing in it (Mckinsey to AT&T in the mid 80s) - I only bring this up because Mckinsey also provides consulting services to Govts and its consultants are considered experts in there respective fields
4. Other instances of "expert" opinion - too numerous to list

The point is this - expert opinion, especially in economics, is not necessarily a better choice. In fact, it probably does more harm given the complacency it generates.

[Andrew Dean]

Wow, "libertarian" must be a real swear word in the US, for you to agree so wholeheartedly with their views, yet go to such lengths to distance yourself from the "l-word"

Is it the gun freaks? If so, I sympathise.

Andrew
Pro gun control Libertarian

[plen]

I think your platform isn't solid enough for a simple reason. Economics is like a set of tools to help think about the world, it isn't ideology. It is like the difference between policy-makers who favour low inflation over low unemployment. Both are perfectly defendable economic positions, but reflect very different political philosophy. I don't see how would the Economics party resolve such a dilemma?

[Jeremy]

"More sane tax policies?" "Strong educational policy?"

Yeah, I think education is good. Raise your hand if you don't.

Why not just say "Do good things for our economy?" That pretty much covers it.

[Felipe Dex]

ALL IN! I'm going to found a filial of this in Brazil!!!! My guess is that we need it more than you do!!!!

[gogo]

Economics rates only slightly higher than astrology for me. The biggest problem I have with Economists is that they forget the difference between their models and the real world. They want to study something complicated, so they create a model to simplify it. Fair enough. But then having gone away and played with the numbers, they start lobbying everyone to change reality to fit their models!

[Patrick]

I'm in! I know this is just infotainment, but seriously, you should make this a real political party.

[martymankins]

I'm in. How do I join? Signing up is hard if there is no paperwork. Just tell me where to meet for the caucuses.

[George]

Scott, if you run for President you have my vote.

[Peter]

The Freakonomics Blog recently had an relevant article:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/hug-an-economist-we-need-it

There are a couple of interesting points in the article.

1) Quote from Sentor Menendez:
"You know, thank god that we don’t have economists making, necessarily, public policy, because they don’t necessarily feel pains that average Americans [feel]."

2) Most economists have Democrat preferences. The actual stats are in the article but it amounts to about 3 times as many lean toward Democrats as Republicans. Interesting given the Replublican support base (big business, high income etc.)

[N]

Agree on all 8.

Agree on a few things DMented talks about as well.

Hey can we have a venn diagram on what consitutes the voting population in the USA and what constitutes the people visiting your site and finding them agreeing with you?

It would be interesting to see how many internationals also visit your site (tho you refuse to acknowledge them ;)).

[burt]

wow. is it just me or does this sound like a cross of communism, facism, anarchy, and Hitlers idea of a perfect nation? Is the next step killing the over rich? why not put them in ghettos. its not like anyones tried this before

Burt ((rambling))((unserious))((overdramtizing)) truB

[Jon]

But most economists realize that the opportunity cost of voting is greater than the odds that your one vote will matter. So you'd have a party of non-voters. I guess their monetary contributions may be significant?

[Dave Oblad]

I'm on board with you Scott.

I would like to see those anti-smoking folks spend a little less money in their
propaganda war on smokers and direct their fear towards those that come to work
sick with the flu. See.. I smoke.. my wife didn't.. so I smoked outside etc just
because she said it stunk. I agreed. Then a co-worker brought a flu to work, she
caught it and died from it. And the majority of workers (managers) still have
that arcane idea that a sick worker is a real trooper. I say that if a worker
brings a flu to work.. they should be fired on the spot! My wife lived with me,
a smoker, for 30 years. Then a flu bug brought by a co-worker killed her in 1 week.

And as far as smoking goes.. get real! The insurance tables used for most of
last century indicated a non-smoker lived an average of just two years longer than
a smoker. The claim that smoking causes cancer is completely false! Smoking
can trigger cancer in a person who is already inclined toward cancer.

Example: To test the carcinogenetic aspects of a substance, science bred mice that
are prone to cancer. That way they get faster results. If they bred mice not to be
cancer prone, tests would take forever. Folks with a family history of cancer will
very likely die of cancer eventually. So for that reason, I accept the current laws
that isolate me from non-smokers. But these guys have made it a vendetta. Now they
are talking about forbidding smoking in cars with pets and or whole neighborhoods.

Cars still kill/injure more people than any other non-natural force. Do you see
anyone clamping down on non-essential driving?

I'm all for legalizing Pot. I know first hand about the medical benefits.
I was a mess.. asthma, psoriasis, ulcers, insomnia. Then I started smoking pot.
Didn't like the high.. but that's just a short term stage when smoking it daily.
All my health problems vanished within two months and stayed that way for 12 years.
I stopped pot a few years ago and now my health issues are back!

Foods that make people fat are legal. Fat = heart attacks = death. Simple..

I don't want Big Brother running this country.. but he already is! And worse..
Big Brother is an idiot!

So... Scott, I'm behind you 100%. Time for a government shift towards intelligence.

Best wishes from Dave :^)

[Luke]

Do we have to be American?

[david]

don't stop these great posts coming!

you and dave barry should team up...