-
Subscribe Today!
May
2
Fareed Zakaria describes the major problem facing the American economy in the 21st century. It is not the rise of China and other foreign powers as competitors in the global marketplace. The real problem, according to his article “The Future of American Power,” is our dysfunctional political system that can’t solve problems.
The problem today is that the U.S. political system seems to have lost its ability to fix its ailments. The economic problems in the United States today are real, but by and large they are not the product of deep inefficiencies within the U.S. economy, nor are they reflections of cultural decay. They are the consequences of specific government policies. Different policies could quickly and relatively easily move the United States onto a far more stable footing. A set of sensible reforms could be enacted tomorrow to trim wasteful spending and subsidies, increase savings, expand training in science and technology, secure pensions, create a workable immigration process, and achieve significant efficiencies in the use of energy. Policy experts do not have wide disagreements on most of these issues, and none of the proposed measures would require sacrifices reminiscent of wartime hardship, only modest adjustments of existing arrangements. And yet, because of politics, they appear impossible. The U.S. political system has lost the ability to accept some pain now for great gain later on.
As it enters the twenty-first century, the United States is not fundamentally a weak economy or a decadent society. But it has developed a highly dysfunctional politics. What was an antiquated and overly rigid political system to begin with (now about 225 years old) has been captured by money, special interests, a sensationalist media, and ideological attack groups. The result is ceaseless, virulent debate about trivia — politics as theater — and very little substance, compromise, or action. A can-do country is now saddled with a do-nothing political process, designed for partisan battle rather than problem solving.
- I wrote this as a reply to Steve Dalton's comment on my post "Our Dysfunctional Politics Are Ruining Our Economy"...
- New York Times columnist Bob Herbert asks if the masters of the politics of personal destruction and division -- Bill and...
- I wish I could say the headline was an April Fools Day joke -- maybe it is -- but the...
- Brian Wesbury -- the chief economist for First Trust Portfolios, LP -- pulls us back from the ledge by letting...
- A video recap of all of the latest happenings in Pope Benedict's visit to America. Video: Pope Benedict in America...
Comments
6 Responses to “Our Dysfunctional Politics Are Ruining Our Economy”
Leave a Reply
Wow. Well put. I entirely agree.
Dan and Chris,
I’m not sure I can jump all the way into that theory. One reason, I am afraid that Hitler used this same theory to suggest wandering around the checks and balances in the German system … so he could get things done more quickly.
If only the ends are in sight, we run the risk of giving away our system that allows no one person or group enough power to get enough done to hurt us.
I like a system that is brutally difficult. A system that allows no one person or group to get much done, without the input and oversight of a lot more people.
Our problem isn’t government, it’s too much government and reliance on government. We need less goverrnment and a whole lot more innovation in society.
Hi Steve,
Interesting take on the problem. I’m all in favor of the Constitution’s system of checks and balances and the idea of incremental changes as a protection against tyranny.
Having a do-nothing Congress and government is often more beneficial to the country as a whole than an activist government that is unified and ready to move quickly.
However, I was thinking about how the Congress hasn’t done much lately — except maybe investigate baseball players for steroid usage.
If I was to act the way Congress does, I’d say that they were responsible for all of the economic messes they complain about because everything happened on their watch.
We do have to have a Congress that is willing to be a little less sluggish and partisan and more willing to think about the long term. The threat to our economy isn’t free trade. It is our system of regulations that is causing many businesses to move out of the country in order to find relief.
Western Europe is dropping tax rates in response to lower tax rates in Eastern European nations. London is becoming the next New York as companies look for places with favorable business climates.
Our partisan system too often blames business and wants to impose taxes to punish while forgetting there is a huge world out there where businesses can go.
If we get rid of NAFTA to make a few people who lost jobs at the old-type industrial factory, we could end up losing our foreign oil supplies from our NAFTA partners to China.
If we impose windfall energy profit taxes on Exxon-Mobil, do we risk having them divert oil away from the American market so that they can make their profits in China?
The problem isn’t a structural problem with our government system. In some ways, it has worked perfectly to keep the radicals from destroying our country by rapid changes by forcing everything to undergo rigorous challenges within the political process.
Our largest problem is with the people who get elected to go to Congress and do nothing except chase business away and scare the public into accept higher and higher taxes as the solution to all of our woes. They focus on winning their next 2- or 6- year term, instead of thinking 25 years down the road.
Instead of fostering economic growth that will cause everyone to benefit, they only offer up demagogic attacks on those who produce our country’s wealth in an attempt to curry favor with voters who are inclined to blame business for their personal failures.
[...] wrote this as a reply to comment on my post “Our Dysfunctional Politics Are Ruining Our Economy” and thought it would make a nifty post, instead of just a reply to a [...]
I’m a proponent of free trade and I reject isolationism. I advocate conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations. I oppose many free trade agreements (FTA’s), like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), since free-trade agreements are really managed trade and they serve special interests and big business, not citizens.
Hi Dan,
What do you think about Hillary Clinton’s stance on NAFTA? She’s against it while it was put into place during her husband’s administration.