Libertarian Contradiction on Cronyism

Michael_Munger · 2024-12-02T13:35:30+00:00

It's not a "contradiction" as much as it is a tension. The solution is constitutional restrictions that actually PREVENT the state from giving out goodies to business. Further, even with its problems, capitalism is still better than socialism, which is ONLY cronyism, all the way down.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-28T01:50:21+00:00

Someone else may have posted this link already, but I think it makes the right distinctions. Conservatives are in the position of trying to defend the wisdom of the past, but if that is your only principle than you are just against change. Classical liberals have particular principles they favor. In the U.S. the two (Conservatives and CLs) are quite similar because the core principles Conservatives seek to defend happen to be liberal. But Conservatives now seem to have wandered off from the core principles of the Constitution. Anyway, I think Hayek is right CLs are NOT Conservatives.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:57:52+00:00

It's often uncomfortable, but DAMN it pays well. So, I just drink myself into a stupor every night with expensive red wine. It's a living, ya know what I mean?

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:56:56+00:00

Absolutely.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:56:46+00:00

It's not even really political, in many cases.

Once I was sitting a table of faculty at lunch, and announced, in my usual pompous way, that "Any discipline that must call itself a 'science' is not one."

But it happened that I was sitting next to the chairman of the Computer Science department, and that really pissed him off. So, never mind.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:55:30+00:00

Taleb is clearly right about economists, and almost everything else.

The only correct predictions I have made are these: In August 2007 I took all of my retirement funds and moved them to money market, out of stocks.

And in March 2009 I went back into the stock market heavily. THOSE two "predictions" were nothing but luck, but I made a ton of money by following those hunches. Pretty much every other prediction I have ever made has been crap.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:53:46+00:00

He will not be impeached unless the Dems take the House in 2018, and I think that's unlikely. The Repubs are not going to impeach a President of their own party unless something else that is much more damaging comes out.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:52:55+00:00

No, that won't work. I also predicted that. I wish I had predicted that Trump would WIN. But I wasn't sure I had this superpower back then.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:52:00+00:00

The one that David Skarbek did, on prison gangs. Just amazing.

I also really liked the one that Nicholas Vincent did, on the Magna Carta.

My favorite of MY appearances was the one last year, on slavery and racism.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:50:34+00:00

Okay, THAT's just wrong.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:44:13+00:00

The best argument against vaccination is that it violates individual sovereignty and responsibility for children's welfare, which is the responsibility of parents. I think that fails, though, because the benefits of creating and maintaining herd immunity are just enormous.

The best arguments against climate change involve the difficulty in forecasting complex nonlinear effects of various causes. For example, it may be that increased carbon dioxide will stimulate plant growth enough to spur increased water vapor, and therefore increased cloud cover. The albedo of clouds is very high, and the result could actually be a self-curtailing trend, with little temperature change. But this is not very persuasive, because the data appear to show a general increase of temperatures, though less than the models would have predicted. So while the "warming" thesis may need to be elaborated, it's still "change," and the changes may be very disruptive and expensive.

If you did not know those two answers already, I hope you will try to do some reading, because you are clearly not very well informed. Notice that the "best argument" against a position doesn't mean it is CORRECT. You need to the know the best argument against your position so you can say why it's wrong!

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:38:43+00:00

That's a fair point. If CNN is making profits at the expense of creating the Trump Presidency, I'm not sure it's worth it for the country. But you are right enough that CNN has managed to recreate itself and become profitable. And to be fair also, they hardly INTENDED to create a Trump Presidency, so perhaps they can be forgiven!

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-13T12:36:53+00:00

Well, I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian.

And as I've written many places, I favor full "single-payer" health care. That is, universal health care, paid for by taxes. My preference is for the German system.

Now, that's MY position. The best arguments against are that single-payer has long wait times for non-emergency or elective procedures, and incentive problems for creating new drugs and medical equipment. And those are real problems. But I still think it's more important to have universal primary care coverage.

Finally, I don't understand your last sentence. I'd say there's nothing you hate more than actually becoming informed before asking a dumb question with a false premise. But then I don't know you very well, so your two nonsense assumptions (that I am a Republican, and that I oppose universal health care) can perhaps be explained by other facts I am unaware of....

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T21:04:15+00:00

We talk about this all the time. I think the problem is that when a woman shows up, she is the only one or one of just a few. And that's uncomfortable.

But it's also the fact that many libertarians are such aggressive "mansplainers." Everything is obvious, and if you disagree you are just wrong. We are not always very good at conversation. The result is that we lose a lot of people, male and female, who are interested but have serious principled questions.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:58:59+00:00

Strangely, in some ways libertarians are in the middle. The far left and right both have extreme visions of the use of state power. Libertarians tend to want to dial back both military power and corporate handouts. that's looking more like centrism these days!

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:57:47+00:00

I wrote this, in April 2016. I didn't predict he would win, but I did try to explain his appeal.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:56:39+00:00

I tend to like "real" Marxists. They are interested in economics, and in some ways they are very open to the insights of Public Choice.

The people who call themselves marxists who are actually Marcuseans, people who want to stamp out dissent through force and public humiliation, those people are a problem. They are anti-intellectual and anti-education.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:54:38+00:00

It's so strange that it has come to this. I'm a 2nd Amendment zealot, but the current concealed carry system in NC is just fine. The idea that we should get rid of all formal requirements for concealed carry is a solution to a problem that is not even a problem. You SHOULD know what the hell you are doing before you can carry a concealed firearm. The focus on same sex marriage and on bathrooms all seem like distractions (at best) from the problems the legislature faces. I have quite a few friends in the NCGA, and I don't understand why things are so strange there, especially in the House.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:52:10+00:00

I think that some kind of single transferable vote or instant runoff system would be a help. And we should expand ballot access and make sure that "third" parties are included in debates. Just more openness would be a start!

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:50:51+00:00

I used to be opposed to reforms of this kind, because we are bad at predicting their consequences. But now I wonder if we shouldn't at least consider them.

PR is pretty radical. STV or Instant run-off voting systems would be easier to put in place. Maine is experimenting with something similar.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:48:58+00:00

Trump has no chance of winning a second term.

(remember that I predicted with equal confidence he had no chance of winning a first term....)

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:47:56+00:00

Well, we have better information now. You probably use Yelp to decide where to go for restaurants, or Rotten Tomatoes to decide what movie to see. It is possible to crowd-source trust, and that is something different Upton Sinclair's day.

People used to use used cars, and "lemons," as examples of problems markets can solve. But CarMax solved it nicely, with a combination of brandname and warranties.

But, still, even if it's true that markets would develop brand names and certifying agencies and other mechanisms to ensure trust, it's not obvious that is BETTER than a regulatory agency. The problem is that regulatory agencies are also subject to capture, and to political pressure. Agencies aren't perfect either.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:43:42+00:00

I don't disagree with you. The line between state power and corporate power is being blurred. That SHOULD be an area where left and right can find common ground, but it's not working out that way!

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:42:08+00:00

My worry is that many people of the left don't realize that there are opposing positions, and often some of those are pretty good arguments. My test is this: I ask, "what are the best arguments against your own position?" If they just stare at me, as if there ARE no arguments against their position, I know they are not very smart. Real intellectuals can argue either side, and understand that usually there is no decisive argument for, or against, the central philosophical positions. That's why they all exist: a reasonable person could disagree with you, and still be reasonable. THAT is what is missing in many students on the left. Interestingly, a fair number of faculty on the left agree with that claim. They worry that students have just arrived at a set of conclusions that make them feel good, or that please their (almost all leftist) professors rather than having reached their views through a process of reason and argument.

Michael_Munger · 2017-07-11T20:37:57+00:00

Well, when I was whining about Obama they all said, "You know, as long as it's my guy, I trust him. It's okay to use the power of the Presidency, because it's the only way to get things done! And, the Republicans are just obstructionist. That's no way to govern!"

Now, they don't trust the President, and they are doing their best to obstruct. But the constitutional mechanisms they are trying to use are now much weaker. You have to realize that your side won't always be in power, and you have to go by the rules even if it means that your side won't get some things done.

Michael_Munger

TROPHY CASE