Vote for me, dimwit

[Yeahman]

Vote for me, dimwit (http://economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9340166)

The uneducated American masses are anti-market, anti-foreign, have a "make-work" bias (the misunderstanding that employment is the only road to prosperity, discounting productivity), and pessimistic. IMO this is a serious problem that politicans obviously aren't going to tackle. What's to be done?

[LaiSteve66]

Very interesting read. What's scary is that politicians often exploit people's ignorance like when politicians blame each other for a recession when it's just a downturn in the business cycle or blaming the oil companies for gas prices. The implications of this behavior are even more scary IMO because it displays one of two things:

1) A lack of integrity on the part of the politician. (I consider taking a position (that is knowingly detrimental to society) for political survival to be unethical).
2) Ignorance on the part of the politician.

Both prospects are scary.

[AgentTofu]

The “make-work bias” needs to be expanded upon. Why would an average American worker care about production of over employment? Nevermind that they are the most productive in the world (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-09/01/content_260175.htm), but product matters little without employment to acquire said product.

The anti-market claim is hard to swallow, because since the removal of pensions from many company retirement schemes, the markets are something millions of workers now must follow if they want to find any comfort in their later years. As if anyone wanted their company to do badly in the market in the first place?

Looking over, this is a very broad article. Most Americans, as the piece states, don't approve of outsourcing, but many economists do. Again, why would a now unemployed American worker approve of their job of x amount of years being shipped overseas? The economist would naturally approve, as the corporation is finding gains and profits, but the worker? The worker is apparently an invisible component in Mr. Caplan's view.

[Yeahman]

The “make-work bias” needs to be expanded upon. Why would an average American worker care about production of over employment? Nevermind that they are the most productive in the world (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-09/01/content_260175.htm), but product matters little without employment to acquire said product.
Nobody said they should care about productivity OVER employment.

The anti-market claim is hard to swallow, because since the removal of pensions from many company retirement schemes, the markets are something millions of workers now must follow if they want to find any comfort in their later years. As if anyone wanted their company to do badly in the market in the first place?
"Market" as in free market, not stock market.

Looking over, this is a very broad article. Most Americans, as the piece states, don't approve of outsourcing, but many economists do. Again, why would a now unemployed American worker approve of their job of x amount of years being shipped overseas? The economist would naturally approve, as the corporation is finding gains and profits, but the worker? The worker is apparently an invisible component in Mr. Caplan's view.
You have perfectly illustrated the bias.
Outsourcing benefits American workers.

[monkeygone2]

Outsourcing benefits the nation, but there’s no denying that middle-class/lower middle-class families & towns are being wiped out.
The dream of the blue collar, factory-working family sending their kids to college & retiring w/ dignity is long gone. It may not be the economist's job to think of those families, but they do exist.

I agree with Caplan’s argument for limiting the scope of the government’s role....
However, his solution for dealing w/ irrational voters - giving more power to political 'experts' - seems irrational. His blind faith in academics is as irrational as the biases of ignorant voters.
All men are can be swayed by special interest, corruption & can display irrational behavior.

Anyway, I think it’s the politicians fault for playing the game. And also the ratings-driven onfotainment news media.
Not the voters.

[Yeahman]

Outsourcing benefits the nation, but there’s no denying that middle-class/lower middle-class families & towns are being wiped out.
There is plenty denying. The poor disproportionately benefit from outsourcing.

The dream of the blue collar, factory-working family sending their kids to college & retiring w/ dignity is long gone. It may not be the economist's job to think of those families, but they do exist.
The problem is you blaming outsourcing for that.
Previous generations blamed machines for the same thing.

I agree with Caplan’s argument for limiting the scope of the government’s role....
However, his solution for dealing w/ irrational voters - giving more power to political 'experts' - seems irrational. His blind faith in academics is as irrational as the biases of ignorant voters.
All men are can be swayed by special interest, corruption & can display irrational behavior.
Experts shouldn't necessary "run" the country but they should be listened to more.

Anyway, I think it’s the politicians fault for playing the game. And also the ratings-driven onfotainment news media.
Not the voters.
Who are the gullible ones?

[monkeygone2]

There is plenty denying. The poor disproportionately benefit from outsourcing.


except for that family/town that’s left in ruins.

The problem is you blaming outsourcing for that.
Previous generations blamed machines for the same thing.

actually, i was addressing the article's point that economists don't care about the jobs that are lost. there was even a cute little Mao Zedong story to illustrate this.

families standing in line for federal surplus milk, rise in suicide, drug/alcohol abuse, domestic violence, & crime...
i don’t expect these people to look at the big picture of automating equipment & moving factories overseas. all they know is- they devoted their lives to a company, the company prospers while they risk losing their homes & savings. for these people, it's personal.

Experts shouldn't necessary "run" the country but they should be listened to more.

yes. but doesn’t caplan write specifically about giving more power to these ‘experts’ in his book?

Who are the gullible ones?

the voters, of course.
but it's the politicians who are exploiting that. it’s part of the game of politics.

What's to be done?

voters can be encouraged to educate themselves the best they can, but beyond that, people are people.
in his book, caplan flirts w/ the idea of nixing democracy. well, fuck that!

we have politicians w/ no ethics & media w/ it’s integrity for sale. that's the real problem imo. not the joe schmoe voter.

[buttermilkwise]

There is plenty denying. The poor disproportionately benefit from outsourcing.


How? The society we live in thrives on capitalism, and materialistic success as the number one virtue not compassion for other people. People don't give a shit about homeless people, and I wouldn't expect the same for the poor.

[Yeahman]

caplan flirts w/ the idea of nixing democracy. well, fuck that!
We can keep democracy but get rid of popular elections.

How? The society we live in thrives on capitalism, and materialistic success as the number one virtue not compassion for other people. People don't give a shit about homeless people, and I wouldn't expect the same for the poor.
WTF does that have to do with outsourcing?
When jobs move overseas to cheaper places, goods and services in the US become cheaper. The poor are able to buy more at Wal-Mart because of the jobs that were moved to China. It then frees up capital and labor in the US to do more productive things.