Friday, February 18, 2005
PAWs vs. PIWs
[Arnold Kling, "The Millionaire Next Door vs. the Politician in Washington," Tech Central Station, 18 February 2005.]
Arnold Kling provides a somewhat amusing, and somewhat disconcerting, analysis of the disconnect between free-spending Washington and thrifty Americans in this column. The implications for health care policy in Washington and Topeka are worth noting:
Many on the left are willing to allow the market to operate in the ever-declining portion of the economy that produces material goods. However, they insist that education, health care, and retirement are too important and complex to be left to the private sector. The Washington power-lusters are as savvy as any businessman in gravitating toward the growth industries.
On the one hand, there are what Stanley and Danko call the Prodigious Accumulators of Wealth (PAWs). On the other hand, there are the views of politicians and left-wing academics, making up what I call Power-Intoxicated Washington (PIWs).
For those of us who value self-reliance and thrift, the economic trends suggest a need to increase saving and to invest heavily in human capital. For those who value paternalism and redistribution, those trends provide an excuse to "help" more people in more ways. This tends to exacerbate the conflict of values, because ultimately the redistribution policies require heavy taxes on those of us who save and try to educate ourselves.
[Arnold Kling, "The Millionaire Next Door vs. the Politician in Washington," Tech Central Station, 18 February 2005.]
Arnold Kling provides a somewhat amusing, and somewhat disconcerting, analysis of the disconnect between free-spending Washington and thrifty Americans in this column. The implications for health care policy in Washington and Topeka are worth noting:
Many on the left are willing to allow the market to operate in the ever-declining portion of the economy that produces material goods. However, they insist that education, health care, and retirement are too important and complex to be left to the private sector. The Washington power-lusters are as savvy as any businessman in gravitating toward the growth industries.
On the one hand, there are what Stanley and Danko call the Prodigious Accumulators of Wealth (PAWs). On the other hand, there are the views of politicians and left-wing academics, making up what I call Power-Intoxicated Washington (PIWs).
For those of us who value self-reliance and thrift, the economic trends suggest a need to increase saving and to invest heavily in human capital. For those who value paternalism and redistribution, those trends provide an excuse to "help" more people in more ways. This tends to exacerbate the conflict of values, because ultimately the redistribution policies require heavy taxes on those of us who save and try to educate ourselves.
Comments:
Post a Comment
