Are we guilty of “confirmation bias?” This is a built in tendency to favor evidence that supports our current beliefs and to dismiss evidence that challenges them.
I have wondered about this when researching the new stimulus proposal. As I’ve read the WSJ or the NY Times, or watched CNN, have I just listened to the info that supports my side and ignored the evidence against it? Let’s face it, we have nowhere near the experience of any of the economists whose opinions we are hearing. So when it comes to filtering facts, how do we really know?
Although I do not vote along party lines, I think I need a “thesis statement” for the democratic movement. Something that eclipses “what they are about” in a way I can agree with. Something like: “We believe that a few highly-educated individuals are better suited to distribute the nation’s wealth (than market forces subject to fraud, misinformation, and unfairness) in order to create economic equality.” Anyone got any others? I’ll read these before doing more research and have a more open mind to the arguments.
Cause here is what I am seeing now:
It provides money to state governments to cover budget deficits. So, in other words, we are supporting a state government’s inability to cut costs or create revenue…
Less than $80B actually goes to anything that could be considered job creation. And the majority of those jobs-to-be-created are in sectors like healthcare, government, and education, which have current unemployment levels of less than 3%.
The rumors of another bill later this year have already started. What???
The WSJ stated, “In the March 2006 IMF Research Bulletin, economist Giovanni Ganelli summarized recent International Monetary Fund research on fiscal policy. Several studies find that reductions in government spending “can have expansionary effects, since they can contribute to a consumption and investment boom owing to altered expectations regarding future taxation.”
In the meantime, I’ll probably keep ignoring any evidence that disputes my idea that a small government is good, that economies have natural recessions and booms, and that fiscal responsibility with taxpayer dollars is a trust. I mean, there’s plenty of evidence to support it…
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB123310466514522309-lMyQjAxMDI5MzIzODEyMDg0Wj.html
Last 3 posts by Eric B.
- Nassim Taleb on the Economy - June 25th, 2010
- Full Circle - May 3rd, 2010
- The Dark Side :) - April 5th, 2010
I think the Democratic Party essentially believes that a government’s responsibility is to ensure that certain rights are available to every citizen. If a person is somehow denied a certain right, it is the government’s responsibility to ensure it is met. And taxing those who have earned a surplus in order to cover the cost is justified to meet that end.
So, I don’t know, it’s not anywhere near perfect, but that’s what I think the Democratic Party stands for.
The problem though is that the definition of rights keeps expanding. The line between rights and wants continues to blur.