The Rise of Fantasy Politics

Obama and McCain have each taken symbolic steps to suggest that they've made tough budget choices. Don't believe them.

By Robert J. Samuelson | NEWSWEEK

Published Aug 23, 2008

From the magazine issue dated Sep 1, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Posted By: mikefarrace @ 09/17/2008 5:54:37 AM

Comment: In the heat of election politics, it's really good to read some common sense.

As citizens, we are forced to perform a kind of voodoo exercise in which we decide which candidate will figure it out when they get there. Unfortunately, the electorate has communicated to politicians that we don't want reality. The first candidate who says "it's going to cost you," is instantly marginalized. We just don???t want to face the music.

I would like to say that, at least, we operate from our self-interest, but that's not true either. To continue your sports analogy, we view candidates like we view our favorite team or Nascar driver, two examples of choices we make that have little to do with fulfilling any substantial self-interest, but which instead make us feel better for a little while when our guy beats the opponent???s guy.

In this election, I prefer Obama of the two candidates. I have read all the positions on both candidate???s websites, read the news like a junkyard dog looking for clues to success and that???s just where I land. I trust him more, think he will unite the country and think he has the organizational chops and intellect to sort through the myriad challenges facing the next president.

I do think the unfettered free market philosophy has failed. I think the reason for that is nothing more than human nature. And, I must admit, I just think it???s time to give the other party a chance to run the thing. I think Republicans have had their chance and things just haven???t worked out so well.

I would like to think there is an equitable system that can provide for a decent living for all Americans and to also reward the industrious, creative and lucky among us appropriately. But your comments resonate with me because I believe that to achieve such a system, you must start with a balanced budget and a pay-as-you-go fiscal philosophy.

If we lived in such a world, I think it would then be possible to build responsive institutions which work on behalf of all people. Universal health care, low-interest student loans, correctly regulated and above reproach financial markets, Social Security that actually pays enough to live on.

When you mention further clutter in an already complex tax system, you???ve also got a point. But more important are the unwieldy and overly complex number of levers available to government. It???s like a giant mobile gone awry. With a balanced budget at its core, the techniques available to those in office would be much simpler, and much more effective in addressing the needs of citizens.
Posted By: homnickj @ 09/11/2008 12:49:46 PM

Comment:
It saddens me to see how distrustful we are of our current government that we even have trouble believing propositions of potential presidents. Samuelson???s article makes sense but only because of the current funk our country is in. If the current president???s approval rating was higher, the public would have a much easier time swallowing speeches that promise economic prosperity. For the record, I agree with Samuelson in that candidates use rhetoric to win applause and not to benefit the general welfare of our country, but its a sad state of affairs when we claim that candidates "talk the talk but don't walk the walk" before we even see any of them walking.
Posted By: Masonomist @ 08/29/2008 10:43:50 AM

Comment: Robert Samuelson is correct: regardless of which party wins the White House or Congress, Uncle Sam is unlikely to get his fiscal affairs in order ("The Rise of Fantasy Politics," September 1).

In principle, government's core responsibility is to prevent Jones from benefiting by his imposing costs on Smith without Smith's consent. In practice, government acts as Jones's agent in securing benefits for Jones by imposing costs on Smith.

Government's modus operandi today is to bestow goodies on politically powerful interest groups, and to pay for these goodies by taxing politically unpopular groups (e.g., oil companies) and politically impotent groups (most notably, future taxpayers). The bottom line is that, through government, Jones imposes costs on Smith without Smith's consent.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
Enterprise Hall
George Mason University
Posted By: Masonomist @ 08/29/2008 10:42:02 AM

Comment: Robert Samuelson is correct: regardless of which party wins the White House or Congress, Uncle Sam is unlikely to get his fiscal affairs in order ("The Rise of Fantasy Politics," September 1).

In principle, government's core responsibility is to prevent Jones from benefiting by his imposing costs on Smith without Smith's consent. In practice, government acts as Jones's agent in securing benefits for Jones by imposing costs on Smith.

Government's modus operandi today is to bestow goodies on politically powerful interest groups, and to pay for these goodies by taxing politically unpopular groups (e.g., oil companies) and politically impotent groups (most notably, future taxpayers). The bottom line is that, through government, Jones imposes costs on Smith without Smith's consent.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
Enterprise Hall
George Mason University
Posted By: Eric2333 @ 08/27/2008 7:40:07 PM

Comment: Samuelson's articl on Fantasy Politics brings up a fantasy of his own. With ridership the highest ever taking millions out of their cars (and planes), and an 80% return on its subsidy, Samuelson still thinks Amtrak needs to go. He is so 20 minutes ago. In light of the ever increasing cost of energy, we need a vastly expanded Amtrak to handle those who no longer want to or can drive; especially in rural areas far from medical services. The feds are getting the biggest bang for their buck with Amtrak and it should be expanded rather than Samuelson's fantasy of elliminating it. Pete Van Zanten
- Posted By: Generic Person @ 08/28/2008 5:36:07 PM
  
  Comment: Can you provide a credible source for your argument?
Posted By: Eric2333 @ 08/27/2008 7:36:10 PM

Comment: Samuelson's title of Fantasy politics should have included his fantasy of killing Amtrak. With an 80% return of investment (hgiher than any other government program), with ridership increased to equipment capacity taking millions out of their cars (and planes), Samuelson still has the fantasy that Amtrak is a waste of money. That attitude is to 20 minutes ago given our energy situation it is almost laughable. Pete Van Zante, Olympi, Wa.
Posted By: Jose52 @ 08/27/2008 4:53:24 PM

Comment: to Realistic, In 1936, Hilter retook lands lost to the Versallies treaty and breaking the treaty agreements. The world did nothing. Then in 1939, Poland was invaded and spilt up with USSR. Wars start whens a bullies are not confonted diplomatically or with force. Care to sign up and join the 82nd Airborne?
Posted By: 'Realistic" @ 08/27/2008 3:10:30 AM

Comment: It seems the John McCain wants to bring back the cold war and confront Russia over Georgia. Obama is more inclined to use diplomacy, or recognize that we are not about to push Russia around in it's own backyard. I mention this because I wonder what the huge increase in our defense budget that a new cold war requires would do to our debt problems. by 'Realistic"
Posted By: Phil08 @ 08/26/2008 6:12:44 PM

Comment: MEMORIES FOR DENVER?????????..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEu8zkLLzxM

THE BRIGHT MEMORIES

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1q9Q0OtJ4g&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxRvExqN7_E&NR=1
Posted By: denmill @ 08/26/2008 1:06:47 PM

Comment: You are so right. The worst is Obama who is promising the dummies "the World". These people are so stupid. Bothe side are controlled by special interests. McCain by big business, and Obama by the communist leftist enemies of America. It is up to us that are smart enough not to have our mind poison by the emtional game that is going on during these convention and choose what is best for America by the choosing the lesser of these two evils (Jonh McCain)..
Posted By: Jill from Florida @ 08/26/2008 9:48:32 AM

Comment: Extremists on both parties have been responsible for our failing economy and have compounded our debt.

Under Carter, the neoliberal Democrats opened up unrestricted trade with Red China, and was supported by the far right Republicans For Big Business.

As one of the last acts for the 96th Congress under Carter, the neoliberals and Big Business Republicans again joined forces to write the WIndfall Profits Tax of 1981. They phased out the coveted small business tax credit of Investment Tax Credit and did a major overhaul of revising the 1040 whereby average wage earners no longer could take any deductions unless they had a mortgage. This resulted in the largest actual tax increase for the middle class and started the demise of the working class. Mom & Pop's either closed their doors or were bought out by the Big Business. Manufacturing dramatically decreased because small businesses now had to chose between paying income tax or upgrading equipment. (And Uncle Sam is a nasty creditor.) Now, remember, this was done with a "globalization" Democratic President and Democratic party leaders for "globalization" and Republican Big Business leaders. Manufacturing plants started to move to other cheaper labor countries. Welfare was stepped up to appease the masses who directly and indirectly lost their jobs to the outflow of manufacturing plants.

Under Reagan, and a Democratic Congress controlled by the "globalization" and special interest leaders, the extremists of both parties joined forces again to stop funding for research and technology for alternative energy and renewable energy. Oil Companies and Big Business owned the Republican leaders. And, "Globalization" and Radical Environmentalists owned the Democratic leaders. Manufacturing companies were given "incentives" for relocating their plants outside the US under the World Wide Income tax loopholes. Welfare and welfare abuse was greatly increased to appease the additional masses of newly-unemployed.

Under Clinton and the neoliberal (globalization) and extremist environmentalist Democratic Congress leaders again joined forces with the Big Business Republicans, and wrote the disastrous NAFTA. Those leaders who supported and voted for NAFTA are the exact same leaders in Congress today (with the exception of Senator Byrd who is still against NAFTA). Pelosi, Hoyer, Kennedy, Durbin, Kerry, Biden, Baucus, Dodd, Harkin, Leahy, Murray, Cantwell supported and STILL support the elimination of manufacturing within the US. The same is for the Republican leaders - but they are PUBLICLY state their support.

This country's economy and our growing debt is not just a result of the Bush Administration's tax cut and the Iraqi Invasion. It has been growing for decades. Until there is a new third party of moderates, or until the extremists in both parties are voted out, the working class of USA will continue to be the majority poor class.

DO NOT BE FOOLED BY TH
Posted By: aguasticas @ 08/26/2008 8:54:13 AM

Comment: Yes, this is fine, but add to it a bloated military budget of almost half a trillion dollars to support an unnecessary war begun by a group of paranoid people without a clue on money. These two guys, Bush and Cheney, the former an MBA Harvard graduate and the latter a CEO of Halliburton illustrate the problem with military usage and spending. There should be a thorough examination of the real security needs of the US. Instead, these two manufactured a threat to start a war, created an agency, Homeland Security, that was not necessary, and could have cared less about deficit spending. The US has soldiers in 130 countries. Not necessary. The Navy sails the world. Not necessary. The problem is the cozy relationship between military contractors, the military, and the politicians who stay on in Washington for decades. They all have "careers" in politics. Term limits, balanced budget amendment, cutting the military budget to fit the real defense needs of the country, term limits on lobbyists and how campaigns are financed by constitutional amendment are all soe of the things that ought to be done. Will they happen? Same fantasy as the current two politicians running for the presidency are spouting.
- Posted By: Jose52 @ 08/28/2008 10:38:13 AM
  
  Comment: To Aguasticas, You dishonor our leaders (even if Bush is a Harvard grad). In our history, GW (Washington) stated to avoid foreign entanglements, which Thomas Jefferson followed and wrote about trying to instill into his adminstration. However, history has a habit of creating situations and testing the resolve of our nation. Jefferson had a to fight a war in Tripoli against Muslims pirates( sound familar) and also bought the Louisana Purchase (against his iniatal reservations on monetary policy or bank). Your armchair analysis has a liberal bent and these global decisions should be left to adults with Gravitas.
  Sign up and grab a weapon; then stand post. The russians will kill Georgians and you..
Posted By: Jack Prentiss @ 08/25/2008 8:22:15 PM

Comment: "But the country as a whole may lose."

Well, what constitutes "losing" for the country is complicated. If the Welfare State isn't destoyed pretty soon, it will destroy every last shred of decency and sanity left in this Country.

Therefore, I was well pleased to see the budget plans of both Obama and McCain will lead to even larger budget shortfalls than those we've enjoyed under Bush.

Get out of the bathtub, Grover, and for god's sake put some clothes on! We're going to have some fun...
Posted By: reezel @ 08/25/2008 4:30:14 PM

Comment: How do I get a copy of the documentary to watch? Can I see it on my computer?
Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 08/25/2008 11:35:27 AM

Comment: POLL POSITION: Barack Obama and John McCain are neck and neck in the FORMULA 2008 RACE, sounds like there could be some DUSTS AHEAD, test those wiper blades, make sure they're working.
Posted By: just jerry @ 08/25/2008 11:17:41 AM

Comment: You're right both are playing a game, just like politicians always do to get elected. The question we have to answer is: once you get past the phony rhetoric of both candidates which one of the candidates will be most successful working in a non-partisan manner to solve problems instead of continuing the politics of polarization?
Posted By: Dollared @ 08/25/2008 10:56:21 AM

Comment: Samuelson is a dishonest hack. If he believed all this, he would have opposed the Bush tax cuts. He did not. If he believed all this, he would clearly favor Obama's health care plan, which controls costs by forcing private health plans to compete with the more efficient public plans, or he should favor single-payor health plans with strong cost controls. He doesn't poiunt out how our defense spending is completely out of control, and how that impacts this discussion. Finally, he is being somewhat honest about raising social security eligibility age, but he doesn't point out that raising the reirement age isn't the only way - Obama's plan to raise the Social Security contirbution from the wealthy would also solve the problem, with much less pain for all involved.

In short, Samuelson is a Republican, pretending to be nonpartisan.
Posted By: stonehenge @ 08/25/2008 10:38:56 AM

Comment: What will the VILLAGE IDIOTS who plan to vote for the Naval Aviator Hero in order to spite Obama tell their children and grandchildren? But then perhaps they are enuchs.
Posted By: FREETHINKINGAMERICAN @ 08/25/2008 5:33:15 AM

Comment: Well, in the end, a people gets the government it deserves and that reflects themselves.
Fantasising politicians for a fantasising electorate that wants to live beyond its means and always chooses the sugar-coated pill.
Posted By: tc125231 @ 08/24/2008 4:02:03 PM

Comment: Tough choices. Oh! You mean like the Bush tax cuts as a lead-up to War? The Tax cuts you have never repudiated, or suggested should be rescinded?

What good are you? Can't you EVER say anything honest?
Posted By: loriw @ 08/23/2008 9:43:07 PM

Comment: I wonder what value Obama places on the life of a baby? After the abortionist does the abortion he doesn't care if the infant is born alive or dead he gets paid either way.
Obama doesn't care if the baby, if born alive after an abortion, is left to die alone in a cold hospital or clinic's dirty utility room as long as the mother or the abortionist isn't further "burdened".
Sometimes folks, it has to be about something more humane than the economy....
- Posted By: btorched @ 08/25/2008 5:43:31 PM
  
  Comment: Great, and when that Mother does have the baby are you going to help support it? WIll you make sure that part of your taxes are available to that mother/child. Probably not, but hey that's the great Republican attitiude! Make sure that NO one can have an abortion, and when that mother needs help YOU PEOPLE are the first ones to turn your back on them!
  - Posted By: UNAROB @ 08/26/2008 8:43:04 AM
    
    Comment: Hey btorched how about if you don't want a kid don't have sex or use birth control? I guess taking responsiblity for your actions isn't the left's strong suit is it? Always looking for a way out of your responsibilities or forcing someone else to pick up your slack huh?
Posted By: RO in Reno @ 08/23/2008 8:59:31 PM

Comment: It goes without saying, the economic abyss the US is now is will not be reversed in 8 years we'll be lucky if it is dealt with in 80 years.
But the fact is this country has an economic crisis with every Republican administration, the short sighted drive for lower wages, (those are the consumers that are being driven into the ground after all), is only the tip of the ice berg.
Reagans trickle down economics or as the Bush administration calls it "Supply side economics" would actually work IF the suppliers were American entrepreneurs and workers instead of the Chinese, but the push to increase the bottom line failed to note that."
But the corruption of Government is the real reason plain and simple greed, This Administration went into office with only one vision and that was to make money for the few, they have succeeded, and Americans will be paying the tap for the next three generations
- Posted By: TexasGoat @ 08/26/2008 12:57:11 PM
  
  Comment: You are all right.... The process stinks and it is clearly the fault of our congressmen and senators, sometimes aided and abetted by the president. The only answer to they're imcompetence/corruptness
  is term limits. We can inforce this immediatley by never voting for an icumbent or someone endorsed by an encumbent again. Once you serve a term in congress, its time to go back to your day job.