Monthly Archives: June 2016

Brexit and the dream of Apartheid

“I don’t want to sound racist, but I think there are just too many people coming into the country. I moved out here from Dagenham four years ago, because Dagenham was looking like a foreign country.”

Nobody wants to sound racist, but sometimes racism happens.

The referendum vote in Britain has been an object lesson in the dangers of direct democracy. This is what we hire politicians for.

It is also an object lesson in the dangers of loose confederacy over a tight Federal union. The greatest triumph of American statesmanship was to replace the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution. The states were bound together much more tightly by the Constitution, and it was a one-way street.

David Cameron has given Vladimir Putin the best bit of news the Russian dictator has had since the Ukrainian Revolution. Why join? Why stay? These questions are so much easier to ask, today.

The effects within the UK are still to be assessed, but already we see that English relations with Scotland and Northern Ireland have been vastly complicated, perhaps fatally for the Union. At the same time, London will face the largest threat ever to remaining a more important financial center than Frankfurt.

North Korea and Myanmar have been stark lessons in the success of going your own way. All Britain is, I’m sure, breathless to hear what Nigel Farage’s juche advice will be. The rest of us are simply shaking our heads.


What government can learn from Einstein

A scientific theory should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.

In some sense, a government is a theory, or at least a hypothesis, about human behavior. Louis XIV had a theory of government that  maximized the benefits to him. The Kim family of North Korea has a theory of government that maximizes the benefit to their family. And the United States has a Constitution which maximizes the benefit to all Americans.

Right on the tin

How do I know this? Well, it says so right on the tin. “…promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, etc. etc. etc.” The hypothesis of the US Constitution is that, among other things, the job of government and in specific the Federal government, is to promote welfare. This promotion is not aimed at the benefit of any single person, family or class. It is the general welfare, and it is not limited in time any more than space. The Federal government is supposed to maximize the total welfare of all Americans extending indefinitely into the future.

That is a big job. There are some of a libertarian bent that would like to pretend these phrases don’t exist. Certainly the other phrases they tend to focus on are important as well. Establishing justice through a court system and legal system. Providing for the common defense against all enemies foreign and domestic. Also central to the hypothesis, but not to the exclusion of the general welfare.

The best government

I prefer a government theory that follows the Einsteinian maxim. The best government is one that is as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Why is the transport infrastructure of the country mainly owned and maintained by the government? Roads and bridges, subways and trolleys, ports and airports – they all used to be private. And then they went bankrupt, often because of delayed maintenance expenses. It appears that there are some things that private enterprise does not do better than government.

Food and drug safety, occupational safety, transport safety. Clean water and air. Support for education and a social safety net. All of them, clearly the job of the Federal government under the theory laid out in the Constitution. The Constitution does not exist to simply clear the ground for competition. It does not say that the only recovery to a wrong is through the courts. An ounce of regulatory prevention (that benefits everyone) is better than the pound of cure( that only benefits that specific person). The government itself has an active role to play, certainly within spaces where private enterprise does not work.

Private enterprise may fail for many reasons. Profits may be uncertain, or the payback period too long. As with all the failed private infrastructure companies throughout the years, the short-term profit focus starves maintenance, or investment in innovation. Companies fall victim to tyrants, to demagogues, as often as countries do. One has voters, the other has shareholders, each can be lied to. The mere existence of the corporate structure is no guaranty of efficiency or virtue. “And our Posterity” is rarely if ever part of the corporate shareholder value equation.

So, yes! I am in favor of a small government! As small as possible, but not smaller.