« A creationist President? | Main | Mankind's comparative advantage »

January 05, 2008


Tim Worstall

Quite. There are some things that must be done centrally, by government, with the powers of compulsion that they alone (should) have.
The rest of it will probably muddle along better if we're allowed to build our own systems, from the ground up, to deal with problems as and when they arise.
Just a random choice from the current news headlines: I don't think we'd be trying to insist that those on unemployment benefit should take a job or training, if offered, in order to continue getting such benefit, if it were still locally run Friendly Societies providing said benefit.
I think those paying in their weekly insurance premium similarly locally would be doing some quite forceful insisting of their own (and no, I don't know how we get from here to there, nor do I know whether it's actually desirable or not. It's an example).

dearieme, Ph D.

Have you considered acupuncture?


You've got a point here.
But there could be one more reason. Maybe the qualities needed to be a politician (getting oneself high enough in the party ladder to have the power to make a difference, I mean) are totally different from those needed to be a good manager.
You need to be a charlatan to be elected and charlatans often make poor work and need to keep the spin on.
However, we, the poor citizens, keep waiting for one that will be the real one, the one with the miracle cure. Today it seems to be someone called Obama.

Mark Brinkley

If a politician can't manage anything effectively - the case for which you make effectively - doesn't mean they have to cover up this truth with hollow words about vision etc. It would be a breath of fresh air just to hear one them say "I'll try my best at managing the mess."

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad