Liberals do think more with their hearts than their heads:
Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country—liberals, conservatives or libertarians? According to a Zogby International survey that I write about in the May issue of Econ Journal Watch, the answer is unequivocal: The left flunks Econ 101. Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic and I considered the 4,835 respondents' (all American adults) answers to eight survey questions about basic economics. We also asked the respondents about their political leanings: progressive/very liberal; liberal; moderate; conservative; very conservative; and libertarian. Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened. Consider one of the economic propositions in the December 2008 poll: "Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable." People were asked if they: 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure. Basic economics acknowledges that whatever redeeming features a restriction may have, it increases the cost of production and exchange, making goods and services less affordable. There may be exceptions to the general case, but they would be atypical. Therefore, we counted as incorrect responses of "somewhat disagree" and "strongly disagree." This treatment gives leeway for those who think the question is ambiguous or half right and half wrong. They would likely answer "not sure," which we do not count as incorrect. In this case, percentage of conservatives answering incorrectly was 22.3%, very conservatives 17.6% and libertarians 15.7%. But the percentage of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly was 67.6% and liberals 60.1%. The pattern was not an anomaly. The other questions were: 1) Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those services (unenlightened answer: disagree). 2) Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago (unenlightened answer: disagree). 3) Rent control leads to housing shortages (unenlightened answer: disagree). 4) A company with the largest market share is a monopoly (unenlightened answer: agree). 5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree). 6) Free trade leads to unemployment (unenlightened answer: agree). 7) Minimum wage laws raise unemployment (unenlightened answer: disagree). How did the six ideological groups do overall? Here they are, best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8: Very conservative, 1.30; Libertarian, 1.38; Conservative, 1.67; Moderate, 3.67; Liberal, 4.69; Progressive/very liberal, 5.26. Americans in the first three categories do reasonably well. But the left has trouble squaring economic thinking with their political psychology, morals and aesthetics. To be sure, none of the eight questions specifically challenge the political sensibilities of conservatives and libertarians. Still, not all of the eight questions are tied directly to left-wing concerns about inequality and redistribution. In particular, the questions about mandatory licensing, the standard of living, the definition of monopoly, and free trade do not specifically challenge leftist sensibilities. Yet on every question the left did much worse. On the monopoly question, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (31%) was more than twice that of conservatives (13%) and more than four times that of libertarians (7%). On the question about living standards, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (61%) was more than four times that of conservatives (13%) and almost three times that of libertarians (21%). The survey also asked about party affiliation. Those responding Democratic averaged 4.59 incorrect answers. Republicans averaged 1.61 incorrect, and Libertarians 1.26 incorrect. Adam Smith described political economy as "a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator." Governmental power joined with wrongheadedness is something terrible, but all too common. Realizing that many of our leaders and their constituents are economically unenlightened sheds light on the troubles that surround us. Mr. Klein is a professor of economics at George Mason University. This op-ed is based on an article published in the May 2010 issue of the journal he edits, Econ Journal Watch, a project sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research. The article is at: http://econjwatch.org/articles/economic-enlightenment-in-relation-to-college-going-ideology-and-other-variables-a-zogby-survey-of-americans.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
I found this fascinating, I just wasn't expecting such a wide divergence between liberals and conservatives, though I'm not surprised to see libertarians come out on top.
Resident Christian Anarcho-Capitalist.
Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country
The idea that there is a method to gain rational and functional knowledge for 'policy choices' is in itself a fallacy.
“Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.” - Benito Mussolini"Toute nation a le gouvernemente qu'il mérite." - Joseph de Maistre
YES THEY CAN!
I know what you are saying, but I think the point we get from this is that the driving force behind leftism, more so than conservatism, is economic pipe-dreams.
Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.
Almost no one is educated as libertarian, you have to go out of your way to become it.
it makes sense that they are more aware of economics.
So does economic ignorance cause leftism, or leftism cause economic ignorance?
I'm inclined to think its the latter. Fashion trumps real personal development.
"The idea that there is a method to gain rational and functional knowledge for 'policy choices' is in itself a fallacy."
Why?
The survery doesn't ask anyone to choose the right policy, but rather to acertain some of its effects...
"So does economic ignorance cause leftism, or leftism cause economic ignorance?"
Both. If one is ignorant of economics then they are going to be drawn by the "humanitarian" policies of the left, whilst if you're already leftist then its more likely that you will continue as such. However overall I would have to say the first it most true, considering that no one goes out of their way to unlearn their economics if they're on the left already. That is to say if someone is ignorant of economics they are more likely to turn to the left, if somone is leftist then they're not exactly going to necessarily shun economic teaching per se, they just aren't likely to be exposed it it.... Most of them at least
So does economic ignorance cause leftism, or leftism cause economic ignorance? I'm inclined to think its the latter. Fashion trumps real personal development.
Sometime, read at least the first few pages of Spencer's Education (free on mises.org IIRC) and think of the 2008 elections, or electoral politics in general.
the responses:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75399/study-proves-libertarian-economists-ignorant
^ is this guy a marxist?
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/are-you-smarter-than-george-mason.html
I didn't read the Marxist? one but Nate Silver (538) is pretty reliable IMO. I didn't realize the problems with some of the questions, or that they arbitrarily threw half of them out. Still, I think that even if you improved the poll, it would be roughly the same but not so bad for the leftists. You could further break down the "libertarian category" and approach zero too =)
the second one is interesting, but the first one isn't worth a dime to read--he states that the minimum wage is a positive thing by citing the ultra-questionable Card & Kreuger "study".
I'm glad to know a few points from the second one, namely the questions that were chucked completely, but there's others that are unfairly criticized; for example the market share one--it's fairly clear that the question is asking if a company is a monopoly merely by having the largest/majority market-share, meaning if you control 20% of the market and all your collective competitors controlled 80%, you could still be defined as a "monopoly" because you have the largest single market share.
Thanks for the info though.
On my intuition, I think the left has quite a bit of elitism, scientism,and subjectivism in its crowds. In fact any more I would think that they are the main fuel for the left. Yeah, they have their hippies and others who think with their hearts (and other parts of the body) but I don't think the majority of them are in any position that matters.
I thought the monopoly question was strange, but not for the reasons that are brought up. Its like what is the point of the question. Who would get that wrong? I didn't know that any reasonable person would think that was a monopoly.
I think it should have been framed more to expose fallacies like the 'monopolies can engage in price slashing to drive out their competitors and then raise prices"
Because states have an epistemic problem of systemic ignorance, not knowing what they do not know, which generates an arbitrariness in thier actions that is not suffered by markeet sectors.
What is the argument that free trade doesn't lead to unemployment? Increased trade equals increased efficiency which means individuals will have more money to spend, and therefore increased demand for other goods/services?
Someone spell it out for me, please.
@Cal 0, here you go: http://www.amazon.com/Choice-Fable-Trade-Protectionism-Updated/dp/0130870528
www.skylerjcollins.com www.libertysearch.info
Care to comment on my argument? I'm trying to win an e-debate on another forum. =D
I'm pretty sure the liberals didn't have in mind the 1990 Card and Kreuger studies... which are seriously cooked
@Cal 0, here's a brief overview of the benefits of free trade: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfE2HO8p3FE&feature=player_embedded
@Skyler, I have seen that video, but it doesn't address the claim that it doesn't lead to further unemployment, which the survey asked.
My bad, here's something from The Freeman by Hans Sennholz: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/protectionism-and-unemployment/
I found this through my search engine www.libertysearch.info.
Skyler.
5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree)
I disagree. It depends on the definition of exploitation. I can't assume these businesses are operating as a free market. Some companies violently crash unionization. Do companies violently force people to work? I do not know the answer to this.