Economics Is Fun
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
DIGG THIS
All
right, so I’m not exactly the most impartial source when it comes
to the Politically Incorrect Guide series of books. But that doesn’t
mean I’m not to be believed when I say you should read Robert P.
Murphy’s new book, The
Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism.
Now the
first book someone should read on economics is probably still Henry
Hazlitt’s little classic Economics
in One Lesson, whose short, easy-to-understand text teaches
you how to think like an economist. But Robert Murphy’s Politically
Incorrect Guide to Capitalism builds skillfully on that indispensable
volume, and takes its place among the very few books that beginners
simply must read and absorb.
It isn’t
just that Murphy gives you an excellent introduction to everything
from prices and wages to money, banking, antitrust law, and international
trade – things every informed American should know about – though
he certainly does. And it isn’t just that he covers topics like
outsourcing that would not have been discussed in Hazlitt’s day,
though this is also true. Even better is that Murphy not only doesn’t
avoid the difficult questions, but he actually seems to relish them.
We all know
price controls don’t work, and that taxation discourages production.
Ho-hum. But how about explaining why capitalism undermines slavery,
why CEO salaries aren’t arbitrary and outrageous, or why road privatization
is not only feasible but vastly preferable to what Walter Block
calls "road socialism"? Murphy covers them all.
Murphy writes
in an easy-to-understand style, and has a gift for choosing just
the right analogy. He also has a way of taking what at first glance
sounds pretty radical and making it sound like simple common sense.
Take airline
regulation, for example. Wouldn’t there be lots of crashes in the
absence of federal regulation? Wouldn’t we all have to research
the safety records of all the airlines on which we planned to travel?
(Almost) needless
to say, nothing of the kind would happen. These objections, in fact,
illustrate the almost embarrassing lack of imagination and common
sense that develop among the general population whenever people
have grown accustomed to state-directed approaches. After a while,
no one can imagine how things could be done any other way – and
when the rare maverick claims otherwise, all people can do is repeat,
in zombie-like unison, the clichés they’ve been taught by
their masters.
To the contrary,
if people simply insisted on indemnification in the event of a crash,
the airlines would have to take out insurance in order to be able
to satisfy any claims that might arise. Any such insurance company
would have a vested interest in doing (or hiring outside agencies
to do) all the regulatory inquiry that makes sense – tracking the
age and condition of the planes, the skill level of the pilots,
and so on. The airline, seeking the lowest possible premiums (not
to mention wanting to avoid the unfavorable publicity that stems
from people dying on their flights), would have every reason to
want a good safety record.
Ineffective
or corrupt private certification would be swiftly punished, as Murphy
explains:
The fundamental
difference between private "regulators" versus government
bureaucrats is that the former will last only if they are effective.
If the insurance company’s inspectors, for example, take kickbacks
from the airlines and overlook cost-cutting but dangerous maintenance
procedures, this corruption will be rooted out after the first
plane crash. The insurer will lose hundreds of millions of dollars
(certainly more than the total value of the kickbacks), and other
airlines will advertise their superior standards and lure away
passengers.
When a federal
regulatory agency fails, on the other hand, the response of the
zombies is that it needs a bigger budget.
In the area
of rail transport, a lot of people realize that Amtrak is a loser.
"It loses money in every conceivable way – on ticket sales
and even on its food and beverage concessions," Murphy points
put. He adds that the line between Los Angeles and Orlando lost
$433 per passenger. "Your tax dollars would have been saved
if the line had been scrapped and Amtrak’s customers given plane
tickets instead."
More importantly,
though, Murphy shows why Amtrak isn’t just a fluke, and why government
enterprise (so called) will inevitably be plagued by arbitrariness
and waste. Forget about making government run like a business, as
we’re often told – it can’t, and Murphy explains why. Meanwhile,
the government officials who benefit from Amtrak, and who are perfectly
happy to have the rest of the country subsidize their commute, are
not about to pull the plug on the whole scam.
The ongoing
debate over free trade has reached a point at which it is very difficult
for the average person to figure out the rights and wrongs, the
truths and the falsehoods, in all the arguments being offered. In
one of the many delightful sidebars generously adorning his pages,
Murphy brings home the major protectionist fallacy by quoting from
Frédéric Bastiat’s famous "Petition of the Candlemakers,"
in which makers of candles protest the unfair competition of the
sun. They call for a law "requiring the closing of all windows,
dormers, skylights, inside and outside shutters, curtains, casements,
bull’s-eyes, deadlights, and blinds – in short, all openings, holes,
chinks, and fissures through which the light of the sun is wont
to enter houses, to the detriment of the fair industries with which,
we are proud to say, we have endowed the country, a country that
cannot, without betraying ingratitude, abandon us today to so unequal
a combat."
To be sure,
trade restrictions do protect the jobs of those workers who produce
the protected item, just as blocking out the sun by law would benefit
the candlemakers. At the same time, of course, they make consumers
worse off, since the price of the protected item now increases –
either because consumers now have to pay more for foreign goods
(thanks to the tariff) or for domestic goods (because the tariff
on foreign goods makes it possible for domestic producers to charge
more). Critics of free trade assure us that this is a trade-off
they’re willing to accept – and they intend to make us accept it,
too, whether we want to or not.
The great body
of consumers are not the only losers in protectionism. The export
sector suffers as well. In addition, any firm or industry using
one of the "protected" items in its own production now
finds itself at a competitive disadvantage. "American car makers
suffered when President Bush instituted steel tariffs," Murphy
writes. "Federal sugar quotas, which make the U.S. price for
sugar twice the world price, similarly drove Life Savers to move
its manufacturing to Canada, where it can buy sugar from all over
the world."
(Incidentally,
Murphy doesn’t just repeat the standard arguments for free trade;
he goes on to consider the more fashionable directions that the
anti-trade argument has taken in recent years. In particular, he
argues persuasively against the current-day argument that the classical
assumptions behind free trade and the benefits it was said to hold
for all participants are no longer valid in an age of labor and
capital mobility.)
The
Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism is positively filled
with interesting insights and little-known facts. Thus, building
on an insight of Jane Jacobs, Murphy shows how zoning regulations
and "urban planning" by know-it-alls have actually contributed
to the prevalence of crime in urban areas. He shows why NASA’s safety
record and expensive failures not only shouldn’t surprise us, but
should actually be expected. And he discusses the much-touted and
totally misrepresented case of California energy "deregulation"
– a typical episode in which the effects of phony deregulation,
which kept all manner of price caps and regulations in place and
may have introduced incentives even more destructive than what existed
before, were perversely attributed to the free market!
Plenty
of people carelessly suppose that reading an economics book must
be unspeakable drudgery. To the contrary, The Politically Incorrect
Guide to Capitalism is great fun, written by a scholar with
the ability to produce rigorous scholarly articles as well as to
explain difficult concepts in an easy-to-understand way for the
general public.
But this
book is not just for you. It’s also for all the students in your
life, nearly all of whom are being taught in their social studies
classes about the selflessness of the American political class and
its disinterested commitment to the common good. They’re learning
about the workings of our form of government, in which people of
good will meet in the public square to cooperate on initiatives
to make all Americans better off. And so on and on, direct from
somewhere on Mars to their textbooks.
The
world has plenty of zombies as it is. Original thoughts – and lots
of them – are the best antidote, which is why Bob Murphy’s book
is so important, and so welcome.
April
26, 2007
Thomas E. Woods, Jr. [view
his website;
send
him mail] is
senior fellow in American history at the Ludwig
von Mises Institute. His
books include How
the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization (get a free chapter
here),
The
Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy
(first-place winner in the 2006
Templeton Enterprise Awards), and the New York Times
bestseller The
Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.
Copyright
© 2007 Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Thomas
Woods Archives
|