Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Why People Prefer Government to Markets
Why People Prefer Government to Markets
Nov 14, 2024 9:08 PM

People do not love markets,” says Pascal Boyer of the International Cognition & Culture Institute, “there is a lot of evidence for that.” Sadly, Boyer is right and I suspect he’s right about the cause too: People do not like markets because people seem not to understand much about market economics.

We don’t fully understand this antipathy, Boyer notes, because there hasn’t been much research on folk-economics, a study of “what makes people’s economic modules tick.” But I think Boyer has identified one of the key reasons why people tend to prefer government interventions to market-driven solutions:

[H]umans may be motivated to place their trust in processes that are (or at least seem to be) driven by agents rather than impersonal factors. This may be why there is a strong correlation between being scared of markets and being in favour of state interventions in the economy. One of the most widespread political assumptions in modern industrial societies is that “the government should do something about x”, where x can be any social or economic problem. Why do people trust the state? The state (in people’s intuitions, not in actual fact) has all the trappings of an agent. It is supposed to have knowledge, memories, intentions, strategies, etc. Now it may be that people are vastly fortable trusting an agent to provide help or impose sanctions, than they would trust an impersonal, distributed and largely invisible process. That would be mostly a question of intuitive psychology (highly salient in our reasonings about social processes) versus population thinking (highly unintuitive, difficult to acquire and engage in without sustained effort).

While free-market conservatives and libertarians may not be as susceptible to this bias, we are partially responsible for its ubiquity. For example, we often talk—or allow others to talk—as if the President was the CEO of the American economy. While the POTUS can certainly have a significant (often negative) influence on the economy, the office has very little direct control over the economy. Yet many people truly believe that the president could “fix” the economy if only he had the will/knowledge/desire to do so.

Because we tend to have political reasons for perpetuating this myth, we often allow this belief to persist without challenge. But if we want to effectively champion the effectiveness of free enterprise, we need to find a way to make people realize that government is not a sentient creature that can make beneficent economic decision on our behalf.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The ‘Moral’ Minimum Wage Increase Hurts Teens and Minorities
Religious activists are stumping for a minimum wage increase as a way to help the disadvantaged. But do they understand the economics? Anthony Bradley observes that government-mandated pay hikes “actually hurt teens and low-skilled minorities in the long run because minimum wage jobs are usually entry-level positions filled by employees with limited work experience and few job skills.” Read the mentary here. ...
Will Chicago Mandate the “Everyday Low Price” too?
Chicago’s City Council passed a measure last week that mandates “big box” stores such as Wal-Mart, Best Buy and Lowe’s to pay workers — regardless of experience — a minimum wage of $13 an hour including benefits by 2010. See the opinion piece in today’s Wall Street Journal. The justification is to help poor people have a better standard of living. Is this another example of good intentions mixed with bad economics? This time I doubt the intentions are to...
Religious Freedom in China
Do economic, political, and religious freedom go together? Rodney Stark, writing in his recent book The Victory of Reason, says that “It seems doubtful than an effective modern economy can be created without adopting capitalism, as was demonstrated by the failure of mand economies of the Soviet Union and China.” He also writes, There are many reasons people embrace Christianity, including its capacity to sustain a deeply emotional and existentially satisfying faith. But another significant factor is its appeal to...
The New Suburbanism
How many of you would like to live here? Tom Monaghan has received a lot of attention for his plans to create munity in Florida in conjunction with the founding of a new Roman Catholic university: “The panying town will provide single- and multi-family housing in a wide range of styles and prices, along mercial and office facilities to modate the businesses and organizations needed to support this major academic institution.” Here’s what Katie Couric had to say in an...
Krauthammer on Proportionality
“‘Disproportionate’ in What Moral Universe?” asks Charles Krauthammer in today’s Washington Post. He continues: When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to cinders, and turned the Japanese home islands into rubble and ruin. Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal...
Isn’t the Cold War Over?
I’ve got an idea for a new . Titled, Hugo and Vladi, it details the zany adventures of two world leaders, one of whom (played by David Hyde Pierce) struggles to upkeep his image of a friendly, modern European diplomat while his goofball brother-in-law (played by George Lopez) keeps screwing it up for him by spouting off vitriolic Soviet rhetoric and threatening all of Western civilization with his agressive (but loveable) arms sales and seizures of private panies. It is...
Sin and Extreme Sports
You may know that a traditional way of interpreting the Ten Commandments involves articulating both the explicit negative prohibitions as well as the implicit positive duties. So, for example, the mandment prohibiting murder is understood in the Heidelberg Catechism to answer the question, “Is it enough then that we do not kill our neighbor in any such way?” by saying, “No. By condemning envy, hatred, and anger God tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves, to be patient, peace-loving,...
On Blogging
G. K. Chesterton on Journalists: “…there exists in the modern world, perhaps for the first time in history, a class of people whose interest is not in that things should happen well or happen badly, should happen successfully or happen unsuccessfully, should happen to the advantage of this party or the advantage of that party, but whose interest simply is that things should happen. “It is the one great weakness of journalism as a picture of our modern existence, that...
Coulter on Christianity and the Welfare State
In this Beliefnet interview conducted by Charlotte Allen, conservative firebrand Ann Coulter references the work of Acton senior fellow Marvin Olasky: Is it possible to be a good Christian and sincerely believe, as Jim Wallis does, that a bigger welfare state and higher taxes to fund it is the best way in plex modern society for us to fulfill our Gospel obligation to help the poor? It’s possible, but not likely. Confiscatory taxation enforced by threat of imprisonment is “stealing,”...
‘We get Viagra. They get malaria.’
At least, the title of this post is typical of the mantra against the practices of drug panies, according to Peter W. Huber’s “Of Pills and Profits: In Defense of Big Pharma,” in Commentary magazine (HT: Arts & Letters Daily). Huber, a senior fellow of the Manhattan Institute, summarizes in brief the pany argument, and then goes on to examine what truth there is in such claims. He says of the difference between creating and administering drugs, “Getting drug policy...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2024 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved