Love ‘em or hate ‘em. The 43 men (Cleveland counts twice because he had a split term) who have occupied the White House have affected the lives of more people in one day than many of us will in a lifetime. For those of us that think politics is a bit insane, think about all the good that is done – or, at the least, can be done.
The president can provide food for the hungry, homes for the homeless and help for the hopeless. He, and perhaps one day “she,” is counted on to fix a broken economy, to protect us from outside threats while maintaining a free and open society, to ensure that all citizens are treated equally under the law, to clean the air, to maintain national peace, to manage a staff of nearly 2 million and a budget of trillions, and…well, you get the point. In the end, every president simply wants to create a more a perfect union.
Given these heavy responsibilities, the presidency must be the most stressful job in the world, as evidenced by the graying of their hair throughout their tenure. On top of this, there is a near certainty that a large portion of the country will hate him and think he is ill-equipped to perform the duties of his position. There are even some that root for his failure – which is our failure – yet claim they love their country (note the contradiction there).
The truth is, it is easy to criticize the president, and that is our right as Americans. But let’s not forget, in the course of civil debate, that Presidents Bush (41), Clinton, Bush (43) and Obama all love our country and try to do what’s right. They all agree in the importance of national security, economic prosperity and human rights. Where they differ is on how to best accomplish our national priorities. Let’s never forget that.
Regardless of the ease in which we critique the president’s policies, it is still the most important position in the world. The stakes are never higher, the impact never greater. Aspiring to be the President of the United States should continue to be the highest goal of idealistic kids determining what they want to be when they grow up.
Let’s treat today as more than simply a day off of work. Let’s thank these men who committed themselves to serving the greatest country in the world and worked to make this world a little better than they found it.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
The Problem of Certainty in Uncertain Times
While reading one of my favorite blogs and podcasts, Planet Money, I was introduced to the recently released hip-hop video entitled “Fear the Boom and Bust - a Hayek vs Keynes Rap Anthem”. In a very simple way, this mock battle-rap distills and contrasts two complicated economic theories in a fun and amusing way, and, in a larger sense, the video mirrors the great economic debate that is at the top of our economic agenda: regulation vs. deregulation; market interventions vs. free markets.
However, while watching the video, I was struck with the certainty that each economist communicated the supremacy of their theory (albeit, through their rapping actor stand-ins). I never met F. A. Hayek or John Maynard Keynes, but I imagine they, like many philosophers or academics, possessed an absolute certainty with the Truth of their positions (and corresponding rejection of any idea that may refute their position) that is similar to today’s rappers. It is a similar belief in one’s own certainty that has polarized otherwise civil discussions about the problems confronting our country today.
For instance, five years ago, some of the best mathematical thinkers (or “quants”) in the world were absolutely certain that mortgage-backed securities would do nothing but grow exponentially for the indefinite future. As we since learned, this new type of investment was so new that we could not accurately predict how they would perform in the future. (see page 10)
Similarly, economist Richard Florida developed a strategy to help post-industrial cities transform their economies from stagnant manufacturing hubs to centers of knowledge-based workers. Inspired by the certainty of the proposed success of his strategy, so many cities and public servants around the country adopted his strategy of The Rise of the Creative Class to change their governing policies that this idea grew into a broad movement. These cities are now facing a dose of reality, as Mr. Florida has since updated his theory to assert that, "We need to be clear that ultimately, we can't stop the decline of some places and that we would be foolish to try." And this debate continues.
Towards the end of the “Fear the Boom and Bust” video, two quotes from Hayek and Keynes are presented on the screen:
While these two quotes come from two great thinkers, each certain he is right and the other is wrong, it seems that each is telling us: nothing is certain, and don’t believe anyone who tells you otherwise.
However, while watching the video, I was struck with the certainty that each economist communicated the supremacy of their theory (albeit, through their rapping actor stand-ins). I never met F. A. Hayek or John Maynard Keynes, but I imagine they, like many philosophers or academics, possessed an absolute certainty with the Truth of their positions (and corresponding rejection of any idea that may refute their position) that is similar to today’s rappers. It is a similar belief in one’s own certainty that has polarized otherwise civil discussions about the problems confronting our country today.
For instance, five years ago, some of the best mathematical thinkers (or “quants”) in the world were absolutely certain that mortgage-backed securities would do nothing but grow exponentially for the indefinite future. As we since learned, this new type of investment was so new that we could not accurately predict how they would perform in the future. (see page 10)
Similarly, economist Richard Florida developed a strategy to help post-industrial cities transform their economies from stagnant manufacturing hubs to centers of knowledge-based workers. Inspired by the certainty of the proposed success of his strategy, so many cities and public servants around the country adopted his strategy of The Rise of the Creative Class to change their governing policies that this idea grew into a broad movement. These cities are now facing a dose of reality, as Mr. Florida has since updated his theory to assert that, "We need to be clear that ultimately, we can't stop the decline of some places and that we would be foolish to try." And this debate continues.
Towards the end of the “Fear the Boom and Bust” video, two quotes from Hayek and Keynes are presented on the screen:
“The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.”- John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money
“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they know about what they imagine they can design.” - F. A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
While these two quotes come from two great thinkers, each certain he is right and the other is wrong, it seems that each is telling us: nothing is certain, and don’t believe anyone who tells you otherwise.
Monday, February 1, 2010
The "P" Word
Wednesday, January 27, 2010 Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner claimed, amid harsh questioning and criticism by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on the AIG bailout, “I have worked in public service all my life. I have never been a politician.”
In response, Representative Mike Turner, one of the two Congressmen from my home town (I grew up on the border of two districts) in Ohio, responded “I want to assure you from your answers today that you are absolutely a politician,” with no small level of contempt.
What Geithner said is telling. He wanted to garner sympathy for being an honorable life-long public servant, not a “dirty” politician. What Rep. Turner said is disturbing. In an effort to kick a man while he was down, he called a man the “P” word.
But wait a minute, you might plead. Isn’t CONGRESSMAN Turner a politician? The answer, simply, is yes. So why would Rep. Turner belittle himself and his occupation?
The answer, again, is simple. Elected officials understand that the best way to be popular with constituents is to be on their side and oftentimes this means hating politicians. It is easy and popular to be a party that rails against the establishment. Just ask the Republicans of 1994, who won 54 additional seats in the House due to discontentment with Clinton, or the Democrats of 2006, who added 31 seats to their House ranks thanks to the unpopularity of Bush.
Following up on my most recent post, this is very sad for democracy. I work very closely with the Hill and I will tell you, most Members of Congress are there representing their districts honorably and effectively. Of course there is dead weight and abuse of power in D.C. But the only reason it is noticed so much more in D.C. is because more people pay attention and the stakes are so high; not necessarily because it is more frequent.
The truth is that most people run for public office to do good for others. Yes, there is a level of narcissism, but most politicians endure public scrutiny and false accusations in the hopes that they might be able to make this world a little better for future generations. The media and voters beat up this profession enough; do the politicians really need to jump in and help?
In response, Representative Mike Turner, one of the two Congressmen from my home town (I grew up on the border of two districts) in Ohio, responded “I want to assure you from your answers today that you are absolutely a politician,” with no small level of contempt.
What Geithner said is telling. He wanted to garner sympathy for being an honorable life-long public servant, not a “dirty” politician. What Rep. Turner said is disturbing. In an effort to kick a man while he was down, he called a man the “P” word.
But wait a minute, you might plead. Isn’t CONGRESSMAN Turner a politician? The answer, simply, is yes. So why would Rep. Turner belittle himself and his occupation?
The answer, again, is simple. Elected officials understand that the best way to be popular with constituents is to be on their side and oftentimes this means hating politicians. It is easy and popular to be a party that rails against the establishment. Just ask the Republicans of 1994, who won 54 additional seats in the House due to discontentment with Clinton, or the Democrats of 2006, who added 31 seats to their House ranks thanks to the unpopularity of Bush.
Following up on my most recent post, this is very sad for democracy. I work very closely with the Hill and I will tell you, most Members of Congress are there representing their districts honorably and effectively. Of course there is dead weight and abuse of power in D.C. But the only reason it is noticed so much more in D.C. is because more people pay attention and the stakes are so high; not necessarily because it is more frequent.
The truth is that most people run for public office to do good for others. Yes, there is a level of narcissism, but most politicians endure public scrutiny and false accusations in the hopes that they might be able to make this world a little better for future generations. The media and voters beat up this profession enough; do the politicians really need to jump in and help?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)