"I'd give my left nut for _______________"
Whoever knows the equivalent expression for the ladies...please speak up!
Is this a silly game? Superficially it is...but understanding the significance of this game is of the utmost importance.
In my last thread...Why Can't Taxes Be Voluntary?...way too many of you rejected the preference revelation value of tax choice by arguing that voting allows citizens to express their preferences. And I'm sure many of you would make the argument that campaign contributions should be limited.
Voting, undoubtedly, allows you to express your preferences. Unfortunately, it does not allow you to express the true intensity of your preferences. Consider this list of intensity ranking...sorted from least intense to most intense...
1. Voting
2. Volunteering
3. Donating
4. Self-immolating
Clearly, the more you are willing to sacrifice, the greater the intensity of your preferences.
But does it really matter how badly you want something? Does it really matter that you'd truly give your left nut for something? Does it truly matter what you would do for a Klondike bar?
Of course it matters. How else would we be able to determine how society's limited resources should be used?
Take gun control for example. How much of society's limited resources should be used to try and prevent massacres at schools? Can we all agree that it would be absurd to use ALL of society's limited resources to prevent massacres at schools? Yes?
What else can we agree on? Would it be absurd to believe somebody's answer if they only offered to sacrifice other people's nuts? "Well...see that guy over there? I'd give his left nut to try and prevent school shootings. Heck, I'd give 100 other guys' left nuts! Make it 1000! That's how much I care about the issue!!!"
Do we really want to know exactly how much of society's limited resources should be used to try and prevent school shootings? Of course...because those resources have to come from somewhere. Something else we value has to be sacrificed. And right now our political system is the epitome of absurdity because all we do is offer each others' left nuts to be sacrificed.
Liberal: Sacrifice national defense! How many nuclear bombs do we really need!
Conservative: Sacrifice welfare! Sacrifice public healthcare! Sacrifice public education!
Libertarian: Sacrifice everything but national defense, the courts and the police!
And then we wonder why, yet again, we're confronted with a fiscal cliff.
Without the intensity of your preferences...without your decision to sacrifice your own left nut...there is no efficient allocation of society's limited resources. We'll end up with too many tanks and too many school shootings...too many soldiers and not enough teachers...too many lawyers and not enough doctors....too much pollution and not enough renewable energy...too much debt and too little to show for it.
That's why it all boils down to the benefit principle...
Until people are made to bear the full costs of their decisions, those decisions are unlikely to be socially sound, in this as in other areas of public policy. - Richard Bird
Are you willing to give your left nut to try and prevent school shootings? Are you willing to give your left nut to try and protect the environment? Are you willing to give your left nut to try and bring about world peace?
In other words...are you willing to put your left nut...errr...money...where your mouth is?
Seriously though...we are infinitely better off when society's limited resources are efficiently allocated.
Is it fair though? Is it fair that rich people can shout louder than poor people? Of course it's fair! Rich people didn't get rich on their own...WE, THE PEOPLE...made them rich. All of us reached into our pockets...we determined the intensity of our preferences...and then we paid for the things that we benefit from. When a ton of us agree that the same thing is beneficial...the person responsible for producing that thing becomes rich.
Imagine how absurd it would be the other way around. A kid walks into a school, shoots people...and then 100,000,000 people each give him a dollar. That would be a non sequitur...because it really really really wouldn't match the public's preferences any more than being shot would match the victims' preferences. Most of us, know, deep down, that it's really wrong to disregard the preferences of others...yet...the public sector disregards the intensity of our preferences...which is exactly why it's a public non sequitur.
The market is the opposite of a non sequitur because it allows each and every one of us to reward and encourage those who respect and recognize our preferences. We have the freedom to positively reinforce their behavior. That's something that my very favorite Crooked Timber liberal, John Holbo, doesn't quite grasp...
Hayek may be guilty of nothing worse: he admires economic actors of a certain sort more than other people. He maximizes freedom for them, while genuinely thinking he is maximizing it for everyone.
Hayek, on his own, maximizes freedom for certain economic actors? No, no, no...no way. That's not at all how the market works. The market works...it really really really works...because each one of us can use our dollars to reward the people who maximize OUR own freedom.
Take this guy for example...
I'm a millionaire, I'm a multi-millionaire. I'm filthy rich. You know why I'm a multi-millionaire? 'Cause multi-millions like what I do. That's pretty good, isn't it? - Michael Moore
Dollar voting for Michael Moore means that you're giving him more economic freedom...but only because he helps increase your own freedom. He does so by giving you an option that you value enough to sacrifice for. Therefore, by giving you a "better" option...he helps to increase your freedom.
Do I want you to stop dollar voting for him though? Yes. Do I value your freedom to dollar vote for people that are selling you lies? Yes. Why? Because maybe you know something that I don't. But, if you really want lies...then just give your money to Vermin Supreme! I love that guy...he'll give you lies for less. In other words...he'll give you far more bang for your buck. If lies are your thing...then you might as well get them at a discount.
The truth is that we all know something that nobody else knows...we know our values...which are subjective. So if you genuinely want to determine exactly how much of society's limited resources should be spent on trying to prevent school shootings...then allow taxpayers to put their taxes where their hearts are. Let's see if their actions match their words. Let's see exactly how Michael Moore spends his tax dollars in the public sector.
