Is Government the Good Guy?

NY Times ^ | 12/13/01 | John Donahue

[ThJ1800]

Is Government the Good Guy?

By John D. Donahue, NY Times, 12/13/01 CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- The market defines America. Labor markets organize our work; consumer markets structure our spending; securities markets shape our future. The idea of the market dominates our mythology: Americans are open to "market solutions" to public problems, from providing housing to improving education — especially with a fumbling, inefficient government program cast as the alternative. Now this mythology may be changing. After 50 years of market ascendancy, government may be poised to reclaim its role as an integral and admirable part of American life. Whether it does so depends as much on how we view our public servants as on how we finance our public institutions and the work they do.

---

John D. Donahue teaches at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and is co-editor of "Governance Amid Bigger, Better Markets."

[ThJ1800]

Note: To see this article, you must register with the NY Times; registration is free.

[Doctor Doom]

After 50 years of market ascendancy

What?

I guess he didn't notice the incredible growth over the years of how much of the GDP the government takes, the strangelhold of regulation, and how many liberties we have lost.

[marktwain]

Where is the Barf Alert! 50 years of Market ascendancy? What has this guy been smoking?? It has been 70 years of more and more government control, and less and less of individual freedom, glossed over by the incredible productive capacity of the market that was left.

[First_Salute]

Like I said from the start, one of the most awkward and major features playing throughout this fall, has been how the government seems to be obsessed with proving itself: "Americans, step aside, your gov't is here, in charge, and in control --- the experts."

As were the Clinton years, when and where "the left" obsessed about proving its economic theories ... right on up until the price of energy proved to be much more a "throttle" on the economy than socialist academia's mantra: interest rates. There were constant self-gratuities from the "higher-ups," with every C.P.I. and P.P.I. listing of economic data, but which reports always stated, "Discounting the cost of food and energy."

I always like that part, was anybody else listening?

[SteamshipTime]

Amen.

[Arleigh]

After 50 years of market ascendancy, government may be poised to reclaim its role as an integral and admirable part of American life.

I'm afraid there's more than a little grain of truth here. Thanks to Wall Street Greedheads (aided and abetted by corrupt Clintonista government) the economy is going to crash and crash hard over the next decade. And the "Free Market" will take the blame.

When the Baby Boomers's stocks and real estate evaporate and they see that they have NOTHING to retire on, they'll be BEGGING Uncle Sam to take care of them in their old age. And since there are so darn many of them, the policitians will be falling over each other to give them everything they want.

[Monti Cello]

Gee whiz, this guy is printed in the NY Times -- isn't he supposed to be smart or something?

The pathetic liberals are really grasping, trying to interpret support for the military, a conservative cause, with support for the bureaucracy. These mfers are talking to themselves in an echo chamber.

I have a suspicion that we will see another grand sweep of liberals from congress in 2002, and they do not see the train a-coming. The arrogance of liberals in these circumstances and their misreading of the national mood reminds me of the revulsion to hillary klinton previous to 94. It's time to teach these punks another lesson.

[Major Matt Mason]

Wow, the goo-goo wingnuts seem to be coming out of the woodwork lately. Nothing like a little, good ol' agenda promotion following a national tradgedy.

These big government worshipers are truly sickening.

[x]

The article is so slight and insubstantial -- the rest of it doesn't add much to the snippet you've given -- that it doesn't look like Donohue is going to be leading any kind of a pro-government revolution anytime soon. These things move in cycles. There may be a small resurgence of faith in government, but once people remember what bureaucracy is really like, they'll soon lose it.

It's more likely that we recognize an equilibrium. There is no great support for major cuts or for major expansion of government right now. Based on the last 20 years, a liberal might call this a victory. Doing so means ignoring the much more exaggerated claims of Great Society liberalism. You can call almost any development in politics a victory if you really want to and if you define your terms in order to do so, but such a victory is very hollow indeed.

So much of the liberal attitude towards government is based on the Great Depression, when something like a quarter of our population were truly dependent on government for sustenance. We won't see anything like that any time soon. A more independent and self-reliant population can't help but regard the government with a good deal of skepticism -- though it might not think of it as the enemy.

[ninenot]

Are you smoking something??? While I don't expect the Dems to have a substantial gain, nor will they have a substantial loss, now or in the future. There's a great deal of satisfaction with "the Gummint" out there--as long as the question seems to include GWB's trouncing of the Taliban and excellent (to date) progress in Afg'nstn. HOWEVER, if the question is phrased: "Do you think that you're getting your money's worth--over 1/3 of your income---from the Gummint??" the answer may not be quite so positive.

[snopercod]

"Americans, step aside, your gov't is here, in charge, and in control --- the experts."

Exactly. That's why I posted in September that the clintons have won: It took a republican administration to hand it all to them, but the clintons have achieved just about everything they ever wanted, and more.

[Monti Cello]

I disagree -- the liberals are floundering right now. The campaign will provide an opportunity to point out the extremism of mainstream liberalism, and draw the stark contrast between reasonable right and ridiculous left.

This contrast, laid out in the contract w/ america, gave people a clear decision -- reasonable limitations on govt, or hillarycare.

I will grant you, the Repubs are terrible at selling their cause. So I won't discount anything, but I think the fundamentals are strongly in their favor. Whether they will force the liberals on their heels and make them answer for their failed policies is another question.