AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (11 comments)

  1. SeattleSam

    There is a fourth law and that is:

    The Law of Good Intentions

    When social program creators/administrators are rewarded more for their good intentions than achievement of goals, few goals will be met.

    As an example, the educational establishment gets “points” for their good intentions in spending more money on K-12 education over the last several decades. Meanwhile educational achievement has not improved. The public also awards good intentions points for raising the minimum wage; yet that action actually harms the very people it is supposed to help. You get rewarded for your intentions’ You don’t get penalized for lack of results.

    1. That’s not what happened. Schools have indeed been penalized for lack of results under NCLB by being closed down or having management replaced, with the justification you’ve presented here. To a much lesser extent, teachers have been punished as well for not improving test scores. The reason it hasn’t helped much is that schools do not know how to improve student test scores. You can penalize people all you want, but if you’re asking them to do the impossible, it won’t help.

  2. All 3 are totally valid which is all the more reason for the GOP to provide substantiative reform proposals to address these issues.

    instead they are hiding in the closet whining that the POTUS is not making proposals so they don’t have to.

    The GOP are feckless weenies when it comes to credible entitlement reform proposals.

    1. Credible proposals… I agree that the GOP needs to get in front of this, instead of shrinking away.

      So, taking what Dr. Murray lays out here as inherent, fundamental characteristics of entitlement programs, are there any credible, rational, substantive proposals that /can/ be offered other than a drastic reduction in the size, scope, and number of entitlement programs?

      If an entitlement or transfer payment is left intact, Dr. Murray’s argument is that at least one of the three laws above will inevitably and predictably come into play, which will continue to exacerbate the problems the GOP purports to care about.

      1. I would think you could take a similar approach to entitlements as to taxes:

        1. – close the loopholes

        2. – capt the total benefits received.

        how about it?

        the hell of this is – that there are a LOT of different ways to comprehensively change the entitlement programs. It’s NOT a black and white, on and off, either/or proposition no more than taxes are.

        Yet the GOP is actually like a bunch of spoiled kindergarteners.

        what happened to the GOP that had thoughtful ways to deal with taxes, cuts and spending?

        they’ve turned into a bunch of whiny lard-asses.

      2. Florida resident

        Dear Eric T.:
        It is quite probable that Dr. Murray voted (at least during 2012 election cycle) for GOP candidates.
        However, I do not think that Dr. Murray is such an adept of GOP in narrow sense.
        As Derbyshire proudly says about himself
        “I am REACTONARY, not a GOP card-carrying member.”
        In a similar manner, Dr. Murray may feel more like a libertarian.

        Observations by Dr. Murray are
        1) valid and
        2) important,
        independently of policy prescriptions,
        be those for Republican party, for Democratic party, or for any other.

        1. Oh, I agree. I don’t believe Dr. Murray is attempting to steer Republican policy choices, or influence specific dialogue during the Crisis du Jour.

          My point was in response to LarryG’s request for GOP proposals on reforming entitlements. If we accept (which I do) Dr. Murray’s analysis here, then the only consistent and logical course to pursue is limiting the damage done by entitlement programs. But since the Democrats are never going to bend on that issue, it falls (sadly) to the Republicans in office to make such a case.

          And to the extent they cannot, Dr. Murray has laid out what we can reliably expect moving forward.

          1. I just think the GOP has spent years talking about entitlements. Back under Clinton, they were so vociferously against “Hillary Care” that they support the individual mandate.

            Since that time they have spent much more time talking about entitlements than doing something about them.

            you would think that they would have a clear plan by now and that they would have the courage and leadership to release that plan and promote it, put in on the table… support it.

            There are dozens of different ways to go about this short of advocating outright repeal which is dumb politically and a non-starter if you want to start somewhere and work at change.

            here’s just one thought. Medicare. People with 200,000 in income and millions in assets pay 100.00 a month because the current means-testing goes to 200k and does not count assets.

            These folks are using Medicare to preserve their assets.

            That’s not why Medicare was created. It was created to keep people of limited means from losing everything they had and become destitute.

            Now… it’s become a way to preserve your assets to pass on to your kids – who, by the way, are going to inherit trillions in debt, in no small part because our taxes are subsidizing their parents in preserving their assets for their kids.

            Mortgage deductions. How about ONLY for one home – your primary residence – and it’s CAPPED at median home prices? If you want a half million dollar house or a vacation home -then fine – but no “entitlement” deduction.

            these are things that principled Republicans could form a plank to propose – to put on the table – but instead what do they do? nothing, they blame the POTUS for not putting something on the table.

            What the heck has happened to the GOP?

    2. The hard work of compromise was done years ago….the result was sequestration. Let’s go to the cliff, the stand-by and watch president can have a rally about it later.

  3. Peter Davis

    What about phasing in a combined federal/state workfare program (managed by private companies) being funded by money re-directed from phasing out welfare and crony capitalist programs?

  4. And of course, the giant elephant in the room is………. never-ending, mass immigration. Mass immgration feeds Big Government and it’s attendant social programs. Most immigrants, whether legal or illegal, support liberal Democrat policies.

    Gee, do ya think it might have something to do with the fact that most immigrants are, how shall we say, “non-white”?

    Bingo.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content