You’ve most likely heard the phrase, “Don’t let the right be the enemy of the great.” What has it meant to you previously, and may there be a strategy to apply this warning to the best way we strategy politics? That’s what this episode is about. It’s fan favourite Mike Munger’s forty fourth look on EconTalk, and one in every of my favorites but. The dialog begins with Munger describing his 2008 run for Governor of North Carolina, and the teachings he discovered based mostly on constituents’ response to his training platform. (It concerned vouchers…)
There’s loads to dig into right here as at all times, so let’s get proper to it. We’d like to listen to extra of what you suppose associated to this episode. Please use the prompts beneath to share your ideas within the feedback. Or use them to start out your personal dialog offline. We’re right here for it.
1- How does Munger describe the distinction between directionalists and destinationists? Which one higher characterizes you? Clarify.
(Bonus: In a current episode of the Nice Antidote podcast at AdamSmithWorks, host Juliette Sellgren and visitor Mark Calabria focus on the query, “Ought to individuals who care deeply about rising freedom work for the federal government?” How would you reply this query, and the way do you suppose this pertains to directionalists versus destinationists?)
2- Munger says, “It might be that the rationale we are able to’t have good issues is that my aspect has continually–that’s the directionalists–have continually conceded the ethical excessive floor.” What does he imply by that? Which do you suppose are extra effective- consequentialist or ethical arguments? Is the excellence between the 2 any extra than simply mental golf? Clarify.
3- Roberts reminds us of Milton Friedman‘s coverage proposals in Capitalism and Freedom, now practically 60 years in the past, saying Friedman’s arguments have been extra pragmatic than ethical. How profitable have been Friedman’s coverage prescriptions? What in regards to the minimal wage? Do you agree with Munger that “we” have successfully by no means tried to argue in opposition to a minimal wage on ethical grounds? What would a compelling ethical argument of this type appear like, and the way profitable do you suppose such an argument might be?
4- Russ asserts, “I feel, the quantity of people that imagine within the worth of liberty for its personal sake in the USA is bigger than ever as a proportion of the inhabitants [today].” To what extent do you agree? Who’re all these individuals on “our aspect,” and the way do they discover themselves there? To what extent do rules stands proliferate in politics at this time? (You may need to learn this Kevin Corcoran submit at EconLog on anchor versus by-product preferences. Then take into account, who’re the individuals whose anchor choice is liberty, and the way and the place do we discover them?)
5- Roberts asks Munger if he’s ever learn a ebook that–written within the final 100 years–made the ethical case for capitalism and that was persuasive to an open-minded skeptic? What do you consider the books Roberts and Munger be aware on this regard? How would you reply that query?
