Internal Contradictions In Progressivism

Matt Yglesias has a very good post where he casts a skeptical eye on some of the proposals for infrastructure spending.

Photo of Train Track Subway


Something like the Silver Line in D.C. has been much more of a mixed bag. Not only did it cost a lot of money, but it’s just a poorly conceived project that’s actually reduced capacity on the Blue Line and therefore made transit service in the region worse in some ways. The Obama era brought us a lot of mixed-traffic streetcars that do absolutely nothing to improve transportation, and I suspect in many cases diverted local funds from what could have been bus lines.

There are various useful things one could do in intercity passenger rail. But is Amtrak actually prepared to do any of them?

My broad view is that on the transportation side, despite endless rhetoric about “crumbling bridges,” we mostly have structures in place where either significant expansion is undesirable (highways) or the existing institutions are mismanaged or incompetent.

At the same time, he’s not particularly concerned about financing issues:

I acknowledge that this is a somewhat pedantic point, but I do want to insist on it. If you want to renovate your house but you don’t have the cash, there’s a difference between getting a renovation loan and hiring contractors who you then stiff. Paying for things with borrowed money is a way of paying for things, not an alternative to paying for them. King put it more squarely, which is that the difference between debt financing and tax financing is whether you try to constrain current consumption to pay for investment or future consumption. And I think the right answer is future consumption.

Another thread of progressive thought focuses on the downside of laissez-faire economic policies.  Progressives often cite a 2013 study by Autor, Dorn, and Hanson, which showed that freer trade with China may have led to painful economic restructuring in industrial areas that compete with imports from China.  Subsequent studies have questioned certain aspects of this research, but the basic finding seems intuitively plausible. Those who accept this critique of import competition often conclude that public policy should aim to reduce the trade deficit.  To do that, you need to either reduce domestic investment of increase domestic saving.  That’s because the current account balance is equal to domestic saving minus domestic investment.

1 2 3
View single page >> |
How did you like this article? Let us know so we can better customize your reading experience.


Leave a comment to automatically be entered into our contest to win a free Echo Show.