Europe Has an Economics Lesson for Obama

Submitted by John on Sat, 07/19/2008 - 11:04pm. Tags:

Economics and Business

That is the title of this WSJ article by Henry Olsen, in light of Obama's visit to Europe, that makes some oft-overlooked points about European economic policy in recent years...from both the European Left and Right.

No doubt Europe is definitely on Obama's side. And I can understand why and can't say I disagree (to put it lightly). The part of American policy that they most see and have to deal with is foreign policy. And there, in recent decades, Republican presidents and leading foreign officials have had a habit of irritating and alienating our European brethren...none more so, by far, than George W. Bush.

OTOH, says Olsen,

the Europe Mr. Obama will visit is quite different from the one Americans often hear about. Over the last decade, much of Europe has very quietly embraced market-based reforms that either draw inspiration from American successes or -- on issues like retirement security -- are even more market-oriented than many U.S. Republicans support.

Sure, it's not the kind of stuff you see American liberals talking about but it is real and has been happening for quite a while.

European governments have been cutting corporate tax rates, cleaning up disability abuse, making labor laws more flexible and even offering private pension options..similar to ones proposed the GOP.

This new European consensus is founded, like all political calculations, partly on conviction and partly on necessity. European center-left politicians have slowly come to respect the power of markets. Much like the so-called "Rubin Democrats," they recognize that the energy and innovation of market actors can better produce wealth than more traditional social democratic economic theory.

Olen says that by taking a closer look at Europe, he can actually find the true trans-partisan bridge he's promising.

As a libertarian, I see that Obama understands this a little more than he leads on in his stump speeches. While liberal, he has inclinations toward targeted tweaking in a libertarian paternalist/behavioral economics manner rather than a messy, complicated and far less timid and technocratic social democratic manner preferred by more socialist-wannabe and populist liberals. In fact, I spotted this article while reading a discussion about the book "Nudge"....a book written by University of Chicago economists connected to Obama. The discussion is between one of the authors and NYU economist Mario Rizzo. Good reading as well.

John's blog
Login or register to post comments

And a lesson on religious intolerance as well. (#104432)

by tomsyl on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 5:01pm

Link. Diary coming on this if I ever finish it.

Rust never sleeps.

(

)

The problem I have (#104360)

by Gabriel on Mon, 07/21/2008 - 12:55pm

with these types of articles is that we need some sort of yardstick for what we are measuring. Yes, I think Europe has become more 'American' in some areas. But the opposite is true in others. The idea of a government-led economy, that maybe some liberals pined for in the 1950s or 60s, has little to no mainstream support today. But the same can be said for the Grover Norquist, WSJ editorial page, GOP platform-type economics.

Standard Disclaimer: I only speak for myself. I may or not agree with others. Ask, if you are curious. If I post about X I may not have an opinion about Y, no matter how closely related you think they are.

(

)

It's worse than that (#104694)

by catchy on Tue, 07/22/2008 - 4:12pm

Europe has become more 'American' in some areas. But the opposite is true in others.

Even in areas where Europe's become 'more American', it still isn't as 'American' as we are.

So you may just as well conclude that the right thing to do is meet in the middle, i.e. the lesson is to become closer to Europe even in areas where they've come closer to us.

The WSJ op-ed page: still a blight on civilization.

(

| parent )

This is inaccurate (#104139)

by Floater on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 9:08am

That is the title of this WSJ article by Henry Olsen,

It's an editorial not an article. Where the WSJ is concerned there is a big difference between the two.

(

)

Pot-AY-to, Pot-AH-to (#104164)

by John on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 11:40am

Thanks for your thoughts....

(

| parent )

Your welcome (#104194)

by Floater on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 5:39pm

always glad to set you straight.

(

| parent )

More like Ap-P-les and Or-AN-ges (#104173)

by Spartacvs on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 2:10pm

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

| parent )

cute. (#104178)

by John on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 2:33pm

So we've established this is an editorial and that the word "editorial" should never be used to in place of the word article. Article apparently has a specific meaning that negates its use when generically talking about articles in newspaper....er...EDITORIAL. 'scuse me.

(

| parent )

In general yes (#104179)

by Spartacvs on Sun, 07/20/2008 - 2:38pm

but in the case of the WSJ, most particularly. Unfortunate, but it is what it is.

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

(

| parent )

Recent Diaries