Knowledge Problem: 1; Central Planning: 0.
Plus: Federalism and the Federalist Papers, cowboy social science, and what qualities make for a good lawyer.
Invariably, central planners turn out to be bad at central planning. Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, they concoct sweeping, well-intentioned, academically credible programs — programs with lots of statistics and polysyllabic words, programs that nobody with a heart could possibly object to.
Once these projects migrate from the paper to real world, however, the complexities of life and the limitations of the human planner’s intellect assert themselves. Once tested by reality, government programs — the apples of their creators’ eye — go rotten.
This author discussed the contradictions within the Biden administration’s antitrust agenda this week at RealClearMarkets; specifically, those related to the Department of Justice’s suit to block an airline merger between JetBlue and Spirit.
Once again, Washington’s overeager technocrats have proved their utter epistemic incompetence. The central planner’s central problem, articulated most famously by Austrian-born economist Friedrich Hayek, is that he cannot possibly gather (much less make use of) the vast information needed to plan an economy effectively. Arguing the same point two centuries earlier, Adam Smith condemned any “statesman, who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals.” This statesman would, Smith argued, “assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever.”
It should surprise nobody that Biden’s antitrusters, perennially blind to their actions’ economic consequences, have mired themselves in contradiction. Convinced of their own rectitude and wisdom, central planners too often fall back to the “this time it will be different” fallacy (a cousin to the “real socialism has never been tried” fallacy). If they ever realize why their policies fail, they do so in hindsight — and usually once they have discovered a newer and shinier theory to justify further economic interventions. This newer and shinier theory is the magic solution that will be different, they tell voters.
And so, the cycle repeats; for industrial policy is a flat circle.
Nobody can slip the constraints Hayek’s knowledge problem imposes. No single person, no council or senate whatever — and certainly no DOJ antitrust lawyer.
Some Wisdom
They say one should read The Federalist. They’re right.
The separation of powers, Madison writes in Federalist No. 51, is “essential to the preservation of liberty.” But how does the Constitution ensure powers will remain separated?
But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
Moreover, the Constitution separates powers between the federal government and the state governments.
From Federalist No. 39:
[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority, than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere. In this relation, then, the proposed government cannot be deemed a NATIONAL one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty over all other objects.
Back to Federalist No. 51:
In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.
Some Beauty
“You got to fill the big empty/With little songs,” sings Colter Wall, the Canadian cowboy baritone extraordinaire. Wall has it right. The stuff of life — that which fills “the big empty” in the human soul — is made up mainly of “small” things close to home — quality time with friends and family, a religious community, meaningful work, good music, good food, bowling leagues.
For those of us who once wanted to grow up to be cowboys — and those of us who still do — Wall’s “I Ride an Old Paint/Leavin’ Cheyenne” strikes a chord.
Some Humor
Sometimes reality out-satirizesThe Onion.
Sundry Links, &c.
Daily Caller: “Court Eviscerates Biden Admin’s Goofy Dishwasher Rule”
Washington Examiner: “The Labor Department wants to decide how and when you work”
Florida Daily: “Florida’s Bill to Mandate Online Age Verification Would Be a Constitutional Disaster”
The 2024 Baseball Hall of Fame class.