A Post That Is A Distraction But Hopefully A Good Distraction

The Marginal Revolution blogosphere has started discussing median voter theory. Here is a link to a summary post.

I always thought the median voter theory was interesting didactically. It teaches students about how democratic elections work and could work. It also explains national politicians, especially presidential candidates. But like most economic theories, I don't think it is an empirical theory. It is based on unmeasurable ever-changing (and indifferent) preferences.

I am not responding to the exact arguments made in Yglesia's post, and I don't think Cowen says much. The problem with economists is that they have things to say about the media, elections, health care, and many other things, but they don't have answers. But writing and media and being heard has become more and more about answers. Health care, GM and Chrysler, and many other issues are clusterfucks. There are no "easy" answers. I would argue that government intervention isn't the best or even a good answer, but it would just be an argument, just rhetoric.

The blogosphere and decentralized media is a good way to argue. The U.S.' three branches, checks and balances system is a good way to argue. The important thing is for the system to allow for arguments. The system becomes more important than answers. Economists need to do a better job of explicitly recognizing this in their work.

If I ever get my shit straight, my economist license, and a job that allows me to do things I want, I will study the contextual nature of preferences and emphasize systems, but for now, I'd better get back to my dissertation.