In the final paragraph of my piece today, I say, “Altogether, an encounter with Vernon L. Smith — who rose from the Kansas plains to leave a mark on the world — is an encounter with intellect, practicality, and humane values.” Yes. Smith is an economist, who shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in 2002. He was born on January 1, 1927. I spoke with him about his life, his field, and his views. You may enjoy getting to know him. That piece is here.
Among the things that Professor Smith and I discussed was the U.S. fiscal house — the national debt, the federal budget deficit, and the looming insolvency of our entitlement programs. In recent days, I’ve been thinking: We’re about to have another presidential contest in which this is not discussed at all. It has not been an issue, really, since the Romney-Ryan ticket in 2012. Maybe Republicans learned a lesson: Shut up about our fiscal house.
But it is screamingly important. How weird not to discuss it, in presidential campaigns. This’ll be the third straight cycle. (The Republican Party will have nominated Donald Trump for president three times in a row.) The R’s and the D’s are agreed: Mum’s the word, when it comes to the debt and deficit and all that.
Politicians respond to the people. For the most part, politicians are not leaders but followers. You can say this is good or bad. But, for now, I say simply: It’s true. The people, for the most part, don’t want to do anything to set our fiscal house in order. So the politicians tell them: “You don’t have to! You deserve low taxes and hot-fudge sundaes from here to kingdom come.”
(Very few appreciate low taxes and hot-fudge sundaes as much as I do.)
I wrote at length about entitlements in particular in January 2023. Allow me to quote:
My eyes widened at something I read in the summer of 2019: A caller to Rush Limbaugh said, “There’s gonna be a $1 trillion deficit. Trump doesn’t really care about that. He’s not really a fiscal conservative.” Rush responded, “Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore. All this talk about concern for the deficit and the budget has been bogus for as long as it’s been around.”
In that same period, there was this, in the Washington Post: “Trump recently told West Wing aides that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told him no politician had ever lost office for spending more money.” (Article here.)
My comment at the time: “He is a canny ol’ bird, McConnell.” He is indeed. I doubt there is anyone who knows more about how the political game is played than he (and, often, he plays it for the good).
This story, from the Daily Beast, was interesting: “Trump on Coming Debt Crisis: ‘I Won’t Be Here’ When It Blows Up.” The subheading read, “The president thinks the balancing of the nation’s books is going to, ultimately, be a future president’s problem.”
That’s what politicians do, the run of them: kick the can down the road. What happens when we run out of road?
I don’t know. My guess is, it’ll be ugly. Reliable analysts say so.
Anyway, the main point of this little post is: I hear a dog not barking, Sherlock Holmes–style. I hear an issue of screaming importance not being debated, or even mentioned. Because the two major parties agree: Mum’s the word.
Which is bad news.