Q&A: Does the People Know What’s Good for It?
Does the People Know What’s Good for It?
Question
Trump won the election. One of the main reasons for that was the economy and high inflation. Even though some of the reasons aren’t really connected to Biden, and even though in the last two years there actually was some improvement, bottom line the average middle-class American votes for whoever gives him hope and might bring change.
On the other hand, every American economist and every person with a bit of sense who read Trump’s plan and Harris’s plan can say with certainty that Trump’s plan would mainly benefit the upper class and only burden the middle class, increase the deficit, not really lower prices, and even the mass deportation he’s planning would create a crisis in the labor market. In short, the people who are going to get screwed most by his plan are that same middle class that voted for him so he would improve their lives.
This makes me wonder whether the statement that in a democracy the people know better than anyone what is right for them is really true at all. After all, every economist and every person with a bit of sense knows that Harris’s plan was better for the middle and lower classes because it was actually built for them!! Unlike Trump’s plan, which was literally tailored for those millionaires he hangs out with. In short, could it be that the people really are stupid? That the people screw themselves over? And no, it’s not like the periphery in Israel that votes for Bibi even though they only get hurt by it, because there they openly admit that they just worship Bibi regardless of anything. As opposed to America, where that’s what people voted for Trump over.
Answer
There are a lot of mistaken assumptions here. In my opinion, Trump wasn’t elected because of the economy, and certainly not only because of it. No less important was the disgust with woke that the Democrats represent.
Second, who said the people know best? That’s a completely idiotic claim. Democracy is not a way to get the most correct decisions, but a system that recognizes the right of every citizen to influence his own fate. See column 69, 79.
The same claim is idiotic in Israel too. The periphery votes for Bibi and is not at all getting screwed by that. Beyond that, the economy is not the only consideration. They’re fed up with the left, just like in America. By the way, all the smart-alecks who criticize poor people for voting right-wing against their economic interest forget to criticize rich people who vote left-wing against their interest. In short, this is just condescending nonsense. First correct yourself.
Discussion on Answer
Elections, by definition, are about what the people want.
What is good for the people?
In medicine, the doctors decide.
In engineering, the engineers.
In law, legal experts.
In science, the researchers and developers, the scientists.
In education, the educators.
In security, the generals and security experts.
Etc.
That’s why there is supposed to be a natural balance between the professional echelon that accompanies the elected echelon.
When the good of the people is before the leaders’ eyes, they balance between desires and reality and the facts.
That also explains why being a politician in a democracy is a complicated profession by its very nature.
You have to remember that the American spirit is hard work. And the ordinary citizen often connects to the capitalist approach even if it doesn’t benefit him immediately. I’ve talked about economics quite a bit with Americans from this social stratum. The spirit really blows in the direction of tax benefits and VAT and is less interested in social benefits. For example, you can easily hear lavish praise for Florida and its tax benefits; people register residence in Florida and live and work in other states. And they hate California, even though roughly all the basic cost of living there is “on the baron’s tab.” This is a country founded on values of hard work, and for the most part it does not appreciate lazy moochers.
As an Israeli from the middle class who would gain more from social benefits than from tax benefits, I also connect to this approach, if only because of my sense of justice—that a person gets less in direct proportion to how much harder he works to earn a living.
A bit of a current-events point: even before the latest storm, this really bothered me regarding the funding of daycare centers. The gaps in funding are so huge that, without exaggeration, the daycare centers alone can create a complete balance between the incomes of two families: one with a kollel husband and a wife working two days a week—sibling discount in daycare means she pays 1,200 NIS for 2 children. Another earns 7,000 NIS more and pays for two siblings in daycare (if one of them is under 15 months old) almost 7,000 NIS…
And also in other things with my business, I was afraid to grow because the tax bracket would go up, and it would come out that I’d work a lot more for only a little more.
Because of a mistake, I wasn’t precise about the gaps regarding daycare centers; it’s a bit subtler than that. The point still stands and is horrifying, just a bit less so.
To sum up: does the people know what’s good for it? Not necessarily. But 1. If the people don’t know, then who does??? Meaning, whom are we supposed to trust? 2. Even if the people don’t know, it doesn’t matter—they’re entitled to decide for themselves whatever they want.