Skip to main content

Torinus right and wrong

John Torinus is a local Milwaukee CEO who writes pro-business articles in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. I tend to appreciate them, and he's pretty reasonable. His latest article "Obama speech was full of anti-business rhetoric," intersects with my recent thoughts: will the Democratic nominee be reasonably pro-middle class, or wildly anti-business? Here's the editorial: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=730879

And here's my breakdown of Torinus, right and wrong:

Torinus is right that Obama's rhetoric lacks pragmatism on economic issues. He should learn from Hillary, who learned from Bill's partnership with business. Obama is busy riding his populist wave, but will find it difficult to govern effectively if he alienates the business community. Plus, there's reality: we can't run from free trade now, and our economy is largely based on "nothing more than a profit."

Torinus is wrong to imply that political and religious leaders are somehow more corrupt than business leaders. Businesses do an excellent job enforcing a moral code, but people do break the moral code. Businesses keep such problems in-house to protect their brand name. Religious and business leaders are considered public property, and their sins appear in headlines every day. Further, leaders of private organizations have the opportunity to settle out of court and avoid public excoriation. No one has to breach a confidentiality agreement to tattle on a politician. I guess, according to Torinus' narrow wording, Dick Strong does not count as a "Wisconsin corporate executive in recent memory" who was "charged with corruption."

Torinus is right to castigate the government's wild west accounting, but wrong not to place the blame on voters, where it belongs. To paraphrase Torinus, "Voters make the rules, politicians play by them."

Torinus understates the case that can be made for a more progressive tax system. He points out that the rich now provide the bulk of tax receipts to the IRS. Is that supposed to surprise anyone? The rich do not have historically high tax rates--they have historically high incomes! Their piece of the pie is historically large compared to any measure of average wages. The middle class has had enough of those crocodile tears.

Torinus is right to defend the virtues of business. America wouldn't be great without innovation, increasing productivity, or the benefits of local and global trade. But neither Torinus nor Obama have found a unifying economic message for America.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Deferred Maintenance

I once worked at a public university that had a huge 'deferred maintenance' problem. Their major equipment was often 35 years old with an expected lifetime of 30 years. As a result, they were constantly doing repairs and paying overtime, but had little time to do preventive maintenance and little money to make pro-active investments in new equipment. In one dorm, water from bad showers on the upper floors started leaking into the main lobby, and the 'fix' was to drag out garbage cans to catch the water. I was told that repairing the plumbing itself was expensive so it was being figured into the "five-year budget plan." The garbage can fix went on for at least a year. A two-page spread in The Atlantic Monthly (March 2008, p 38-39) calls out our nation's growing infrastructure problem. This is a real 'tragedy of the commons' situation: individuals are not willing to give up more tax money if they don't see a real-time, personal benefit. At the sa...

Whose fault are high gas prices?

GM recently announced the closing of several auto plants in North America, primarily those that make large, gas inefficient vehicles. The news anchor began the segment with "Due to high gas prices..." Since everyone's blaming high gas prices for our woes these days, it begs the question "Whose fault are high gas prices?" Your driveway is the first place to look for answers. If your car gets bad mileage, that's probably your fault. Some luck, huh? After that, I blame "the invisible hand." This is the idea that when everyone follows their own self-interest in a free market, everyone ends up better off. Everyone is motivated to work hard and be efficient and produce goods that others want to trade for. Free markets do a fine job of producing wealth and prosperity, but they've really botched the energy situation. For all it's glory, the invisible hand has little strategic foresight. In the 1970s, we learned that America was vulnerable to high e...

Real Estate in America

We sold our house this summer and bought a new home. The experience has led me to reflect on homes and home-buying in America. As in any industry, there are good and bad incentives at work in real estate. A home seller would like to get the highest price for their house and sell it in a reasonable period of time. The industry operates on a commission system so that the agent seeks to sell the house at a higher price. This incentive works, but only to a point. Consider the impact of $5000 on the seller vs. the agent. Six percent of $5000 is $300. After the realty company and purchasing agent take their cut, the agent isn't left with much. A $5000 difference in the price of the house means little to the agent, but a lot to the home owner. Does an agent become successful by getting the highest price or by turning over lots of houses? The answer is obvious. An agent's ideal world is not one where people get exactly the right price for their homes, it is a world where everyone is wi...