Mickey, who generally advocates the "under no circumstances should you give the people want they want" school of government, explains why it's critically important to ignore the needs of the electorate:
P.S.: Of course, McGurn is working the Take Away Rule, which holds that it's always harder for politicians to take something away from someone than it is to not give it to them in the first place. In the vast majority of circumstances, this principle favors government-expanding liberals, since it makes any federal spending near-impossible to cut ...
"Take Away Rule"?
1) I'm not sure why Mickey needed to relabel the "Endowment Effect" (or "Divestiture Aversion", or the "Offer/Ask Disparity", or a thousand other reasonable terms) as the hilariously infantile "Take Away Rule", a move that recasts the general public as a kindergartner and Mickey as the sensible adult trying to ween them off their binky. Or maybe that's the point, and he only went with that one because "The Big Sissy Wants His Bottle Rule" was too on-the-nose.
2) The larger problem here is that the "Take Away Rule" clearly violates the Kaus Rule-Naming Rule, which holds that names for rules should be as obscure and unelucidating as possible, causing one to have to repeat both the origin story and the entire theoretical underpinning of the rule every time it is referenced, thereby creating the illusion of productivity. [Note: The Kaus Rule-Naming Rule is named after Mickey Kaus, who uses names for rules that are as obscure and unelucidating as possible, causing him to have to repeat both the origin story and the entire theoretical underpinning of the rule every time it is referenced, thereby creating the illusion of productivity.]
If the Take Away Rule wants to join the Feiler Faster Thesis, the Howell Raines Fallacy, Jo Moore Day, and a dozen other bits of received wisdom repackaged to honor/disparage some long-forgotten influence/enemy, Mickey had better work a little harder.
(Coming soon to Kausfiles: the Camel Whack Tent Theorem. I'm very, very sorry.)
P.S.: Of course, McGurn is working the Take Away Rule, which holds that it's always harder for politicians to take something away from someone than it is to not give it to them in the first place. In the vast majority of circumstances, this principle favors government-expanding liberals, since it makes any federal spending near-impossible to cut ...
"Take Away Rule"?
1) I'm not sure why Mickey needed to relabel the "Endowment Effect" (or "Divestiture Aversion", or the "Offer/Ask Disparity", or a thousand other reasonable terms) as the hilariously infantile "Take Away Rule", a move that recasts the general public as a kindergartner and Mickey as the sensible adult trying to ween them off their binky. Or maybe that's the point, and he only went with that one because "The Big Sissy Wants His Bottle Rule" was too on-the-nose.
2) The larger problem here is that the "Take Away Rule" clearly violates the Kaus Rule-Naming Rule, which holds that names for rules should be as obscure and unelucidating as possible, causing one to have to repeat both the origin story and the entire theoretical underpinning of the rule every time it is referenced, thereby creating the illusion of productivity. [Note: The Kaus Rule-Naming Rule is named after Mickey Kaus, who uses names for rules that are as obscure and unelucidating as possible, causing him to have to repeat both the origin story and the entire theoretical underpinning of the rule every time it is referenced, thereby creating the illusion of productivity.]
If the Take Away Rule wants to join the Feiler Faster Thesis, the Howell Raines Fallacy, Jo Moore Day, and a dozen other bits of received wisdom repackaged to honor/disparage some long-forgotten influence/enemy, Mickey had better work a little harder.
(Coming soon to Kausfiles: the Camel Whack Tent Theorem. I'm very, very sorry.)
