Reagan and Thatcher Would Mock Today's Pessimists

[Valin]

Real Clear Markets:

John Tamny

June 9 2015

 

While it's not as prevalent as it was back in 2008, pessimism somewhat defines portions of the modern electorate. The view among some is that we've crossed an imaginary line toward permanent statism thanks to the very real errors committed by the political class. Their taxing, spending, and tendency to devalue the currency understandably has many depressed about the future prospects of great countries like the United States and Great Britain.

 

To be clear, government is a problem today, and it's the source of relatively slow economic growth for both countries. Taxes in the U.S. and U.K. are too high, and they're a barrier to production. Regulations are too intrusive, trade could be freer, plus the dollar and pound could be stronger and more stable in terms of value. Government spending is a certain tax on growth, and in both countries reduces the amount of precious capital available to businesses and entrepreneurs. All that, plus Barack Obama and David Cameron don't exactly remind us of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Life and economic opportunity could surely be better, and they would be if individuals like Reagan and Thatcher were running the proverbial show.

 

(Snip)

 

In a speech given last month at the Reagan Ranch Center, I made the argument that today's pessimism is wrongheaded, and belied by history. In a speech set for tomorrow at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London, I'll make a similar argument.

 

The solutions to what ails us are common sense, and because they are we have every reason to be optimistic. Reagan and Thatcher overcame much worse, so rather than complaining about what's wrong, it's time for the right in both the U.S. and England to match the optimism of their heroes.

 

There's a reason to be cheerful right now, and the reason lies in simple fixes that Reagan and Thatcher well understood not terribly long ago. Let's stop talking about what's wrong, and start talking about how much better off we'll all be when we elect individuals intent not on helping us, but on reducing the lone barrier to our prosperity which is the size and scope of government itself.