The Myth of the Rational Voter

5 Reviews

• 2 people find this helpful

  

  This is a book about economics, not sociology; its premise is that most voters' misunderstanding of basic economics ensures they vote for politicians who either share their biases or claim to when it's politically expedient.

  Caplan is at his best when he's trying to explain the balancing act a ... (continue)

  This is a book about economics, not sociology; its premise is that most voters' misunderstanding of basic economics ensures they vote for politicians who either share their biases or claim to when it's politically expedient.

  Caplan is at his best when he's trying to explain the balancing act a politician needs to perform when trying to implement a policy that is likely to have positive economic results (and improve his or her chance of re-election) but is unpopular with voters. Referencing Machiavelli, he also shows when a politician can safely ignore the wishes of the electorate.

  At his worst, Caplan's writing is jargon-filled and opaque, his arguments incomprehensible. He's big on theory, but rarely offers practical examples to illustrate his ideas. Far too much of this book is spent defending economists against charges of bias instead of supporting his arguments. Caplan seems to think (and says so half a dozen times) that most of the world's problems would be solved if everyone just had a PhD in economics. As a result, he comes across as a condescending pedant with an axe to grind.

  An intriguing premise, but a book that ultimately seems aimed at fellow economists, not the general public, and therefore a disappointment.

  Is this helpful?

  JM said on Nov 19, 2008 | Add your feedback

• 

  Read this!

  Fascinating critique of democracy. Ok, I think a little tongue in cheek, but asks some interesting questions. Just how much CAN we understand as voters? Why are we so eaily swayed in our voting behaviours by what a politician looks like on TV, and how much money he/she promises us?

  Is this helpful?

  Ian Hodgson said on Jan 30, 2011 about the Hardcover edition | Add your feedback

• 

  Worth a read – but take with more than a pinch of salt

  Bryan Caplan must enjoy the role of the economics professor. He wields the tools of the trade with gusto, and even adopts the (very enjoyable, if you ask me) writing style that the greatest eighteenth century economists excelled at.

  He makes a case for relaxing the assumption that voters are ratio ... (continue)

  Bryan Caplan must enjoy the role of the economics professor. He wields the tools of the trade with gusto, and even adopts the (very enjoyable, if you ask me) writing style that the greatest eighteenth century economists excelled at.

  He makes a case for relaxing the assumption that voters are rational, which is often challenged by field research. Since assuming that people are IRrational makes the whole economics edifice collapse, he proposes instead that people have a (rational) preference over worldview. In the political arena it is cheap to indulge in it, because your individual vote never gets to decide anything, so you can be irrational without individually pay for it.

  The argument is quite elegant, though it relies on quite sophisticated "doublethink" behaviour. Where the book does not really do it for me is in proposed reform, which (tacitly) assumes that policy does minor adjustments, and there is going to be no need for a major call to arms. Basically, Caplan's idea is to have less democracy, and let economists run the economic policy ship to a greater extent. Which is great, as long as there is no "blood and tears" episode: because the public would not buy that if it did not perceive its own involvement in the navigation!

  Is this helpful?

  Alberto Cottica said on Aug 20, 2010 | Add your feedback

• 

  The freakonomics of democratic choice

  My acquaintance Arnold is a successful independent treasury consultant with an income to match. Arnold even thinks he makes money too easily, and sometimes votes for the Socialist Party, a fringe party with old-fashioned ideas about taking money from “the rich” to distribute it to “the common man”. ... (continue)

  My acquaintance Arnold is a successful independent treasury consultant with an income to match. Arnold even thinks he makes money too easily, and sometimes votes for the Socialist Party, a fringe party with old-fashioned ideas about taking money from “the rich” to distribute it to “the common man”. Still, Arnold uses every trick available to reduce his income tax bill.

  The coming national elections here in the Netherlands are all going to be about the latest economic crisis and the sustainability of the welfare state. The event seemed good enough a reason to upgrade my knowledge of political economy, and this book delivers. It answers questions about voters’ understanding of economics, how it affects their choices in the voting booth, and how politicians deal with the outcome.

  Starting point of the book is that people with PhD’s in economics know best what works for the macro-economic management. This seems like a rather bold statement given the current state of the economy, which followed the adoption of classical policies by institutions like the Federal Reserve. Mr. Caplan sees this in broad terms however. He takes efficiency as the sole basis and choice, and then looks at certain biases like an anti-market bias, a pessimistic bias, an anti-foreign bias, and an overvaluation of hard work by the American public (somewhat unfortunately, Mr. Caplan’s book mainly uses examples from the United States, making his book less applicable to the other 94% of us on the globe). Most of these issues are indeed generally accepted and covered in most under-graduate courses in economics. The book also quotes research that people who are generally better informed about society think more like these PhD’s, as are highly educated people, people with high income growth or job security, and males.

  Mr. Caplan then uses classical micro-economic reasoning to explain that not only ignorance but also irrationality about what is best for the economy are perfectly rational approaches for voters. The reason is simple: given how little importance an individual vote has in the outcome of elections, the choices of people like Arnold go without costs. Empirical studies have found that people do not vote with their wallet in mind. Voters choose parties that they think have the best policies for the nation. They may also vote for emotional reasons, or to belong to a certain group. There is little need to adjust the mental security blanket offered by an ineffective world view in this matter. People can be irrational as long as the consequences are limited.

  The author also looks on how this affects the supply side of policy. Although most issues of public policy have a strong economic component, economists only play a secondary role in determining government politics: “to get ahead in politics, leaders need a blend of naïve populism and realistic cynicism. No wonder the modal politician has a law degree. (…) The electoral process selects people who are professionally trained to plead cases persuasively and sincerely regardless of merit”. And even if politicians know “the best policy”, they will have to strike a balance between the irrational preferences of the masses and his own ideas. He cannot however fully ignore efficient policies, as the electorate can vote him out of office in the next elections. Vague solutions, with the tough part delegated to agencies can be a solution in this case.

  Is this helpful?

  Hermes said on Jun 6, 2010 about the Hardcover edition | Add your feedback

• 

  Interesting, but he doesn't prove his point

  Mr Caplan's book is very interesting in the beginning as he takes us through research that illustrates how the average American holds biased views which influence how we perceive (and choose to solve) issues we face as a society. While I enjoyed the book for the factual insight to our belief system ... (continue)

  Mr Caplan's book is very interesting in the beginning as he takes us through research that illustrates how the average American holds biased views which influence how we perceive (and choose to solve) issues we face as a society. While I enjoyed the book for the factual insight to our belief system, I'm not sure Mr Caplan proves his thesis as stated in the subtitle - "Why Democracies choose bad policies."

  For all intents and purposes, the topic is presented in three parts: 1) demonstrating that voters are irrational, that is, we don't make choices that are in our best interest, 2) case studies of irrational behavior in a democracy, and the potential impacts, 3) anecdotal sermonizing. It's the 2nd part that presents the problem.

  Myth of the Rational Voter plays by the numbers in the 1st part. Taken at face value, it's a factual walk through our beliefs and biases as captured by a scientific survey. In the 2nd part, Mr Caplan shows how these biases influence our decision making. He also shows how a Democracy (really a Republic; representative Democracy) has some give in the system, allowing better informed representatives to do what's right rather than necessarily what the voters say they want. The only conclusion I was able to draw from the case studies is that "Democracy" works better than it should - that is, better than "true" Democracy would if decisions were made directly by the voting public. If better informed representatives save us from ourselves, why does Democracy result in bad policies?

  In the 3rd part, Mr Caplan rails against the misinformed, and the policies that arise from their voting behavior in a rambling monologue. I don't necessarily disagree; however, he hasn't sufficiently drawn the connection given his arguments in the case studies, so his exposition doesn't flow. This segment is disjointed from previous conclusions.

  I enjoyed the first two parts, but tired of the waxing philosophic in the third segment. Here, Mr Caplan wanders from his derived conclusions, preferring, instead, to argue his own biases.

  Is this helpful?

  Andyberschauer said on May 26, 2009 | Add your feedback

Book Details

• Rating:
  (12)
  • 5 stars
  • 4 stars
  • 3 stars
  • 2 stars
  • 1 star
• English Books
• Paperback 296 Pages
• Edition: New
• ISBN-10: 0691138737
• ISBN-13: 9780691138732
• Publisher: Princeton University Press
• Pub date: Aug 21, 2008
• Also available as: Hardcover and Others

Prices Change currency & sellers