A Simple Lesson of Policy Diversity from “The Black Swan” Author: ...(Thomas Sowell mentioned)

Several months ago, I wrote a rather wonky post explaining that the western world became rich in large part because of jurisdictional competition. Citing historians, philosophers, economists, and other great thinkers, I explained that the rivalry made possible by decentralization and diversity played a big role in both economic and political liberalization.

Now I want to provide another argument in favor of the jurisdictional differences that are encouraged by national sovereignty. Simply stated, it’s the idea of diversification. Reduce risk by making sure one or two mistakes won’t cause a catastrophe.

This isn’t my insight. The author of The Black Swan understands that this simple principle of financial investment also applies to government. He recently explained his thinking in a short interview with Foreign Policy. The magazine began with a few sentences of introduction.

But it’s important to understand why he likes Switzerland and dislikes the European Union: Small is beautiful. More specifically, decentralized decision making means less systemic risk.

Taleb elaborates on this theme, echoing many of the thinkers I cited in my wonky September post.

Because it’s a short article, he doesn’t cite many specific examples, so let me elaborate. One of the reasons for the financial crisis is that the world’s financial regulators thought it would be a good idea if everybody agreed to abide the same rules for weighing risks. This resulted in the Basel rules that tilted the playing field in favor of mortgage-backed securities, thus helping to create and pump up the housing bubble. And we know how that turned out.

Unfortunately, governments seem drawn to harmonization like moths to a flame. To make matters worse, the corporate community often has the same instinct. Their motive often is somewhat benign. They like the idea of one rulebook rather than having to comply with different policies in every nations.

But mistakes made for benign reasons can be just as bad as mistakes made for malignant reasons.

P.S. Last but not least, it’s worth noting that Taleb is not a big fan of democracy.

I don’t know if this is because he recognizes the danger of untrammeled majoritarianism, much like Thomas Sowell, George Will, and Walter Williams. But if you want more information on why 51 percent of the people shouldn’t be allowed to oppress 49 percent of the people, here’s a very good video.

Interestingly there is one state where the governor is using his rather significant constitutional powers to force at least some significant parts of the public administration down to the local level and support distributed decision making in education. Of all places it is Louisiana. Bobby Jindal has used the recurring state deficit problem to defund significant parts of the state public health apparatus and leave the consequences to some degree in parish hands. The state mental hospital in New Orleans has been slowly dismantled and then done away with. Residual services were shirted to the large Southeast State Hospital in Mandeville. This year citing lack of funds that hospital was closed. The political leadership of the very well off St Tammany parish, where this hospital is, threw a tantrum. Jindal’s response was to offer parts of the hospital to the parish to operate with the proviso that the parish would handle everything and pay the costs. That is what happened . A mental health contractor from Florida was found and the parish will pay the freight. The large state charity hospital in Baton Rouge appropriately named Earl K. Long Hospital Center had a physical plant over 50 years old. The politicos of course wanted to have a grandiose new physical plant. Jindal through his appointees on the governing board instead elected to contract out EKL to Our Lady of the Lake. Next step is to start whittling away on those services the state will pay. As long as there is a deficit this can be employed as a tactic to cut the public health footprint of the Swamp State.

Public schools have been getting the same treatment using expansion of charter schools to districts that consistently score low. Jindal also has gotten the legislature to support a grant plan that provides a hefty payment for charter school fees for students with a decent academic record. Slowly the public schools are becoming just the dumping grounds for the dregs and students who want to learn in a violence and drug free environment are getting the chance. Also the centralized top down public school administration model is being crumbled by the distributed decision model of the charter schools.

Jindal has also clearly stated the Swamp State will not in any way take part in setting up the Obamacare state insurance exchange. It will be a totally fed operation.

The effects of Jindal’s decisions have delivered significant body blows to two of the biggest sources of Rat Party strength in Louisiana, the school employees and teachers organizations and the state civil service empire. The budget deficit in 2013 will be in the neighborhood of $1B and that provides a good opportunity to deliver some blows to Louisiana's ridiculously bloated (so called) higher education structure.

Of course all the usual suspects are screaming the usual bloody murder, the polisucks, the Rats, the Lamestreams most loudly represented by New Orleans rapidly sinking flagship publication, the Times-Picayune, plus all the usual high minded whiners and socialist hand-wringers. Bobby J just keeps a low profile and keeps on pushing responsibility downward for government. The big problem is that he doesn't have any real successor lined up when he has to leave office at the end of his term. Swamp State politics are more personality driven than almost any other state. Much of the GOP in the state are just a bunch of time serving pigs slopping at the public trough so it will be hard to continue the act but not impossible.

Absolutely. Competition is good for ideas and systems as well as goods and services.
Just because you're big and powerful does not mean you're always right.
Look at out government, performing social experiments on 300 million people, to a large extent without their consent, and with their own money.
Money means nothing when you're too big, governments routinely think they have an unlimited supply, especially when they can print it, but it does run out.
If you have a one world government, where can you flee to when it goes sour? And I say WHEN not IF.
I notice whenever there is a difference in rules and economics between two regions, businesses spring up along the borderline taking advantage of it.
I the whole world is exactly the same, that won't happen. What's the point of traveling and tourism then?
Watch old buildings? Why, pictures are on the web.
Besides, the pyramids will be gone soon.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.