Are we all stupid voters?

This is a response to Brian Caplan's "The 4 Bonehead Biases of Stupid Voters"
He has some pretty interesting points: http://uhec3334.blogspot.com/2008/01/biases-and-economics.html
Here's what I thought of the "Pessimistic Bias":

In recalling a time I struggled getting a horse out of the trailer, I can provide some justification for Bryan Caplan's "Pessimistic Bias." It was a tricky unloading situation, and I knew it wasn't guaranteed to be safe. The horse was very nervous to back down the ramp in this awkward situation, and it was going to take some work to change his mind. I could only hope that the horse would back out calmly enough that nothing too terrible would happen. If he could only trust me, and do exactly what I asked him, he would soon be out of the trailer and back to his home. However, in my first few attempts getting him to back out, he did in fact try. He ended up taking an innocent but wrong step down, catching his leg and cutting it badly before jumping back in the trailer. After that, getting him out turned from tricky to impossible.
Bryan Caplan's explanation of the pessimistic bias is sound; it is true that the public sometimes blows even temporary symptoms of doom out of proportion. It is also true that this stress only makes the economy worse off as a whole. We may go so far as to sacrifice wealth or freedom to solve a problem that may not have truly been that big of a problem left alone. While these arguments all seem reasonable, I think that Caplan is neglecting to see why voters may have reason behave this way.
Take for example the incident I described above, in which my encouragement led to false trust and ultimately disaster. I knew that there was a good chance that disaster wouldn't strike, but I couldn't deny that there was also risk. In this unlucky situation, I gave the horse reason to believe that there was no way he could get out of the trailer without getting hurt. I think that voters behave similarly. In cases where a small part of the economy is failing, a certain industry may suffer severely, justifying their concern, and even the action taken. When this suffering happens, it is difficult to maintain the "keep it cool" mentality. At this point, the suffering party must make due for themselves. Transferring money into offshore bank accounts is a good example of every-man-for-himself mentality. I think voters know that this isn't good for the economy overall, but the question is whether or not they are acting for the economy as a whole.
I guess I could completely agree with Caplan if the term "bonehead" could be translated into "hardhead." Rather than accusing the public of being stupid (given, some are, but not all), I think a better claim would be that many voters act irrationally due to their firmly held beliefs and personal experiences. When somebody has a bad experience, it is understandable that that individual is going to have a different opinion than the frustrated economist. I think this bias is evident in our country, as Caplan explains, but unlike Caplan's view, I think this bias should be allowed to influence a vote. In a society with perfect political efficacy, people probably would turn to the advice of the economists in making their decisions. But voting for many is only valuable because it gives people a way to express their opinion. This includes but is not limited to a hope for an improving economy, but also an expression of that individual's personally held morals, whether they are irrational or not. So while one way to explain this flaw is by accusing the voters of being "bone-headed," I prefer to accept the misconceptions of the public as their own right to vote the way they wish.
Again, I am not saying I don't agree with Caplan's reasoning from a broad view, but I do also think that he isn't addressing what is really happening on a small scale. Even in his writing this, it is evident that he has a bias of his own. While the author lives in a situation where "a few hours’ wages spent at the grocery store can feed you for weeks," many people don't. They don't have the cushion to be able to view the economy over time the way somebody like the author may; they are more worried about "now." These people probably have a right to be pessimistic when the economy wounds them. This pessimism then has sort of a dominos effect on the economy, causing more and more people to panic or behave similarly.
So, while I do agree with Caplan on the overall issue of too much pessimism, I wouldn't dismiss this "pessimistic bias" as society's stupidity.

Bookmark/Search this post with: