Ostrem ch.3, Question 5

The discussion about government involvement in the economy is a very controversial and heated debate. Charles Wheelan takes a moderate stance in the debate by pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each party. He says that liberals too often will neglect the "broader economy" (Wheelan 76) and forget that when an economy grows the poor will be helped as a result. The conservatives, however, will too often only approve of policies that facilitate economic growth while neglecting perfectly useful policies that help the environment and redistribute the wealth. He condemns complete anti-government with his cocktail party example and makes the case that the government has it's place in the economy (solving externalites, making rules, providing public goods). He also makes a point that in the case of 9/11 government was necessary to intervene (track down Al-qaeda, protect Americans). I fall into the moderate conservative side of the debate. I agree that government is necessary for an economy to run (public roads, preventing fraud), but I think the government takes too much money from its citizens and that politicians are inefficient when spending money. They do have some good solutions, but often the incentive of politicians is re-election and not necessarily what is beneficial for our country.