November 3, 2012
WP
By
ROBERT J. SHILLER
WITH so much attention on the income divide between the top 1 percent
and the other 99 percent of Americans, it might seem that having
enormous business wealth wouldn’t be a great qualification for election
as president. And if such a candidate pledged to keep taxes low for the
wealthy, he would appear to have no chance at all in a troubled economy.
Mitt Romney’s
campaign has been showing that these factors may not be insurmountable.
To the contrary, many Americans are showing deep affection for stories
of business success — like Mr. Romney’s at Bain Capital — and many are
shrugging off the inequality issue.
In some ways, this isn’t so surprising. Americans have long been seen as
admirers of business wealth. In 1840, Alexis de Tocqueville observed in
“
Democracy in America” that “in no country in the world is the love of property more active and more anxious than in the United States.”
And in his 1906 book, “
Why Is There No Socialism in the United States?,”
the German sociologist and economist Werner Sombart wrote: “If the
American prays before the god of Success, he strives to lead a life
acceptable to his god. Therefore we see in every American — beginning
with the paperboy — restlessness, yearning and compulsion to be way and
beyond other people.”
Sombart’s observation about American national identity still looks
spot-on. The other day in Chicago, a taxi driver told me that he had
emigrated from Romania and had grand plans to develop at a distance a
vacation resort in his home country. America continues to attract people
who have the utmost respect for wealth.
Not long after, a taxi driver in New Haven confided to me that he was a
high-school dropout. When I asked if we should tax the rich more, he
replied with an emphatic “No!” He saw himself as a small-businessman who
happened to be in the taxi business, and he identified strongly with
the rich.
The pursuit of wealth is a real source of identity in America. We are
accustomed to seeing ourselves chasing riches, even if we’re not in
business the way Mr. Romney was.
Still, Americans haven’t elected many businessmen as presidents. The
principal examples come from the Roaring ’20s, a time of huge stock
market gains, when faith in business reached all-time highs. Consider
our presidents in that decade: Warren G. Harding had been a newspaper
publisher in Ohio. Calvin Coolidge, trained as a lawyer, was once a vice
president of the Nonotuck Savings Bank in Northampton, Mass., and was
known for saying that
“the chief business of the American people is business.” And Herbert Hoover was a mining expert who traveled to Australia in its 1890s gold rush and became a mine manager.
But businessman presidents disappeared after the market crash of 1929 and during
the Great Depression
of the 1930s, when many Americans believed that the business world had
failed the nation. Franklin D. Roosevelt, who came from a wealthy family
but was never a businessman and never talked like one, handily defeated
both Hoover in 1932 and Alf Landon, a banker and independent petroleum
producer, in 1936.
Not until the Bush presidencies did businessmen, in the suit-and-tie
sense of the word, retake the White House — though it otherwise could be
argued that Jimmy Carter, a peanut farmer, was a businessman, too.
George H. W. Bush was elected during a soaring stock market, and his son
George W. Bush won during a real estate boom. Both men were oil venture
entrepreneurs.
You might think that the current economic slump would drain support for
businessmen, as it did in the Great Depression. But there are
differences. Back then, the United States hadn’t yet reached the
pinnacle of economic power. Today, many people worry about an apparent
crumbling of American economic growth as emerging markets surge around
us. There is a widespread fear that the American wealth machine is
faltering — and, as a result, many people are aiming to rediscover the
nation’s traditional strengths.
In Connecticut, the typically “blue” state where I live, Linda McMahon,
the Republican candidate for senator, is campaigning on a story of
self-made riches, and is presenting a serious challenge to the Democrat,
Representative Christopher S. Murphy.
Ms. McMahon lacks legislative or governmental experience, but she cites
her success in managing World Wrestling Entertainment as evidence that
she can be an effective legislator. Her life story — involving an early
bankruptcy, then redemption through earning millions running staged
wrestling bouts — is a rags-to-riches tale, and she says it demonstrates
her capacity to succeed as a senator. Americans have long heard stories
of how entrepreneurs from John D. Rockefeller to Steven P. Jobs have
achieved phenomenal success, and many derive a sense of identity from
seeing themselves as having the qualities that could lead to riches,
too.
FOR many voters this year, a central question is how to maintain what
they consider as America’s greatness, its exceptionalism. They are
concerned with both lowering the unemployment rate and creating good
jobs — jobs that are exciting and can create substantial wealth. This
attitude may be improving the odds for businesspeople seeking office.
If elected, Mr. Romney wants to enforce a general pro-business mandate
and to bolster business confidence. That is quite possible. Still, any
such confidence boost will most likely be offset by his promise to
drastically cut government spending. The weight of evidence from studies
of
fiscal austerity
indicates that, at least in times like these, it is very costly to
economic activity. Big cuts now could easily plunge the country back
into a recession.
Yes, many Americans admire business success and believe that business
experience is a plus in a president. But Americans have usually also
understood that other factors — like wise policies and strong leadership
ability — are much more important.
Robert J. Shiller is professor of economics and finance at Yale.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home