Realignment? Part Two
Today is a teaching day, and I am in a rush. Had I had time earlier this morning, before I posted the piece on realignment that I composed last night, I would have read and referred my readers to the essay, entitled The Great U-Turn, that James Bennet has published in the new issue of National Review. It is an historically sensitive account of the manner in which Europe went one way in the 20th century while American went another. It underlines the importance of the election of 1946 and of our geographical circumstances.
I would add to his analysis only one point. The 401k, which had its debut on 1 January 1980, has had a transformative effect on American politics and is, to a considerable extent, responsible for the great battle now underway.
The reason is simple. Thanks to the legislation providing for the 401k, defined-contribution plans took over in the private sector, and untold millions of ordinary citizens found that they had a clear and obvious interest in economic growth and in private enterprise. In the public sector, nearly everywhere, we still have defined-benefit plans. Workers in the private sector look to the market for their long-term well-being; workers in the public sector look to the government.
One of the reasons why Barack Obama was elected is that private-sector workers with 401k’s felt betrayed by those in power in and before 2008. One of the reasons why the Republicans will sweep in the midterm elections of 2010 is that private-sector workers now feel betrayed by President Obama and the Democratic Congress. The 401k is the bulwark of the market system. If the Democrats cannot destroy the defined-contribution retirement plan – which many of them would very much like to do – the Left is doomed. If, over the next few years, the Republicans can shift public-sector workers from defined-benefit to defined-contribution plans, the Left will lose most of its base.
The times they are a-changing.
- Comment (7)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Realignment? Part Two
I had just finished reading the Great U Turn when I punched the Ricochet button and saw this.
I do beleive you have a solid point regarding the 401k's and the feeling of betrayal.
But while the Republicans let people down, Obama has endangered them with his manoevering regarding the Auto Industry bailouts.
Republicans were asleep at the switch and let things go wrong, Obama is attacking!
Re: Realignment? Part Two
Jaydee_007: I had just finished reading the Great U Turn when I punched the Ricochet button and saw this.
I do beleive you have a solid point regarding the 401k's and the feeling of betrayal.
But while the Republicans let people down, Obama has endangered them with his manoevering regarding the Auto Industry bailouts.
Republicans were asleep at the switch and let things go wrong, Obama is attacking! · Sep 27 at 8:02am
Amen.
Sep '10
Re: Realignment? Part Two
Paul A. Rahe:
If, over the next few years, the Republicans can shift public-sector workers from defined-benefit to defined-contribution plans, the Left will lose most of its base.
Interesting point. Christie is my hero.
May '10
Re: Realignment? Part Two
The only problem with this theory (with which I to some extent agree) is that a large number of American universities have the professoriate on defined contribution plans, with no visibile effect. TIAA-CREF virtually was founded and exists to handle the university market.
If I had time, I'd go find data on this. But I haven't seen many professors do anything except blame George Bush for the drop in their 401(k) values. They sure haven't been arguing for growth-friendly policiy shifts.
Sep '10
Re: Realignment? Part Two
Interesting point Duane, but, I would posit that academia is a "hard" political atmosphere while your typical government office is "soft". Most college campuses are rigidly ideological, with echo chambers in full force. Most offices, I would guess, contain ordinary people who take their political views from the general atmosphere that surrounds them. Some general grousing in the break room can go a long way in that environment, whereas the same at a college will just get you shunned.
Re: Realignment? Part Two
Duane Oyen: The only problem with this theory (with which I to some extent agree) is that a large number of American universities have the professoriate on defined contribution plans, with no visibile effect. TIAA-CREF virtually was founded and exists to handle the university market.
If I had time, I'd go find data on this. But I haven't seen many professors do anything except blame George Bush for the drop in their 401(k) values. They sure haven't been arguing for growth-friendly policiy shifts. · Sep 27 at 9:29a
There is no hope for the professoriate. Its members care only for status -- and the resentment they direct at businessmen exceeds their greed. A hopeless lot.
May '10
Re: Realignment? Part Two
Paul A. Rahe
Duane Oyen: The only problem with this theory (with which I to some extent agree) is that a large number of American universities have the professoriate on defined contribution plans, with no visibile effect. TIAA-CREF virtually was founded and exists to handle the university market.
If I had time, I'd go find data on this. But I haven't seen many professors do anything except blame George Bush for the drop in their 401(k) values. They sure haven't been arguing for growth-friendly policiy shifts. · Sep 27 at 9:29a
There is no hope for the professoriate. Its members care only for status -- and the resentment they direct at businessmen exceeds their greed. A hopeless lot. · Sep 27 at 10:32am
Well, the hard left make-up of academia is why I "to some extent agree". I fear that there will soon be more 401(k) owners asking the government to shelter their rates of return; bad news there.
I already fear that the retirement saving we have done for years will be undone by this administration's hostility to capital markets and the failure to let markets discipline Wall Street investment banks.