{"id":25041,"date":"2014-04-09T07:32:36","date_gmt":"2014-04-09T12:32:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=25041"},"modified":"2014-04-09T07:32:36","modified_gmt":"2014-04-09T12:32:36","slug":"being-pro-business-does-not-mean-the-same-as-being-pro-market","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2014\/04\/09\/being-pro-business-does-not-mean-the-same-as-being-pro-market\/","title":{"rendered":"Being “pro-business” does not mean the same as being “pro-market”"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s a common misunderstanding<\/a> (especially with people who don’t know what laissez faire<\/em> actually means):<\/p>\n

For years, Republicans benefited from economic growth. So did pretty much everyone else, of course. But I have something specific in mind. Politically, when the economy is booming \u2014 or merely improving at a satisfactory clip \u2014 the distinction between being pro-business and pro-market is blurry. The distinction is also fuzzy when the economy is shrinking or imploding.<\/p>\n

But when the economy is simply limping along \u2014 not good, not disastrous \u2014 like it is now, the line is easier to see. And GOP politicians typically don\u2019t want to admit they see it.<\/p>\n

Just to clarify, the difference between being pro-business and pro-market is categorical. A politician who is a \u201cfriend of business\u201d is exactly that, a guy who does favors for his friends. A politician who is pro-market is a referee who will refuse to help protect his friends (or anyone else) from competition unless the competitors have broken the rules. The friend of business supports industry-specific or even business-specific loans, grants, tariffs, or tax breaks. The pro-market referee opposes special treatment for anyone.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

GOP politicians can\u2019t have it both ways anymore. An economic system that simply doles out favors to established stakeholders becomes less dynamic and makes job growth less likely. (Most jobs are created by new businesses.) Politically, the longer we\u2019re in a \u201cnew normal\u201d of lousy growth, the more the focus of politics turns to wealth redistribution. That\u2019s bad for the country and just awful politics for Republicans. In that environment, being the party of less \u2014 less entitlement spending, less redistribution \u2014 is a losing proposition.<\/p>\n

Also, for the first time in years, there\u2019s an organized \u2014 or mostly organized \u2014 grassroots constituency for the market. Historically, the advantage of the pro-business crowd is that its members pick up the phone and call when politicians shaft them. The market, meanwhile, was like a bad Jewish son; it never called and never wrote. Now, there\u2019s an infrastructure of tea-party-affiliated and other free-market groups forcing Republicans to stop fudging.<\/p>\n

A big test will be on the Export-Import Bank, which is up for reauthorization this year. A bank in name only, the taxpayer-backed agency rewards big businesses in the name of maximizing exports that often don\u2019t need the help (hence its nickname, \u201cBoeing\u2019s Bank\u201d). In 2008, even then-senator Barack Obama said it was \u201clittle more than a fund for corporate welfare.\u201d The bank, however, has thrived on Obama\u2019s watch. It\u2019s even subsidizing the sale of private jets. Remember when Obama hated tax breaks for corporate jets?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It’s a common misunderstanding (especially with people who don’t know what laissez faire actually means): For years, Republicans benefited from economic growth. So did pretty much everyone else, of course. But I have something specific in mind. Politically, when the economy is booming \u2014 or merely improving at a satisfactory clip \u2014 the distinction between […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[831,25,53,13],"tags":[645,727,817,266,661],"class_list":["post-25041","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-business","category-economics","category-politics","category-usa","tag-corporatewelfare","tag-cronycapitalism","tag-laissez-faire","tag-protectionism","tag-regulation"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2hpV6-6vT","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25041","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25041"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25041\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25042,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25041\/revisions\/25042"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25041"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25041"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25041"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}