LA City Council, $218,000 -Public Good Served? | #212

LA City Council, $218,000 -Public Good Served? | #212

•

Episode description

In recent news, LA city counselors were caught on tape saying derogatory things about those living within their community. Upon this news, the Gwartney team looks to discuss the incentives for such behavior within Los Angeles. The Gwartney team discusses why LA city counselors are paid hefty amounts and why they cannot be kicked out of office. What is at play here: higher cost of living, increased workload, a stressful job, or could it be to deter corruption? Join us for a great episode as we sort out the incentives at play within Los Angeles. 

Timeline:

Incentives / 3:00

Government vs. Free Market / 8:15

Importance of Accurate Capital / 11:00

Rational Ignornance / 18:30

Devil's Advocate / 22:45

Shocking? Not to Dr. Clarke / 25;30

Bad Actors / 31:20


The “Faith in Economics” podcast, produced by the Gwartney Institute at Ottawa University, explores the intersection of faith and economics as a means to aid human flourishing. In the episode, host Cole McRae converses with Dr. Russ McCullough, Dr. Justin Clark, and Dr. Peter Jacobson regarding recent developments in U.S. government efficiency efforts, particularly focusing on controversial figures like Elon Musk and initiatives like “Doge.” The panel discusses the idea of a “Doge dividend,” a proposed initiative where savings from government spending cuts would be returned to citizens in the form of checks, reminiscent of COVID stimulus checks, aiming to offer approximately $5,000 per American based on 20% of the budget cuts achieved.

The conversation emphasizes the need to restructure government expenditure and addresses the complexities of executing cuts responsibly, likening it to a surgical operation that inevitably removes some healthy aspects along with the waste. Dr. Jacobson and Dr. Clark express support for the dividend proposal, highlighting its potential to politically empower citizens and counter the narrative that tax cuts benefit only the wealthy. The economists advocate for a more significant percentage than 20% for dividends to encourage public awareness and engagement with government spending.

Diverse views regarding balancing the national budget and addressing the national debt also emerge. While Dr. Clark argues the importance of immediate compensation for spending cuts to bolster political will, Dr. Jacobson counters that the method whether through dividends or future tax cuts won’t ultimately impact debt responsibility. This lively discourse illustrates the nuanced relationship between government efficiency, fiscal policy, and citizen engagement, advocating for a systematic change that could reshape economic conditions while benefiting ordinary Americans through incentivized spending cuts. The episode concludes with reflections on the broader implications of the proposed Doge dividend amidst ongoing discussions about government deficits and accountability in spending.