...we should look to the far-reaching, destructive effects of government intervention... that undermines productive behavior and rewards unproductive behavior. The solution, for the auto industry and others, is simple: remove the toxic presence of government “planning” and leave the industry free to produce and profit. [bold added, links dropped]But the reason for my post is something Epstein wrote in his very first sentence of the piece, and it's something that deserves to be examined more closely. He wrote:
One way in which the central planners of the Obama administration easily acquire and exercise the power to dictate how a 300-million-person economy should run is by portraying entire industries as stupid, short-sighted, and in need of “adult supervision.” [bold added]I think he's used this terminology before, but it really jumped out at me this time because of how powerful and concise the phrase "central planners" is in reference to what Obama is doing.
This one simple phrase has a major significance in its obvious reference to the Soviet and Chinese communist dictatorships and their failed economic policies. With a delightful economy of words, and because of its subtlety and unambiguous implications (because of the near universal understanding of the historic failure of central planning), the use of the phrase clearly identifies the activities of the administration as tragically similar, without taking it too far and weakening the argument. If he called Barack and his administration communist or some other name, it would harm his credibility by seeming to go too far.
Referring to this administration as "The Central Planners" is something that I hope will catch on. I certainly plan on using it in conversation and writing, and I think you should too.