Liberal Vision

Nudge Dredd

Professor Richard Thaler, Chief Justice of the Nudge movement sweeping politics, is back in Brit-Cit this week to advise the government on using his analysis of irrational behaviour to design non-coercive policies that encourage individual choices for longer, healthier and better lives. A philosophy he calls libertarian paternalism.

Underlying libertarian paternalism is a truth, that all of us frequently make ‘bad’ choices that do not extend, improve or enhance our lives; and a conceit that the state is always good at knowing what the best choices might be, that they are good at nudges to help us get there, and the nudges do more good than harm.

In the first part some ‘good’ decisions (by Thaler’s criteria) are obvious or evidence-based. Don’t smoke, drink in moderation, eat a balanced diet and do some exercise. Others are entirely subjective or moral choices. Be a player or a priest, experiment with soft drugs, go to church, and so on. Others have unclear implications with risks both ways. Play sports with a high risk of serious injury, let your kids watch commercials, cycle to work. Other choices like giving to charity may be bad for you and good for society.

What outcomes the state judges is good, with what priority, and what choices lead to those outcomes is largely a matter of politics. It is not obvious though there needs to be a political consensus on right and wrong in any electoral cycle, or that the ‘state’ view should be a monopoly. Liberal scepticism of monopoly should apply to edicts of certainty, whatever their source. And where good choices are clear, there are usually many more actors than the state involved in saying so, leaving it unclear why the state should expend treasure as one more voice. Is there any reason at all for example why GB plc is running five a day commercials alongside all the other exhortations to eat better?

Who is better at nudges, the private or public sector? I’m not sure there is a sensible answer to that question, or at least not a short one. Private companies looking for the next dollar can encourage bad choices, but equally can make good choices much easier through lifestyle marketing. Government marketing and opt-in/opt-out laws can make a difference, but when the government gets it wrong, for example with stakeholder pensions and nannying on trivia like stand-by buttons, the cost is large.

The wider libertarian movement suspicion though that nudges increase the scope of government to interfere in private decisions rather than make it less coercive is a reasonable worry. Are opt-out organ donor schemes a nudge or coercion? Is compelling companies to plain package cigarettes a nudge or heavy-handed regulation? What about all the perverse nudges and incentives to make bad choices in the welfare system?

In brief nudge policies are a broadly welcome alternative to some types of government intervention. They might be used to ‘nudge’ some politicians away from the jackboots to the nanny-shawl in the political dressy-up box; or leave it alone entirely. But there is a risk in the hands of Mega-government and protean Nudge Dredd politicians helping us for our own good, that what you actually get is something like

“you want choice citizen, I am the choice, prepare to be nudged”

Shrew bites Squirrel

The Telegraph notes former Labour Equalities Minister, Harriet Harman, has apologised after calling the current Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander a “ginger rodent”.

A regrettable error for one so senior who herself has overcome the inherited disadvantage of no discernable sense of humour.

We at LV hope she treads more gingerly in future.

Clegg’s desert island dilemmas

The shocking revelation on today’s Desert Island Discs was that Nick Clegg’s luxury would be a “secret stash of cigarettes“. He has clearly not read the party memo on mention of the ‘evil weed’ being the social equivalent of beating children or driving a 4×4.

Being on a desert island alone of course Nick could do much as he pleased with his stash. But being the Deputy Prime Minister we’re sure he would wish to stick as closely as possibly to the law of the United Kingdom in order, like Robinson Crusoe, to maintain the standards of civilisation and social order that ‘separate us from savages’.

His first dilemma then would be whether to declare the import of his stash and pay tobacco duty. Currency is rare commodity on tropical islands, and the Treasury quite absent. However both can be replicated quite adequately with coconuts and a large hole in the ground.

Nick’s first task then would be gather a large number of coconuts and inter them. The exact number would depend the size of his stash and UK-island exchange rate. Local pricing might also be awkward, cigarettes are rare, coconuts literally grow on trees, however for convenience we’ll say 1 packet equals 10 coconuts, of which given UK duty-equivalence, 8-9 need to go in the ground for each import, depending on the brand.

The coconuts in the hole could of course be retrieved from time to time to support Nick’s health and welfare, or the arts if he wants some handy percussion instruments, but many will rot. This is the administration cost.

Despite the hole full of rotting coconuts, or perhaps because of it, Nick is fortunate to attract a second castaway to his island a little time later. Man Alexander is strong, loyal and brave; a handy guy to have around when the cesspit needs draining, or in seeking accommodation with the tribe of cannibals on a neighbouring island.

However the island has now become a public space, and the covered shelter built using husks from the pit, public housing. Nick can still grab a crafty puff from his stash on the beach or in his own bedroom, but the communal food preparation area is a no no, and the covered veranda requires two side walls to be knocked out. Nick is required to ensure adequate fire prevention mechanisms are in place (a bucket of sand), and conduct a full risk assessment before inhaling.

He also has a difficulty in what he can say to Alexander about his stash. Some initial inquiries and a battered passport happily establish that despite appearances to the contrary Alexander is over the age of 18. So he can exchange cigarettes with him for coconuts and need not confiscate any he finds not-so-young Alexander smoking on the public beach.

Although he’s not yet banned from displaying the stash for sale to Alexander, he is certainly thinking about hiding them under his hammock in future, and those that he does display must be done in very precise and limited ways in order not to breach rules on many types of advertising, promotion or sponsorship. The A5 poster he eventually settles on putting next to the communal urinal is factual and 30% of it constitutes a warning about the risks of shrivelled genitals.

This does not deter Alexander.

He eventually procures some of Nick stash and throws some coconuts in the hole.

However due to the previous occupation of the island by a tribe of vegan militarists, who decided to go to war with the cannibals using an arsenal of weaponry entirely fabricated from coconuts, and pay off their reluctant warriors with promises of more coconuts, the coconut supply is quickly running out.

Both have to stop using the stash.

Nick though one day discovers Alexander puffing away behind the fish gut pit using a supply of illicit cigarettes that have washed up on the beach.

Nick has no choice but to arrest Alexander for smuggling, destroy the contraband, and impose a large fine in coconuts that he cannot pay. The economy and tranquillity of the island swiftly breaks down in petty feuding and both are relieved, if only for a short time, to be rescued by the cannibals the following week who have no restrictions on enjoying a cigarette after their meal.

Nick alternative was to treat the island, or parts of it as a private space subject to local rules and come to some sensible compromises with Alexander should he have proved to be a non-smoker. The coconuts might have been managed more efficiently without the help of a large pit. The communication of the product on offer, and associated risks with a little more pragmatism and less zealotry.

But this is all just a desert island fantasy, isn’t it?

Tony Blair’s drinking problem

As ever, Matt has hits the nail on the head!

God v Satan

One for Laurence Boyce:

Hat-tip: ChartPorn.org