We should Not Vote based on the Short-Term Economy

 Politicians and the media keep drumming into our head that the short-term economy is the major issue in each election.  There is some truth in that statement, but they enhance an unhealthy voting pattern by stressing this point, helping to convince voters that they should vote based on short-term economics.  I think they should explain the long-term issues that deserve attention.

There are at least 3 reasons why short-term economics should not be a key issue for most people.

1)        Most of us can afford to vote based on what will be best for future generations.  If you’re having trouble finding your next meal, voting on the short-term economy makes sense.  But the rest of us can afford to look more long-term.  I acknowledge that some people may be empathetic toward others who have trouble finding their next meal, hence might vote on this basis, whether it is a good idea or not.

2)        Generally, the short-term economy is more reflective of the previous administration than the current administration.  It takes years for regulatory or tax changes to work their way through an economy.  It does not make sense to vote for or against the current administration because of actions taken by their predecessors.  Acknowledgement: President Trump’s tariffs are a counter-example, as they had an immediate impact.  However, potential long-term benefits did not affect the current economy.

3)        Aspects of the success of the current economy are independent of what politicians do.  Politicians like to think their decisions control the economy, but things rarely work out the way they expect.  For example:

a)        During President Trump’s second term, AI and data centers have contributed about 30% of GDP growth.  Does he deserve credit for that?

b)       President Obama downplayed the contributions of business.  For example, in 2012, he said "If you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

I agree that the business environment is important for business and that we should be thankful.  That’s why we should “give back”.  But businesses added more than 11 million jobs in rebounding from the Great Recession and invested heavily in equipment, intellectual property, etc.  How much of that is thanks to the President?

The Fed’s low interest rates helped boost the economy.  But the Fed was independent.

Fracking, which he opposed, accounted for 10% of economic growth during his tenure.

Other advances, such as drones and 3-D printing had minor effect (partly because President Obama (not unreasonably) delayed drone development in the US so the government could create a regulatory structure for them.  They provided economic growth for future administrations.