This election, take note of 'opportunity cost'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Mike Hicks

The first concept taught in every introductory economics class is the simple idea of “opportunity cost.” This is the straightforward notion that the cost of an item is measured by what you give up to get it.

I think it is an idea that separates those who make decisions from those who want to talk about them and, in application, is an idea that distinguishes serious from unserious people. As an economist, and more important a citizen-soldier, father and taxpayer, the one thing I am looking for in this election is men and women who understand the idea of “opportunity cost.”

In the coming years, we face a set of difficult policy decisions. A delay in these decisions robs the best alternatives from us all. In truth, a good many matters at issue in this election cycle are not yet really a crisis. The federal budget, energy dependency, health care and Social Security can be fixed now without life-altering sacrifice. Left unchecked, the options narrow, the necessary sacrifice grows and the future dims. They are, however, a brewing crisis. As this happens, many (on both the right and left) entirely miss the point.

One aspiring presidential candidate on the right proclaims that the nation’s problems are a “moral crisis, not a money crisis.” True, perhaps, but I neither need nor want a president to help me raise my kids, improve my marriage, or choose my church. No matter how bad I am at these, no denizen of the White House is going to do better. I want something far more from my president than helping me with my kid’s baseball practice, violin lessons and evening prayers. I want a president who will keep us free and unburden my children from debt. Mrs. Hicks and I, our family, neighbors and friends will attend to the rest.

The left is no better. We fight difficult wars in a half-dozen countries, yet the sticking point in this year’s defense budget was repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Call me crazy, but caring for soldiers is more about buying body armor and ammunition than easing an open discussion of their sexuality. For the record, and this is a potentially costly admission since I remain a serving reserve officer, I believe we should repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” But we must wait until we have emerged with honor from our current wars; until then, the opportunity cost of debating it is just too high.

As they have reminded us frequently these past years, the current Congress and administration came to office with many challenges not of their making. Yet, the heaping of enormous uncertainty onto recession made matters far, far worse. As a consequence, this election will see many good folks lose their jobs in Congress simply because they followed a leadership with no sense of priorities. Still, this election will send a clear signal of priorities. And I, like many Americans, will be voting for folks who understand the simple economic concept of “opportunity cost.”•


Hicks is director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at cber@bsu.edu.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. President Obama has referred to the ACA as "Obamacare" any number of times; one thing it is not, if you don't qualify for a subsidy, is "affordable".

  2. One important correction, Indiana does not have an ag-gag law, it was soundly defeated, or at least changed. It was stripped of everything to do with undercover pictures and video on farms. There is NO WAY on earth that ag gag laws will survive a constitutional challenge. None. Period. Also, the reason they are trying to keep you out, isn't so we don't show the blatant abuse like slamming pigs heads into the ground, it's show we don't show you the legal stuf... the anal electroctions, the cutting off of genitals without anesthesia, the tail docking, the cutting off of beaks, the baby male chicks getting thrown alive into a grinder, the deplorable conditions, downed animals, animals sitting in their own excrement, the throat slitting, the bolt guns. It is all deplorable behavior that doesn't belong in a civilized society. The meat, dairy and egg industries are running scared right now, which is why they are trying to pass these ridiculous laws. What a losing battle.

  3. Eating there years ago the food was decent, nothing to write home about. Weird thing was Javier tried to pass off the story the way he ended up in Indy was he took a bus he thought was going to Minneapolis. This seems to be the same story from the founder of Acapulco Joe's. Stopped going as I never really did trust him after that or the quality of what being served.

  4. Indianapolis...the city of cricket, chains, crime and call centers!

  5. "In real life, a farmer wants his livestock as happy and health as possible. Such treatment give the best financial return." I have to disagree. What's in the farmer's best interest is to raise as many animals as possible as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible. There is a reason grass-fed beef is more expensive than corn-fed beef: it costs more to raise. Since consumers often want more food for lower prices, the incentive is for farmers to maximize their production while minimizing their costs. Obviously, having very sick or dead animals does not help the farmer, however, so there is a line somewhere. Where that line is drawn is the question.