HICKS: What a third-grader gets about economic policy

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Mike Hicks

I recently attended a birthday party with my two sons. This bevy of 9-year-olds looked a bit daunting, so I stuck around to chat with another dad and lend a hand if the hostess needed it. True, this offered me a chance to play laser tag and have a piece of cake, but really, that wasn’t why I stayed.

By chance, the conversation turned to economic policy. Earlier in the month, reports were floating that Michigan was broke and would begin a series of statewide shutdowns. This was bad news, which one dad conveniently used for a teaching moment. The conversation with his son was so elegant, simple and pure, it called for retelling.

“Son, have you heard Michigan will not open its offices for a few days next week because the state is broke?”

“Dad, does that include the Lions? They could use the break.”

“No, son, just the offices that are there to help people and keep the state running.”

“Hmmm, Dad, that’s not good.”

“Son, what do you think the governor will do?”

“Dad, that’s easy. He’ll probably have to raise taxes to get more money to keep the state going.”

“Son, I think you are right. But people in Michigan already pay very high taxes. What do you think businesses will do when their taxes go up?”

“They’ll just move to Indiana. Gotta go, Dad. They’re cutting the cake.”

This brief lesson in economic policy from a third-grader is just the sort of material many city and state leaders need in times like these. Many are about to learn it the hard way.

Faithful readers of this column will recall I am not a deficit hawk, nor a single-minded foe of taxes. Business and people now, and in the future, will choose to locate in places that have the right mix of taxes and public services. Good public services—primarily good schools, recreational amenities and the like—will always draw more taxpayers and folks willing to pay higher rates. Places that do poorly on these scores will have to have very low taxes or drive residents and businesses elsewhere. Communities that enjoy good public services and low taxes will grow.

In my judgment, much of Indiana is poised to learn a happy lesson on the virtuous combination of low taxes and good public services. That is not an accident of nature, but the result of disciplined and sometimes difficult public policy. Sadly, more than a few places in the state continue to endure low-quality schools, ineffective local government and high taxes. They will not prosper in the coming recovery.

This recession has been long. As a result, there is significant pent-up demand for business investment. When it is unleashed, the places that offer that investment the best prospect of profit will benefit. For the first time after the past four or five recessions, Indiana is such a place.•


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. So as I read this the one question that continues to come to me to ask is. Didn't Indiana only have a couple of exchanges for people to opt into which were very high because we really didn't want to expect the plan. So was this study done during that time and if so then I can understand these numbers. I also understand that we have now opened up for more options for hoosiers to choose from. Please correct if I'm wrong and if I'm not why was this not part of the story so that true overview could be taken away and not just parts of it to continue this negative tone against the ACA. I look forward to the clarity.

  2. It's really very simple. All forms of transportation are subsidized. All of them. Your tax money already goes toward every single form of transportation in the state. It is not a bad thing to put tax money toward mass transit. The state spends over 1,000,000,000 (yes billion) on roadway expansions and maintenance every single year. If you want to cry foul over anything cry foul over the overbuilding of highways which only serve people who can afford their own automobile.

  3. So instead of subsidizing a project with a market-driven scope, you suggest we subsidize a project that is way out of line with anything that can be economically sustainable just so we can have a better-looking skyline?

  4. Downtowner, if Cummins isn't getting expedited permitting and tax breaks to "do what they do", then I'd be happy with letting the market decide. But that isn't the case, is it?

  5. Patty, this commuter line provides a way for workers (willing to work lower wages) to get from Marion county to Hamilton county. These people are running your restaurants, hotels, hospitals, and retail stores. I don't see a lot of residents of Carmel working these jobs.