Product Description

A leading political and business thinker identifies the greatest threat to our economic future: the things we think we know—but don’t

---

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #24189 in Books
• Published on: 2009-01-06
• Released on: 2009-01-06
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Dimensions: .95" h x 6.45" w x 9.60" l, 1.09 pounds
• Binding: Hardcover
• 272 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780805087871
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

From Publishers Weekly
If Fortune columnist Miller's eerily prophetic book had come out earlier, it could have served as a wakeup call for Wall Street leaders and Washington, D.C. lawmakers before the failure of several venerable financial institutions required government bailouts. The author's prescient observations make a persuasive case for how an American attitude of entitlement and outdated beliefs about government, education, taxes, business, corporate excess and health care threaten our national well-being and our position as a world leader. The author denounces such cherished and longstanding beliefs as Your Company Should Take Care of You, and The Kids Will Earn More than We Do, and examines their historical provenances—for example, he traces the adoption of pensions to the early 20th century, when employers like Proctor and Gamble and G.E. acted as feudal lords offering benefits to recruit and retain employees—strategies that are now strangling these same corporations at the expense of global competitiveness. Rather than a petulant indictment of our political and economic myopia, this book offers a fair-handed critique. (Jan.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
Miller, consultant and author, describes the threat that America faces from the traditional way it thinks about certain economic issues (“Dead Ideas”) and suggests new ways of thinking (“Destined Ideas”) to ensure our future prosperity. Dead Ideas include corporate America’s desire to stop providing health care and pensions to its workforce, which will leave millions unprotected; and since aging baby boomers will cause the government’s health and pension costs to explode, we cannot manage this reality by raising taxes to a level that destroys economic growth. The author contends only top business executives can spearhead new ideas since power-driven politicians are incapable of such leadership. We learn, “In an era when more change is expected to occur in the next thirty years than in the previous three hundred, the skill and speed with which people cope . . . will be the key to success; those slow to adapt will be punished faster and more harshly.” This is an excellent book for a wide range of library patrons. --Mary Whaley

Review

"Matt Miller writes and thinks with amazing clarity about some of the most difficult problems this country is facing. The Tyranny of Dead Ideas offers the most plausible way to renovate our political and policy thinking to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century -- if we have the guts to go forward. This is must reading for the next president and for anyone who wants to be a creative citizen in a difficult time."—Joe Klein, political columnist, Time

"This book will make you the most valuable contributor to your next workplace discussion of politics or the economy. Matt Miller explains the history of ideas in a way that forces fresh insights about the future.  I feel smarter already."—Chip Heath, author of Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die

"With crisp prose and compelling arguments, Matt Miller overturns orthodoxies left and right. Whatever your political persuasion, you will agree that The Tyranny of Dead Ideas is a tour de force -- the rare book that can reshape the national agenda."—Daniel H. Pink, author of A Whole New Mind

"To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, our times are piled high with difficulty, and just as we must act anew we must think anew. Matt Miller is one of those few, invaluable voices who is able to reach beyond the truisms of yesterday to help us think anew about tomorrow. I warmly recommend his pathbreaking new book The Tyranny of Dead Ideas."—David Gergen, director of the Center for Public Leadership, Harvard University, and senior political analyst, CNN

"In The Tyranny of Dead Ideas, Matt Miller drives a bulldozer into the complacent conventional wisdoms of our society, including the desirability of free trade, of paternalistic corporations, and even of low taxes. You need not agree with every idea to be invigorated by Miller’s bold and original vision."—Philip K. Howard, author of The Death of Common Sense and Life Without Lawyers

---

Customer Reviews

The "Must-Read" Policy Book
If you are interested in government policy --- the role the government can play in improving society, or even in preventing decline --- this is one book that must be on your reading list. And you will enjoy it.

Miller has experience and training as a lawyer and as a business consultant and has worked in the federal government and as an opinion columnist and radio host. These varied skills and experience are all on display as Miller takes readers on a pithy, informative and entertaining journey through the major challenges facing the country and practical, viable ways of addressing them, if we are willing to release ourselves from "dead ideas" --- the political orthodoxies that constrain action. Miller is a pragmatist with a heart of gold, and all readers will be challenged and engaged by his suggestions, and this book's relevance could not be greater at this time.

3 out of 6 dead ideas still breathing
Matt Miller would portray himself as an unapologetic centrist, non-partisan, unencumbered by the burdens of ideology. An eminently reasonable policy wonk, if you will. But he does adopt the ideology of the technocrat. The technocrat believes in the power of science and reason to mediate political compromise and find out "what works." Voters demand competence and this the technocrat promises. By now we should know this is the ultimate "dead idea."

Mr. Miller numbers six Dead Ideas: 1) each generation can expect a rising standard of living; 2) free trade is always good; 3) employer-provided healthcare benefits; 4) tax rates are too high; 5) local school finance; and 6) free market outcomes are just and fair.

Of these, his technocratic arguments can possibly affirm only two (local school finance and employer provided health care), with a fair philosophical argument for a third (free market outcomes are just and fair). On the other three he plays victim to his own dead ideas.

The technocratic approach is based on the social sciences, principally economics, political science, and sociology, which in turn are based on rudimentary psychology. Unfortunately, the behavioral assumptions of these pseudo-sciences provide a foundation of quicksand. We have discovered this to our own dismay with our current worldwide economic and financial crisis. Does anybody get a queasy feeling these `experts' have no idea what they're doing? This is the world of the technocrat: hubris based on self-delusion. For a more sober assessment of the limits of economics and finance I suggest reading Nicholas Taleb or Benoit Mandelbrot.

Whether future generations will experience a rising standard of living will depend on the policies we adopt and the way we define our standard of living. In other words, it's not a dead idea until and unless we kill it. Malthus claimed the same dead idea regarding population growth and look how wrong he was. Anyway, do we think this idea is dead for all classes across society? Does this mean poor youth have no hope of rising above their parents' station? I would hope not. If the poor of the world have better prospects for the future, why not the middle and upper classes? In fact, if we really think government is going to provide universal healthcare, we better hope the quality of care will be progressive rather than regressive. Advancing medical technologies almost assure it will be. The only question is will we be able to pay for it?

On free trade, no Ricardian ever claimed the benefits of free trade are distributed evenly. The adjustment costs must be managed politically and this is how free trade blossomed in the 20th century. Ricardo's trade theory shows how comparative advantage makes trade a win-win proposition in terms of national welfare. But the winners still have to compensate the losers. This is not a dead idea, it's a misspecified one.

On taxes, it seems disingenuous to make general statements about whether taxes must go up or down without specifying what taxes and how. Taxes are a favorite of the technocratic class because public revenues are needed to fund technocratic solutions. Mr. Miller is a fair-minded centrist here, shooting for the middle ground to define the pro-market, pro-government agenda, but it comes back again to how taxes affect incentives to create wealth and how well government spending fulfills the demands of voters that cannot be met by markets. From where we stand now I'd have to say markets could and do provide most of the public benefits that technocrats insist must be provided by government. Most retirement funding and healthcare has historically been provided by the private sector. And historically we have done very well until we decided to put macroeconomic management into the hands of the technocrats (re: The Fed, Treasury and Congress). Taking a wrong turn on entitlements now will not enhance our future quality of life, but detract from it.

I would most agree in supporting Mr. Miller's argument on the fairness of market outcomes. Like Machiavelli claimed 500 years ago, at least half of man's fate in life is due to Fortune and the other half to Virtu. Especially with our current version of casino capitalism, many of the superrich owe their outsized wealth to pure luck and influence, not intelligence, talent or hard work. But this is a philosophical and moral argument as much as an empirical one. It won't be resolved by technocratic claims.

Mr. Miller is a good writer and thinker, an honest, intelligent technocrat. Most readers will find his arguments reasonable and appealing. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them right. The school of technocrats should have been closed after Robert S. McNamara, the ultimate technocratic wunderkind who left behind a wake of destruction wherever he went. Technocrats are functionaries, they do not have the right tools to be designing the edifice for society.

Sharp national learning curve ahead
//The Tyranny of Dead Ideas// made this reviewer angry, depressed, and ready to entertain unconventional ideas to survive enormous changes coming our way due to globalization. Miller proposes that the following sacrosanct ideas are dead: The kids will earn more than we do, free trade is "good" (no matter how many people get hurt), your company should take care of you, taxes hurt the economy (and they're always too high), schools are a local matter, and money follows merit. Miller is an intelligent guy with opinions on these topics that political junkies should read if they want to expand their knowledge of the issues beyond shallow talking points. It is overly condescending to conservatives and certain to rile liberals as well. Miller asserts there is a growing realization among Americans that those who "work hard and play by the rules" are not getting ahead like they used to. This reality will lead to uncomfortable changes. For instance, Miller believes local school boards should go away and Washington should take a stronger role in setting higher education standards while giving local schools the autonomy to reach those goals. He says unions impede higher pay to attract teachers into needy schools or to essential subjects like math, science, or special education. A shift from local control would be necessary to educate young people to compete globally. He believes national protectionism would only make things worse. Miller prefers individual protections for workers who need unemployment, healthcare, and pension security because of changing economies. Employers can't continue to bear the cost of healthcare and retirement. Therefore, the government will be forced to raise taxes to provide these benefits, much like other industrialized countries have done.

Some of his suggestions are difficult to follow. This reviewer would have liked to see him include the responsibility of government to reduce its costs or eliminate unnecessary programs. He is convinced that the Lower Upper Class is having an epiphany of compensation inequality. They see those above them reaping extravagant financial rewards, often in the face of dismal performance. Miller believes Lower Uppers will be instrumental in the movement back to equality. He feels business executives, if they can regain their integrity, will lead reforms that politicians loathe to embrace. This reviewer hopes Miller is an inaccurate prognosticator, but something tells me he's got plenty of it right.

Reviewed by
Grady Jones