Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies” as Want to Read:
The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies

3.89 of 5 stars 3.89  ·  rating details  ·  679 ratings  ·  84 reviews
The greatest obstacle to sound economic policy is not entrenched special interests or rampant lobbying, but the popular misconceptions, irrational beliefs, and personal biases held by ordinary voters. This is economist Bryan Caplan's sobering assessment in this provocative and eye-opening book. Caplan argues that voters continually elect politicians who either share their ...more
Hardcover, 276 pages
Published April 1st 2007 by Princeton University Press
more details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Myth of the Rational Voter, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Myth of the Rational Voter

For a New Liberty by Murray N. RothbardThis Changes Everything by Naomi KleinThe Machinery of Freedom by David D. FriedmanThe Myth of the Rational Voter by Bryan CaplanThe Fatal Conceit by Friedrich Hayek
4th out of 71 books — 16 voters
The Constitution of the United States of America by Founding FathersThe Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the U... by Thomas JeffersonThe Federalist Papers by Alexander HamiltonGreen Illusions by Ozzie ZehnerThe Revolution by Ron Paul
Best Books to Become an Informed Voter
208th out of 679 books — 877 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 2,031)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  rating details
Since I probably won't finish this book before school starts, I figure I'd put in my review now based on the first few chapters. While I was really excited to see this book come out and feel it's a topic long overdue for a good discussion, I believe Caplan is too smart for his own good.

The premise of the book is that if the average person knows more about economics, our democracy would function better. Caplan contends that systematic anti-foreign, anti-market, pessimistic and make-work biases c
Mike Edwards
Caplan is half right. He explores in some detail why irrationality is inherent to the human condition, and how this necessarily leads voters to make bad decisions. But I have two major problems with the book:

1) Caplan's prime example of how stupid voters are is that voters want to regulate international trade. Certainly free trade is powerful and good, and while I agree with him that protectionist isolation would be very bad, there are reasonable, nuanced, and intelligent reasons that one might
Mike (the Paladin)
Alexis de Tocqueville told us in 1835 that “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” That's not an exact quote as I've had pointed out to me but it's what the man wrote almost 200 years ago. Or there's: It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public funds (treasury).

Actually to be precise America is not a democracy. We are a Democratic, Constitutional Republic. That said
Requiring my concentration throughout, this book packs a big payoff in every section. The author presents the economic biases shared by a frighteningly large majority of voters and follows by clearly (although with a lot of empirical evidence) demystifying these biases in a way that makes your brain feel good. Caplan, a Princeton economist, cleaves the difference between the rational way we conduct business in our economic lives and the irrational way we hold political positions on economic issu ...more
I read this book because ever since Prop 8 passed in California, I have completely lost faith in direct democracy, and started feeling like voting was just opting into a corrupt system of the majority suppressing whatever minority they didn't like. The "We are the 99%" protests rubbed me the same way.

This book confirmed some of my mood, but left me a bit more hopeful.

The author offers an erudite, economist viewpoint that the perception that voting is just like the free market is wrong because
Howard Olsen
A good look at the harsh reality of political discourse in a democracy. Not only do people lack the time and information to make truly informed decisions, they also suffer from basic analytical fallacies that are readily exploited by politicians on the make. Don't start feeling smug, though. Caplan takes on sacred cows on the Left (protectionism works! globalization = evil!) and on the Right (immigration is bad! deficits = evil) with equal aplomb. As Caplan notes throughout, many economic fallac ...more
This book is all about economics and the amazing differences in beliefs of trained economists and the voting public. The author posits and offers proof that this is why democracies choose bad policies. The book is not about anything other than economics. If you are interested in other, non-economic, irrational beliefs and how they tie in to politics, you won't find it in this book.
Chris Lund
I definitely wasn't convinced of the strength of all the arguments in the book, and by the time I got to the end I felt a bit unsatisfied and unresolved, but it was worth the read if for no other reason than it forces you to confront the issue of bad policy decisions in ways that are rarely talked about, and from an angle that is quite different from the typical discussions of these issues. The writing is a level or two above "casual non-fiction reader", and it probably helps to have a bit of an ...more
Caplan's general argument is that a majority of voters in democracies (or representative republics) are rationally irrational when it comes to politics. Since the likelihood of one voter's vote being decisive in an election is practically nil, the costs for being wrong (i.e., choosing a candidate whose policies are bad for the nation) are practically nil to the individual voter. This being the case, voters have little incentive to take the time to become informed on political/economic matters. O ...more
Sergei Moska
There's too much here for me to give it less than 3 stars, but Caplan seems to willfully ignore two (related) retorts to this thesis. Two caveats, though. First, I'm not summarizing the (interesting!) argument, so if you haven't read a synopsis of the book, it's possible that none of this will make sense. Second, I'm not writing this with the thought that it "disproves" Caplan. It's just a couple of things that were bugging me.

The first retort is that when he characterizes adherence to politica
Skylar Burris
The Myth of the Rational voter attempts to explain how democracies continue to enact stupid economic policies that are not in the best economic interests of a majority of people. There are two primary reasons: (1) Most voters are ignorant of economics and (2) Even if they are not ignorant of economics, people sometimes value their ideology more than they value prosperity. (Caplan calls this “quasi religion.”)

The book is called The MYTH of the Rational Voter because many have argued that voters
What's the Churchill line about talking to a voter for 5 minutes and hating democracy? Yeah basically that but I mean those voters are then only voting for candidates who then can do whatever they want in congress or parliament - while still at the same time being the person who the Dumbies voted in over the person the Smarties wanted, so I dunno, may not have as big an effect as he says, but most elections do seem to be on the same level as post game interviews with professional athletes in ter ...more
Eduardo Santiago
Jan 16, 2011 Eduardo Santiago rated it 5 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommended to Eduardo by: Dana, 2008-11-13
It's not just ignorance. Not even deliberate (rational) ignorance, or for that matter voter self-interest. It's outright irrationality. Shocked? Me either. But what did surprise me is the resistance that Caplan seems to find to this: it seems economists model people as "rational actors" and are reluctant to change that perception -- or at least to discuss it in mixed company. Elitism is a 4-letter word.

Caplan describes potential fixes, fascinating ones involving markets and education, but that's
Jack Davis
A intellectual book that isn't boring is a rare treat, and Caplan comes through with that in The Myth. Caplan is more than an economist--he discusses psychology, political science, and philosophy in this critique of democracy. His central argument is that voters both lack information (e.g. think foreign aid is a huge part of the budget), and often act irrationally. This combination leads to bad policy outcomes. You don't have to agree with everything he says --(I have a few minor disagreements w ...more
This makes the important observation that bad policies are put in place not always because of two faced politicians, but because people don't understand what is truly in their economic interests and demand poor choices (like trade protectionism). But, Professor Caplan, which major political thinker ever argued that the voters were rational? Isn't the entire premise of democracy that *everyone* is flawed and possesses bounded rationality? Open society is about public accountability, and checks an ...more
A lot of people either love or hate this book, I try to take a less biased approach.
First of all, prepare to drop a lot of your preconceptions from the start, if you do that this will be a much more enjoyable read.
Second, try and check out the writings of the various economists that Caplan references, The Wealth of Nations, Bastiat's various essays and David Ricardo's works can be found online for free.
I will confess, I have always liked statistics, despite all the misuses and abuses they might
Jeff Stockett
I thought this book was extremely fascinating. He starts out by talking about how very few members of the population understand economics. He then talks about how a small minority can still sway public policy because the assumption is that the irrational and uninformed will essentially vote randomly. So if 99% of voters are irrational then 49.5% will vote one way and 49.5% will vote the other way. The rational 1% can save the day with their vote.

Unfortunately, however, the irrational voters do n
Billie Pritchett
Bryan Caplan's Myth of the Rational Voter argues that democracies choose bad policies because democracies' citizens have systematic biases related to economics. The four main biases he identifies are anti-market bias, anti-foreign bias, make-work bias, and pessimistic bias. Here is Caplan in his own words:
[1] anti-market bias [is] a tendency to underestimate the economic benefits of the market mechanism...

[2] anti-foreign bias [is] a tendency to underestimate the economic benefits of interaction
Really interesting book on the economics of voting. It makes the case that there are systematically biased beliefs among voters who are uneducated about economics, but voting on economic issues: anti-market bias, anti-foreign bias, make-work bias, and pessimistic bias. These biases aren't found among economists and voters who are educated about economics, irrespective of social status. But the interesting, main argument of this book takes this as a premise, and says that it's not just a case of ...more
Synopsis: An explanation of why people consistently vote against their own economic best interests.

Thoughts: My apologies to anyone who had to listen to me talk about this book in the week after I'd finished reading it. I did go on about it, rather, didn't I?

So, I have no formal training in economics. And, I couldn't always follow the thread of his logic. And sometimes I had to suspend judgement as I was reading, thinking to myself—"okay, I'm pretty sure I disagree with you on this point here, b
Caplan produces much food for thought when he points out that voters have systematic irrational biases that affect their thinking about public policy. He explores what this means for democracy and politics more generally. Some examples of the biases he points out includes a trend toward pessimism (odd considering the world has pretty much done nothing but grown more prosperous for two centuries now), the anti foreign bias, anti market bias, etc. He doesn't explore where these biases come from, b ...more
This was a fairly quick read- only 200 pages with a fair number of charts, tables and other data presentations, so it was pretty easy going. The argument is interesting- Caplan essentially claims that voters are systemically biased against policies that pretty much all economists, of whatever political stripe, agree are best (the most obvious example being free trade, which economists have known for centuries makes society better off, but still gets a bad rap from the majority of voters). He not ...more

Caplan, an associate professor of economics, believes that empirical proof of voter irrationality is the key to a realistic picture of democracy and, thus, how to approach and improve it. Focusing on how voters are systematically mistaken in their grasp of economics-according to Caplan, the No. 1 area of concern among voters in most election years-he effectively refutes the "miracle" of aggregation, showing that an uninformed populace will often vote against measures that benefit the majo
Max D'onofrio
Though maybe it's because Caplan agrees with my own philosophy that too often politicians do what constituents ask and not what is best for them, I found this book week written and thoughtful. It explains some of the basic economic principles that many economists agree on as fundamental and shows how average Americans just don't get it. Though I may not agree with all of his solutions, he raises some very good arguments about the state of government today the though process of modern voters.
Caplan begins by outlining current theories of voter behavior that emphasize voter rationality + voter ignorance, and lays out persuasive objections to this view. First, he describes and provides empirical evidence for four systematic biases of the general public. He refers to these as antimarket bias, antiforeign bias, make-work bias, and pessimistic bias. He explains that once you take into account the fact that voting is unlike shopping and more like a commons, it makes perfect economic sense ...more
Aleksey Bilogur
A well-written academic study as-a-book and a copiously sourced attack on the premises of democratic right to rule that should chill the blood of any politically involved reader for all the right reasons. I nonetheless disagree that the consequences of the conclusions he draws are as dire as he thinks they are.

In the end I think Winston Churchill summarized it best:

"No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government exce
I stopped reading this long ago too. I find the premise to be an interesting and believable idea, but found the nitty-gritty study data and statistics too tiresome and I wasn't really THAT interested in them. Probably would be more interesting for someone who studies Econ. I didn't bother to finish reading it, though I did peruse the graphs and charts and some of the data analysis.

Basically the idea is that people vote for bad policies because they don't understand very basic economic principals
Caplan argues that voters misunderstand basic economic principles and that sometimes it is by choice and not due to complete ignorance. It all plays into his rational irrationality voter model, which he claims flies in the face of most accepted voting models and theories. I am no economist (who, by the way, seem to be his principal audience, though it might not have been intended that way), so I will take his word for it. I do think there's something to his argument. Since people know their vote ...more
Caplan takes a very obvious premise, that people are stupid, and backs it up with one tenuous piece of evidence and a lot of sketchy reasoning. The arguments go like this: free trade enlarges the economic pie, so free trade increases prosperity per person, so free trade makes everyone more prosperous, so anyone who opposes free trade is stupid. The point he makes is important for economists, who tend to work exclusively with models of perfectly rational people, but his argument is that economist ...more
Bryan Caplan can't understand why voters aren't as smart as him, so he wrote a book to try to explain it. I found his arguments unconvincing - I'm not sure if it's because I'm too dumb to understand them, or because they don't make sense.

He also occasionally uses examples that don't make sense - saying that nobody should be opposed to immigration because the effect is the same if they spend all of their earnings in the country (except that they don't - transfers from abroad are a huge source of
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 67 68 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • Create Your Own Economy: The Path to Prosperity in a Disordered World
  • The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy
  • The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism
  • The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups
  • Individualism and Economic Order
  • A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World
  • The Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle and Other Essays
  • The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else
  • Essays on political economy
  • Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis
  • Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement
  • Notes on Democracy
  • Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship and the End of American Debate
  • In Defense of Global Capitalism
  • The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce
  • Micromotives and Macrobehavior
  • The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists' Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics
  • Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government
Bryan Caplan is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. He received his B.S. in economics from University of California, Berkeley and his Ph.D. from Princeton University. His professional work has been devoted to the philosophies of libertarianism and free-market capitalism and anarchism. (He is the author of the Anarchist Theory FAQ.) He has published in American ...more
More about Bryan Caplan...
Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think Authority, Obedience, and the State (Cato Unbound) Distributive Justice In A Pure Service Economy: How The Truth Of Libertarianism Follows From The Wrongness Of Slavery The Politics of Family Size (Cato Unbound) Majority Fools? Irrationality and the Limits of Democracy (Cato Unbound)

Share This Book

“Remarkably, until the passage of the Representation of the People Act of 1949, Britain retained plural voting for graduates of elite universities and business owners.” 0 likes
“Would we still have a "democracy" if you needed to pass a test of economic literacy to vote? If you needed a college degree? Both of these measures raise the economic understanding of the median voter, leading to more sensible policies. Franchise restrictions were historically used for discriminatory ends, but that hardly implies that they should never be used again for any reason. A test of voter competence is no more objectionable than a driving test.” 0 likes
More quotes…