Economically Possible? No. Politically Possible? Yes
Q: Is it economically possible to simultaneously demand low electricity prices but no new generating plants, while using ever increasing amounts of electricity.
Q: Is it economically possible to simultaneously have "open space" laws forbidding building while increasing "affordable housing"?
Q: Is it economically possible to add the costs of government bureaucracies to the costs of medications and medical treatment have the the total cost of medical care go down?
Q: Is it economically possible to have lower costs for medical care, or anything else, without sacrificing quality?
Although the answer to all of these questions is "No," because these tradeoffs are economically impossible to achieve simultaneously, Thomas Sowell explains in his latest column "The Art of the Impossible" why they are all politically possible:
"You want the impossible? You got it. Politicians don't get elected by saying "No" to voters. People can get the possible on their own. Politicians have to be able to offer the voters something that they cannot get on their own. The impossible fills that bill perfectly."
As Thomas Sowell reminds us: "The first lesson of economics is that we live in a universe of scarcity, and we face tradeoffs. The first lesson of politics is to ignore the first lesson of economics."