6. Vote for me, dimwit (The Economist June 16th 2007)

How the electorate is irrational by Lexington

6-1-33
Anyone who follows an election campaign too closely will sometimes get the feeling that politicians think voters are idiots. A new book says they are. Or rather, Bryan Caplan, an economics professor at George Mason University, makes the slightly politer claim that voters systematically favour irrational policies. In a democracy, rational politicians give them what they irrationally want. In 'The Myth of the Rational Voter', Mr Caplan explains why this happens, why it matters and what we can do about it.
The world is a complex place. Most people are inevitably ignorant about most things, which is why shows like 'Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?' are funny. Politics is no exception. Only 15% of Americans know who Harry Reid (the Senate majority leader) is, for example. True, more than 90% can identify Arnold Schwarzenegger. But that has a lot to do with the governor of California's previous job pretending to be a killer robot.
Many political scientists think this does not matter because of a phenomenon called the 'miracle of aggregation' or, more poetically, the 'wisdom of crowds'. If ignorant voters vote randomly, the candidate who wins a majority of well-informed voters will win. The principle yields good results in other fields. On 'Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?', another quiz show, the answer most popular with the studio audience is correct 91% of the time. Financial markets, too, show how a huge number of guesses, aggregated, can value a stock or bond more accurately than any individual expert could. But Mr Caplan says that politics is different because ignorant voters do not vote randomly.

A. 어휘
vote for 찬성 투표하다. dimwit 얼간이. electorate 유권자.
irrational 이성이 없는, 어리석은. follows an election campaign 선거운동을 추적하다. idiot 백치. economics 경제학. the slightly politer claim 조금 더 정중한 주장.
favor ...에 호의를 보이다, 찬성하다. policy 정책. a democracy 자유민주주의 국가.
myth 神話(신화). why it matters 그것이 왜 중요한 문제가 되는지를.
complex 복잡한. inevitably 불가피하게. ignorant 무지하다.
smarter than a 5th grader. (초등학교) 5학년생보다 더 똑똑하다. exception 예외.
the Senate majority leader 미국 上院(상원)의 다수당 院內(원내)총무.
identify (사람과 사물을) 확인하다, 식별하다. have to do with 관계가 있다.
governor 주지사. previous job 前職(전직). job (두드러진 사람). pretend ...인 체하다.
job pretending to be a killer robot 살인 로봇으로 분장하는 配役(배역).
phenomenon 현상. miracle 기적. aggregation 집합체. poetically 시적으로 말하자면.
vote randomly (정치적 선동이나 타인의 영향이 없이 개인이) 제 멋대로 투표하다.
candidate 후보. well-informed 사정에 정통한, 박식한. principle 원칙. yield 산출하다.
in other fields 다른 분야에서도. on ... 에 관해서. millionaire 백만장자. audience 청중.
the answer most popular with the studio audience 청중들에게 가장 인기 있는 해답.
correct 91% of the time 퀴즈당시에 91%가 정확하다. financial 금융의. stock 주식.
bond 채권. value 평가하다. accurately 정확하게. expert 전문가.

B. 구문
-rational politician . . . irrationally want.
[이성적인 정치가들은 유권자들에게 유권자들이 비이성적으로 원하는 것을 준다.]
-this does . . . because of a phenomenon . . . 'wisdom of crowds'.
[“인간집합체의 기적” 또는 ,보다 더 詩(시)적으로 말해서, “군중의 지혜”라고 불리는 현상 때문에 이것은 문제가 되지 않는다.]
cf. 선동가들의 선동만 없으면 인간은 수백 수 천 또는 수 만 명이상의 사람들이 모이면 신비하게도 사물에 대해서 정확한 판단을 하게 된다
-a huge number of guesses . . . expert could.
cf. aggravated = if they are aggravated
[거대한 多衆(다중)의 추측은 그것들이 결집되면 어떠한 개별적인 전문가보다도 더 정확하게 주식이나 채권의 값을 평가할 수 있다.]

6-2-34
Instead, he identifies four biases that prompt voters systematically to demand policies that make them worse off. People do not understand how the pursuit of private profits often yields public benefits: they have anti-market bias. Second, they underestimate the benefits of interactions with foreigners: they have an anti-foreign bias. Third, they equate prosperity with employment rather than production: Mr Caplan calls this the 'make-work bias'. Finally, they tend to think economic conditions are worse than they are, a bias towards pessimism.
Mr Caplan gives a sense of how strong these biases are by comparing the general public's views on economic questions with those of economists and with those of highly educated non-economists. For example, asked why petrol prices have risen, the public mostly blames the greed of oil firms. Economists nearly all blame the law of supply and demand. Experts are sometimes wrong, notes Mr Caplan, but in this case the public's view makes no sense. If petrol prices rise because oil firms want higher profits, how come they sometimes fall? Surveys suggest that the more educated you are, the more likely you are to share the economists' view on this and other economic issues. But since everyone's vote counts equally, politicians merrily denounce ExxonMobil and pass laws against 'price-gouging'.

A. 어휘
bias 경향, 性向(성향), 편견, 斜線(사선). prompt 재촉하다.
worse off (생활형편이)더 나빠지다. pursuit 추구, 추적. private profits 개인적 이득. public benefits 公共(공공)의 이익. underestimate 과소평가하다. interaction 상호작용. equate 동일시하다. prosperity 번영. employment 고용, 취업.
“make-work bias' 일자리 만들기 편견. tend to+V ...하는 경향이 있다.
pessimism 비관주의. a bias towards pessimism 비관주의로 향하는 성향.
general public's views on ...에 관한 일반대중의 견해.
those of highly educated non-economists 고도로 교육을 받은 비경제전문가의 견해.
those→views blame 나무라다, 비난하다. greed 탐욕. oil firms 석유회사.
expert 전문가. make no sense 이치에 닿지 않는다. petrol 석유, 휘발유.
how come = why. fall (가격이) 하락하다. survey 조사. count 중요하다.
merrily 즐겁게. denounce 규탄하다, 비난하다.
ExxonMobile 미국의 세계적인 석유회사. price-gouging 가격을 속이기.
gouge 속이기, 둥근 끌, (끌로)구명을 파다, 사취하다.

B. 구문
-Mr Caplan gives . . . these biases are.
[Caplan 교수는 이런 편견이 얼마나 강한 것인가를 알려준다.]
how이하는 give a sense of 의 목적어 명사절.
-asked why petrol prices . . ., the public . . . oil firms.
cf. asked = If they are asked→being asked→asked.
[휘발유 값이 오른 이유를 질문 받으면 대중들은 대개 석유회사의 탐욕을 탓한다.]
-the more educated you. . ., the more likely you . . . view.
cf. the+비교급, the+비교급→...를 더 많이...할수록, 더 ...한다.
[교육을 더 많이 받을수록 경제전문가의 견해를 더 많이 가지게 된다.]