An actor prefers goods sooner than later.  Every action requires some amount of time to achieve any goal.  Time is scarce.  It must be economized.  Time must be used to accomplish the highest value first.  Therefore, goods are preferred sooner than later.  It is impossible that it is any other way.  If man were not constrained by time, Crusoe would build a fishing trawler right away.   Or, man would choose the most productive process first, but this can’t be done without prior saving.

Crusoe cannot have a high time preference.  If he ate all of his fish right away, he may never build a fishing pole or net.  He must have a lower time preference.  Otherwise, he will not last long.  Now, Crusoe knows he needs a lower time preference to survive.  He must consume less than he catches, or engage in saving.  What do you suppose is the time preference for a democratic politician?  Or, any who will be in office for a term?

A democratic politician will not view the country the same way Crusoe views fish.  In other words, a democratic politician has a high time preference.  Crusoe must survive for an unknown amount of time.  The politician only needs to survive the term.  The politician will consume what he can right now, while he’s in office.  He will attempt to make plenty of friends while he can.  Of course, all of his actions are detrimental, this is the next sucker’s problem, but the problem doesn’t go away for the masses.

What do you suppose will be the time preference for a dynastic ruler?  He doesn’t have a term to deal with.  He is almost always in power for life.  Then, he passes his estate on to his heirs.  He is not trying to deplete the capital value.  Naturally, he will have a lower time preference than a democratic politician.  It should be clear, the dynastic ruler will view the land area as his property.  The democratic politician is just a temporary caretaker.  This is just like renting a car or owning one, which will you treat better?

The dynastic ruler is restrained.  The democratic politician is not.  If the dynastic ruler attempts to raise taxes, there is resistance from the public.  The family will be worried about the family’s power.  The democratic politician faces little resistance.  Under a dynastic ruler, the public knows they cannot be king.  The public under a democratic politician may not like it, but one day they may be on the receiving end of taxation.  Essentially, everyone can be king in a democracy.  The distinction between the ruler and the ruled has become blurred.

Reference

Hans-Hermann Hoppe; Democracy—The God That Failed