Viewing entries in
Politics and Economics
Income-dependent rent increases create a disincentive to take up employment and reduces overall labour mobility, especially when rent increases are tied to hard thresholds.. Social housing estates often become rundown over time, especially when rents don’t cover ongoing operational costs, leading to deferred maintenance and cost-cutting measures…
No matter what you call it, new social housing is back on the policy to-do list in many countries, especially those with a dearth of affordable housing. Social housing has been around for long time in most of these countries, so the challenges are well-known.
How easy would it be to move for better job opportunities under post-capitalist housing system proposed by Democratic Socialists of America?
In which I ask AI six questions, including Would the post-capitalist society envisioned by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) allow for private entrepreneurs to hire and profit from the labor of employees? and, As an alternative, what if the post-capitalist order allowed small employer businesses and then used tax and regulatory mechanisms to discourage employee growth past a certain threshold? Verified sources for AI responses included.
This post continues the theme of lived experience and attitudes about social mobility across the lifespan, specifically attitudes related to personal agency and control over financial outcomes. The Pew Survey asked panelists the perfect question for my purpose: “How much personal control do you think most Americans have over how financially successful they will be in life?” Here’s the breakdown by type of the “Not much” and “None at all” responses…
This post will look at the political types by age groups, specifically the percent of young adults (18-29), older adults (50+) and adults at the age of highest median income (35-44).
Wow - talk about a partisan divide! It’s rather obvious that animosity towards the super-rich comes mostly from the far-left. In contrast, over two-thirds of Pew panelists considered the existence of billionaires to be either a good thing or neither a good nor bad thing for the country, including a majority of moderate democrats.
The Left and Right appear to agree: it’s important to discuss this country’s failures and flaws. This is not the impression I’ve gotten from the media or in conversations.
What does it mean to “act in the public interest”? Is this about intentions, self-belief, behavior or impact? In other words, do scientists want to do good, believe they’re doing good, act like good scientists, or directly benefit the public?
That’s pretty strong support, but not strong enough for politicians to pass environmental legislation without at least some buy-in from those who have the most to lose from stricter regulations, such as farmers and small businesses.
[This is] “a top-down vision of the state that replaces the decentralized wisdom of millions of entrepreneurs and consumers with the ideological preferences of a few people at the top — people who do not risk losing their money if their decisions result in failure.” - Johan Norberg & Christian Sandström
What about climate change? Here’s a chart that reveals major left-right disagreement on this issue…
Americans on the left tend to see more Big Problems than those on the right. Take inequality…
Do Americans think their compatriots lack the wisdom to make political decisions? Apparently that’s the opinion of many…
Inspired by a recent holiday celebrating the birth of this nation, this post will address Americans’ confidence in its future, by political type. Here we go…
I’m particularly interested in how many people of each political type are doing okay financially, operationalized as middle-income or higher. This is what Pew found…
What’s surprising is how well the No Apologies Right and Faith First Conservatives are doing, given that only a third are college graduates. These are the strongest Trump supporters on the right, by far (90% and 81% approval, respectively) and they seem to be doing okay, financially-speaking. Yet Trump supporters have often been portrayed by the media and academics as “left behind” by the economy, struggling to make ends meet…
Pew Research has just come out with a new typology that sorts the American public into nine groups based on their political values and beliefs. The typology is based on a survey of 10,357 U.S. adults conducted in November 2025. The Pew report draws additional data on the same respondents from 15 separate surveys conducted over the course of 2025 and 2026, as well as records from prior Pew Research election surveys and commercial voter files.
This post will look at the relationship between economic freedom and worker well-being. For the latter I’ll be using survey data from Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace: 2026 Report in which Gallup classifies employees into three wellbeing categories:
Thriving: Employees with positive views of their present life and the next five years
Struggling: Employees who manage day to day but express concern about the future
Suffering: Employees who report that their lives are going poorly and are likely experiencing significant challenges
The overall pattern is clear for these 11 countries: greater economic freedom = higher GDP per capita, with a few bumps along the line from Singapore to China. The US is the big exception… I’m not sure why this is the case, but I suspect the American work ethic has something to do with it. Specifically…