Viewing entries in
Politics and Economics

Democracy and the Scientific Mind

“It’s when uncertainty collides with urgency that the authorities enter the fray, convene commissions, and issue findings. Those who accept the sanctioned conclusions gain official backing. Those who don’t are ruled out of bounds. No longer recognized as colleagues with legitimate hypotheses, they risk being treated as crackpots, deniers, and conspiracy theorists.” - Doctor’s Orders: It used to be progressives who distrusted the experts. What happened? By Daniel Immerwahr/The New Yorker. May 26, 2025 

Are Republican Mayors More Effective in Managing City Budgets?

In their recent article, Best- and Worst-Run Cities in America, WalletHub compared the operating efficiency of 148 of the largest U.S. cities to determine “how well city officials manage and spend public funds by comparing the quality of the services residents receive against the city’s total budget”. Among WalletHub’s 36 metrics of comparison were per Capita Budget and Financial Stability.  I had a hunch that, on average, cities with Republican mayors would have smaller per capita budgets and greater financial stability than cities run by non-Republicans (mainly Democrats).  So I checked out if my hunch had any merit.

Prevent Property Crime to Reduce Violent Crime

“Property crime fell from the early-1990s onwards because of security improvements, particularly to vehicles and households. As fewer young people became involved in property crime, fewer progressed to violence (which is fortunately rarer), and fewer crimes were committed in which violence also occurs, such as robbery and aggravated burglary.” - Professor Graham Farrell, School of Law/University of Leeds. (Letter to The Economist, June 7, 2025 issue)

Chart and Comment: Has Gen Z Struck It Rich?

I recently read some articles claiming Gen Z -Americans born between the late 1990s and the early 2010s - have become “unprecedentedly rich”, an assessment purportedly based on some number-crunching by the Federal Reserve. Turns out that’s not what the Fed found. To quote:

Chart and Comment: Why the US Needs More Workers

Why does this matter? Because workers support the young, elderly, and other nonworkers, aka “dependents”.  A larger working-age population supports economic growth, thereby generating additional tax revenue to fund  pensions, healthcare, public education and other programs that benefit the young, old, disabled, etc.  Too few workers relative to dependents, the economy tanks, tax revenues plummet, and the dependents go without – majorly. And that’s where we are headed.

Chart and Comment: Should the Capital Gains Tax Be Increased?

Several developed countries have lowered capital gains taxes over the last couple decades, mainly to stimulate economic growth, investment, and global competitiveness, as well as to discourage investors from holding on to their assets simply to avoid taxes. However, some argue that lower capital gains taxes mainly benefit the rich and have little impact on economic growth or investment. The verdict is out on that score.

Rethinking Density: How to Protect Wild Habitat and have a Yard Too

Environmentalists push for high-density housing because it’s a way to lower emissions and conserve habitat. The basic idea is more people on less land, the better for the biosphere. Single family homes usually don’t belong in this picture. But they can.

Thirteen Features of Environmentally-Friendly Single Family Homes and Community Context  

But large yards are no longer de rigueur in this country. As documented in the first post in this series, a recent survey of over 7,000 Americans ages 18 to 54 found that over 90% of renters with plans for more children wanted to own homes - but the survey did not find a preference for homes with bigger yards over smaller yards.  Across every demographic subgroup, safety/low crime was by far the single most important neighborhood trait, especially for families with children or with plans to have more. Good schools ranked second for people with children, followed by walkability. Note that neighborhoods with large lots tend to be less walkable.

Rethinking Density: Why Families Want Single Family Homes

Several surveys have documented that most families in the U.S. and many other countries prefer living in single-family homes, detached or attached (e.g., townhouses). What’s the attraction? Here’s one explanation:

“Challenges surrounding building fewer large homes or more multifamily homes mostly relate to policy and societal norms.” - Berrill & Wilson (2022) Decarbonization pathways for the residential sector in the United States

Rethinking Density: Robbing Peter to Pay Paul

American families are generally receptive to living in single-family homes on small lots, as long as they have at least three bedrooms. Unfortunately, densifying cities typically limit the construction of single-family homes and often bar new housing developments on previously undeveloped land (“greenfield”), creating a housing shortage for local families. Without an adequate supply of suitable housing, many of these families will end up moving away when they’re ready to buy a home.

Independent Voters and the Balance of Power

In 2004, 31% of American voters self-identified as independents, less than either Democrats or Republicans. Twenty years later, 43% identify as independents, much higher than either Democrats or Republicans, both sinking under the weight of voter dissatisfaction at just 28% each. The trend is obvious…

Republicans Passing the Baton to Democrats: The Noble Cause of State Rights

“The inhabitants of a particular town are much better acquainted with its wants and interests than with those of other places; and are better judges of the capacity of their neighbours than of that of the rest of their countrymen. The members, therefore, of the legislature should not be chosen from the general body of the nation; but it is proper that in every considerable place a representative should be elected by the inhabitants.” (Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws, 1748)

Montesquieu, Liberty, the Nature of Power, and Trump

“Political liberty is to be found … only when there is no abuse of power. But constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go.” - Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws

Contributing to the Solution of a Problem You Don't Believe Exists: Why Not?

Climate change is mostly about bad weather becoming worse over time, to the detriment of humans and the rest of the biosphere. However, one doesn’t have to believe in climate change to care about bad weather and its impacts. Nor does one need to believe in climate change to want to fix problems associated with today’s bad weather. And since problem-solving capacity builds over time, whatever is learned fixing today’s problems will help us fix similar problems in the future.

Adversaries as Occasional Allies in the Environmental Movement

The same goes for fossil fuel companies and the meat industry. Yes, these are businesses whose main interest is profit and survival. I don’t expect them to willingly self-destruct. That doesn’t mean they can’t be allies on some environmental issues, eg, reducing methane emissions. But I don’t require that they really care about these issues. Environmental allies don’t need to be pure of motive as long as they contribute…

Ideology, Climate Change, and the War on Optimism

Some may feel that optimism undermines the spirit of political activism and thus makes people less open to “structural change”. This is not an unreasonable proposition: if optimism is based on positive experiences, why would anyone want to hobble a system that has improved the quality of life for so most of humanity?

The Ups and Downs of Public Opinion about Protecting the Environment (Detecting a Pattern)

What I find surprising is the sharp rise in public concern about the environment during the pre-Covid Trump administration, despite the administration’s anti-environmental rhetoric, aggressive deregulation and cost-cutting measures.  Apparently, the administration’s top-down messaging was unable to override the inclination of Americans to care more about nature when bread-and-butters worries subside.