Viewing entries in
Politics and Economics
Many movements frame complex social and political issues in strictly binary, moralistic terms—good versus evil, oppressors versus oppressed. This binary view leaves no room for legitimate policy disagreements, as political opponents are viewed as morally corrupt rather than simply having a different perspective.
Instead of a strict separation, the branches share and overlap powers so they must interact and limit one another. For example, Congress passes laws, but the President can veto them, and Congress can override that veto with enough votes. The President nominates judges and officials, but the Senate must confirm them. The courts can declare laws unconstitutional.
In systems where political ideas and platforms must actively fight for support, leaders are forced to remain responsive to diverse societal preferences.
“Authoritarian systems can move faster because they suppress friction. Democracies often appear disorderly because they institutionalize it. But friction is not necessarily weakness. In engineering, friction prevents machines from spinning out of control. In politics, constitutional friction can prevent a powerful country from making an enormous mistake that nobody is permitted to identify.” - Jianli Yang, Make American Democracy Great Again
Confession, straight-up: I think of Trump and his followers as wannabe fascists and much of the U.S. left as wannabe totalitarians. Not there yet, but inclined in that direction. I’m not assuming I’m right, but it does feel right. So I asked Google AI why. Here’s the exchange
I'm more interested in what non-academics mean when they use these terms, especially when they defend or condemn one or the other. What comes to mind when we speak of the left or the right? What aspects of ideology and behavior are highlighted, what is ignored or minimized?
Unfortunately, these rosy stats can’t hide the fact that up to 20% of the U.S. population remains stuck in the lowest income brackets over their entire lifetime.
It makes a lot of sense that younger Americans have doubts about their future. The world feels like it’s coming apart.
“Why” is a big question, one that can go meta quickly, with abstract talk of systemic this or that. I’d rather stay close to what the people themselves say about the barriers in their way of achieving the Dream. For example, here are the reasons given by respondents in the 2026 survey who said it was out of reach…
Many economists define the American Dream as some variation of “doing better than my parents”, which they then proclaim a myth. But why do social scientists get to define the American Dream? They didn’t invent the term - that was the freelance author and historian James Truslow Adams back in the early days of the Great Depression. Besides, there’s no rule saying the Dream has to be strictly defined. It’s a subjective term that captures a kind of hopeful yearning that means different things to different people. For example
What type of social mobility impacts wellbeing the most? The type that boosts sense of purpose, hope, optimism, personal agency and the confidence that comes from mastery, progress and accomplishment. And that would be intragenerational mobility. Or as I prefer to call it, lifecourse mobility, especially from young adulthood onward. The research bears me out here…
Social mobility boosts resolve, hope, optimism, personal agency and confidence (among other things).
For the time being, I won’t try to answer “what is too much political power and why is it too much?”. Instead, I’ll look at some ways to measure the political power of billionaires in California and New York, states with extreme levels of wealth inequality.
In which I list a few considerations, with no attempt to resolve the matter.
For some, however, the problem of economic inequality goes beyond economic effects; it is also a moral and political issue. They argue that inequality in the US violates basic principles of fairness and leads to severe disparities in political power and wellbeing.
This ASBI would target Americans 25-54 who want to update their skills to match ever-changing employer demand. My current version would pay them $1000 a month, no more than $9,000 a year, up to $18,000 total over the age of eligibility, provided they are enrolled students in good standing at approved postsecondary training and education programs…
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.