The MAGA Coalition and Next Week's Potential Reversal of Progress

MAGA is essentially a coalition of losers from history: those who opposed FDR’s regulation of capital, Lincoln’s shift from tariffs to income taxes and public investment, and Jefferson’s push to separate church and state. Each was a minority in its day, but together—and fueled by disinformation—they’ve turned next week’s election into a coin flip. Now, they have a real shot at overturning the three most defining and positive political transformations of the modern world.

What Was Possible With Even An Average COVID Response

In the first year after the outbreak, COVID fatalities in the U.S. occurred at roughly twice the rate of the average OECD country. This suggests that, had the pandemic been managed as effectively as in other countries, around 40% of the Americans who died from COVID in that first year might have survived.

Pennsylvania - Still a Swing State 224 Years Later

In the 1800 election between Federalist John Adams and Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson, Pennsylvania was the swing state that tipped the scales. 224 years later, it’s still a swing state with the power to deliver the presidency. (A client from Philadelphia once told me, 'Pennsylvania is Philadelphia on one side, Pittsburgh on the other, and Alabama in between.' That's a formula for a purple state.)


It’s almost as if the ghosts of the Founding Fathers are making sure the state that hosted the creation of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution still has the final say in this country’s direction. (And if ghosts are haunting the country, it might explain why Election Day is just a week after Halloween.)

Zero-sum Thinking and Resultant Slowdown at the Heart of Economic Stagnation, BREXIT, and MAGA-nomics

The UK's GDP growth per person slowed dramatically from 2.5% to around 0.5% annually following Brexit—a drastic change, largely attributable to the economic effects of Britain's withdrawal from the EU and the global economy.
Just as Britons narrowly voted for Brexit, we Americans might similarly (and narrowly) vote for Trump, potentially embracing policies that involve withdrawing from the global economy through tariffs, deportations, and other isolationist measures. If so, we could experience a comparable economic slowdown, starkly contrasting with the thriving economy of recent years.
This isn’t surprising. While economies are complex and unpredictable, one certainty is that zero-sum thinking—where gains are seen only at others' expense—leads to economic decline. The mindset behind Brexit was that Europe was prospering at Britain's expense, just as Trump's supporters believe that the world is prospering at the expense of the U.S. Zero-sum thinking is not only the root of conflict but a path to scarcity. Unfortunately, it’s also at the core of both Brexit and "MAGA-nomics."

Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson - A Couple of Key Ideas Behind Today's Nobel Prize in Economics

Today, Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson won the Nobel Prize in Economics. That pleases me. I’ve mentioned Acemoglu in 20 of my Facebook posts, and I believe his two most popular books (one co-authored with Johnson, the other with Robinson) are profoundly important. For those who haven’t read his longer works, here’s a simple summary of his key ideas.

In Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, Acemoglu and Robinson emphasize that the design of institutions is fundamental to economic outcomes. They illustrate this by contrasting British and Spanish colonies in the Americas. Why did one set of colonies lead to economic abundance, while the other led to relative poverty?
In the British colonies, institutions were more inclusive. This meant that not only did the sponsors back in Britain receive a share of the returns, but those actually living and working the land in North America benefited even more. If the colonial settlers worked harder or innovated, they reaped the rewards, fostering a culture of productivity and improvement.
In contrast, the Spanish colonies were designed as extractive. The Spanish elites back in Spain extracted nearly all the wealth from the colonies’ mines and plantations, leaving the native laborers destitute regardless of their efforts. These workers had little incentive to work harder, innovate, or improve their conditions since they wouldn’t benefit from any additional effort or creativity.

The extractive institutions stifled growth and innovation.

Acemoglu’s more recent work with Johnson - Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity - builds on this by examining the role of technology in economic outcomes. They argue that there is nothing automatic about technological advancements benefiting the majority. History shows periods where the elites captured the overwhelming share of productivity gains, and other periods when those gains were more broadly shared, improving the lives of workers as well as capitalists.

Focusing specifically on AI, Acemoglu is skeptical about whether its potential gains will be shared widely or remain concentrated among a few. He argues that the outcome—whether gains are broadly shared or narrowly held—will depend on deliberate policy decisions, not on the simple evolution of the technology itself or market forces.

I share Acemoglu’s sense that with economics’ small 1 to 3% annual changes, all the really fascinating progress plays out over generations and not months or years. Economic progress has deep causes and the design of institutions is even more important than the design of tools or products. It's gratifying to see that recognized by the Nobel Prize committee.

Well It Seemed Funny at the Time

 "He’s the kind of guy who’ll pee on your leg and call it trickle-down economics."

**

"I'm cooking, Jerome! You said this hike would be shady!"

"Shady? No, I said this hike is hotter than Hades."

***

What are the odds that Miss Universe actually is?

*****

I’m so tired of Southern California being overrun with illegals. You see them everywhere—on the freeway, where the speed limit is clearly 65 mph, and yet at least a third of the cars are driving faster than that! Illegals... shamelessly speeding in plain sight.

*********

They keep saying the stock market is booming, but I'm not convinced— the S&P has been stuck at 500 for so long that it's now reached the point of absurdity.

*************

Manny Machado.
Is there a name with a higher testosterone count?

***********

I've defined a new kind of economic cycle: Buliminomics.

In Buliminomics the economy undergoes a binge (excessive spending, often fueled by borrowing or credit) followed by a "purge" phase (where consumers cut back on spending to manage or pay off debt), before returning to another cycle of splurge.

Buliminomics: the splurge and purge that leads to dangerous economic excess.

***********

My economic plan is bold, visionary, and - with a positive attitude - achievable: get everyone into the top 1%. Because even the average person deserves to be better than average.

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some... well, they vote for me."

************

I get that the label "all natural" helps sell products, but honestly, if I saw something labeled “10% supernatural,” I’d probably buy it—at least once.

**************

Sobering to think that I’ve reached an age where if I say, “I’m literally dying,” people really would take me literally. Which is kind of ironic.

**********

But enough about me, he said. Now I'd like to tell you about my hobbies.

********

"I was really surprised that our relationship didn't work out," he said.

"Oh? Why was that," I asked.

"Well we were both Geminis. I felt like we would totally understand each other. I mean, I've been reading her horoscope every day for years."

**************

It is all well and good to dream big but a chicken who never accepts the fact that he can't fly is just going to create a lot of squawking and mad flailing of wings and rob the whole barnyard of peace.

***********

Sitting in Costco with 3 vaccinations freshly coursing through my veins wondering if medieval peasants would be more amazed by immunizations against plagues or a vast building with stacks of food 20+ feet high in every direction.

And progress isn't even done yet.

**********

All this talk about “utopia,” but what he really meant was “me-topia”

*********

After a few too many drinks, he tried to say he was a policy analyst, but what came out was "Pollyanna-ish." Given what we'd heard from him all night, it seemed like an apt confession.

**********

He woke up confused, having slept in latte and hastily splashed pumpkin spice cologne on his face. Fall always left him feeling a little disoriented.

*********

“The best material model for a cat is another, or preferably the same cat.”

- Norbert Wiener

**********

He was really excited to hear that the Fed was planning a hate cut ... until someone corrected him to point out that they were actually talking about a rate cut ... which somehow seemed less imperative to him.

************

In 2025, Pluto goes into the public domain. In 2028, Goofy does.

I'm looking forward to a heartwarming story in about 2030 in which Pluto and Goofy look at each other soberly and Goofy says, "I don't know why we go through this charade. You're his pet and I'm his friend and nobody can explain why he treats us so differently and we pretend to be so happy about it. This has to stop. Either you join us at the dinner table or I join you at the doggy dish but we have to stop letting a manipulative mouse come between us like this."

It'll be a heartwarming story about rising above the scripts we've been handed and living life as our true self, of treating others as equals.

**************

Waiter or waitress has always connotated waiting. I think there was a time in history when it referred to the server waiting on the diner and not the diner waiting on the server. But I'm not sure. I'll wait for you to look that up.

**********

I'm going to call my AI model "elves on the Internet" and cater to the market of folks too savvy to fall for the notion that so-called algorithms are sufficient to generate such results.

I expect that I'll capture nearly half the market.

If you would like to be an early investor, there are two options:

1. Invest $100k into the startup.

2. Provide job references for at least 2 elves.

**********

I have strong opinions about everything. Except, you know, strong opinions. I'm not sure if it's a good or bad thing to have so many strong opinions.

********

John Gray points out that Freud wasn't intent on transforming people or their potential or sense of self. Freud stated, “the goal of psychoanalysis is to turn neurotic misery into ordinary unhappiness.”

Probably harder to sell as a promise but ordinary unhappiness does sound like an attainable goal.

What are your goals for 2025, Fred?

I'd like ordinary unhappiness for a change.

Oh, well good luck with that.

************

The promise of social security seemed both noble and absurd to him… until he discovered it was just about monthly payments, and had nothing to do with alleviating social anxiety or tackling the tougher issues of status, acceptance, or belonging.

Christian Nationalists - People Who Would Like You To Think They Understand Christianity More Than Christ and Government More Than the Founding Fathers

In the four Gospels, Jesus doesn’t mention abortion or homosexuality—not once.

But in three of the four, He gives the same advice to a rich young man who wants eternal life: sell everything you have and give it to the poor. Also, in three of the four, He says it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Bill of Rights has 10 amendments, and the very first begins with, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

So, if you don’t want to sell all your possessions—despite the fact that Jesus explicitly taught it—the First Amendment suggests you don’t have to. And if you don’t want to lose your right to decide whether or not to have a child, not only does the Constitution forbid others from legislating their religion onto you, but the religion they want to impose on you isn’t one Christ taught anyway.

I suppose it’s possible that Christian nationalists who want to legislate their beliefs understand politics better than the Founding Fathers who gave us the First Amendment and understand Christianity better than Christ. Possible—but unlikely. Because if they did, the real Christian nationalists would be out here pushing for a 100% wealth tax. And I guarantee you, when that happens, these faux Christian nationalists will be waving the First Amendment faster than you can say, “seize the means of reproduction!”

How Trump Uses Nonsense to Distract From His Nonsense

Let's talk nonsense this morning. Or, more specifically, let’s talk about why Trump talks so much nonsense. He does it to distract reasonable people from his unreasonable policies.

Let's start with some facts.
The number of children living in poverty doubled from 5 million to 10 million between 2021 and 2023. Why? Because the expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC) expired at the end of 2021.
Meanwhile, the U.S. has 800 billionaires. This morning the five richest Americans are worth a combined one trillion dollars.

Trump’s policy is simple: He sees 10 million children in poverty and believes we should cut their benefits. He sees 800 billionaires and thinks we should cut their taxes.

Trump believes that the rich and powerful should be richer and more powerful, and that the poor should be poorer.

That is nonsense.

So, how does he distract you from this nonsense? With other nonsense.

"I'm still gonna call them an illegal alien," JD Vance recently said about Haitian migrants who are in Ohio legally. This echoes Trump's rhetoric, who claimed during his one debate with Harris that immigrants were eating people’s pets —a claim that originated from a false Facebook post and has no basis in reality.

When Trump pushes this nonsense about Haitians eating pets, it does two things: First, it excites racists and fuels racial division. Second, and more importantly, it distracts voters from his agenda based on his conviction that poor children are not poor enough and the wealthy are not wealthy enough.

He spouts nonsense about immigrants eating your pets or claims that children are coming home from school to unsuspecting parents surprised to learn that their child has had transgender surgery between classes. He spouts nonsense to distract you from the fact that the combined wealth of the five richest Americans is one trillion dollars, and he plans to give these men even more tax breaks.

In short, he’s distracting you from his nonsensical policies with nonsensical lies - his hope apparently that we will be made numb, or senseless with all of his nonsense.

***********

Here fact checker Daniel Dale of CNN lists some of the completely fictional stories Trump has been recently telling.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/19/politics/fact-check-donald-trump-fictional-stories/index.html

2 Reckless but Potentially Valuable Forecasts for This Week

I'm going to make a couple of reckless forecasts for this week.

On Wednesday, September 18, Fed Chair Jerome Powell will announce a 50 basis point rate cut, signaling the end of an aggressive rate-hiking cycle that began in 2022. This will be the first cut in over four years.

As a result, the NASDAQ will rise more than 1%, maybe as as high as 3% by week's end. With inflation moderating and further rate cuts probable, investors could flock back to tech stocks, pushing the index higher. The NASDAQ has historically responded positively to rate cuts, with the index rising an average of 2.4% in the month following similar announcements.

2 Ways to Define Conservative and Liberal and How R&D Spending Predicts How Communities Vote

In America, we use "conservative" in two main ways. One, to describe those who want less government. And two, for those who protect traditions and reject change.
Similarly, "liberal" covers both people who distrust wealth and corporations, and progressives who want society to evolve and improve, prioritizing quality of life and individual freedom over tradition.

New data on R&D spending as a percentage of state GDP supports the idea that conservatives resist novelty while progressives embrace it. States investing more in R&D, aiming to change the world, voted overwhelmingly for Biden in 2020. Conversely, states spending less on R&D favored Trump. The contrast is striking: the 10 states with the highest R&D spending voted for Biden by an average margin of 19 points, while the 10 states with the lowest R&D spending backed Trump by 18 points.

Data on the 10 states with the most and least R&D spending below.

Source for data here:
https://www.bea.gov/news/blog/2024-05-09/experimental-rd-value-added-statistics-us-and-states-now-available

Trump of McCain - I Like People Who Weren't Captured. McCain of Trump - I Like People Who Weren't Shot

In July 2015, during a campaign event in Ames, Iowa, Donald Trump made controversial remarks about John McCain. Trump said, "He's not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured"

John McCain was not drafted during Vietnam. He enlisted.

McCain was held as a prisoner of war in Vietnam for 5 years and 10 months, from October 26, 1967, until his release on March 14, 1973.

After being captured and enduring severe injuries and torture, McCain was offered early release by his captors in 1968. This offer came because his father, Admiral John S. McCain Jr., was a high-ranking naval officer and had been named Commander-in-Chief of Pacific Command.

However, McCain refused the offer of early release, adhering to the military code of conduct, which stipulates that prisoners should be released in the order they were captured. McCain believed it was important to maintain solidarity with his fellow prisoners and to prevent the enemy from using his release for propaganda purposes. He insisted that those captured before him be released first​​. This decision resulted in McCain enduring additional years of brutal treatment and torture until his eventual release in 1973.

The reason McCain was unable to lift his arms over his head was due to the torture and harsh treatment he endured during his captivity. After being shot down and captured, McCain was subjected to severe beatings, torture, and was often kept in solitary confinement. His injuries included broken arms and a broken leg, and the inadequate medical treatment he received exacerbated his condition. The physical abuse led to lasting damage, particularly to his shoulders, which is why he had difficulty lifting his arms above his head.

Imagine dismissing all that with the comment, "He's not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured" It would be as if McCain were still alive and said of Trump, "I like candidates who weren't shot." The idea that someone would dismiss an assassination attempt should horrify you - nearly as much the idea that any candidate aspiring to be Commander of Chief would dismiss the ordeal of a POW.

For the MAGA crowd, enduring years of torture by a military enemy is to be dismissed. Shot at by a deranged teenager is to be reverenced.

And of course when you're in a cult, you can't trust your own judgement about whether something is to be ridiculed or reverenced until you know what the cult leader thinks. So now Republicans know - one is supposed to dismiss the suffering of a Prisoner of War but show sympathy and outrage for someone attacked by a would-be assassin. Well, they are half right. Pity that echoing Trump's mood and philosophy doesn't quite allow someone to be fully human.

Kamala Harris, Immigration, Progress and Trump's Internment Camps

Kamala Harris is a product of a very different immigration policy than the one that came before LBJ and the one that will come after Trump.

Prior to LBJ, immigration was essentially proportionate to countries already represented in the US. Lots of Americans of British and German descent, for instance, was matched by lots of immigrants from Britain and Germany. LBJ changed that, making immigration increasingly dependent on academic achievement or potential, understanding the importance of knowledge workers and diversity in the information economy.

Kamala Harris's parents met at grad school at UC Berkeley - he from Jamaica and her from India. Once they graduated they became part of the academic and research professionals who define the leading edge of progress in developed nations. Her father taught economics at Stanford. Her mother was a cancer researcher at UC Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The Bay Area where they worked and Kamala lived before moving east for work has an immigration rate that is nearly triple that of the US as a whole. (And, of course, plenty of children of immigrants as well.)

Quite a few Americans were thrown by the fact that these immigrants were less likely to look like the folks who'd previously immigrated here from places like Northern Europe. LBJ's new immigration policy also resulted in immigrants who are generally more productive, innovative, and entrepreneurial.

The Bay Area, for example, has levels of entrepreneurship that has led to the creation of more wealth than anywhere else in the world - a rate of entrepreneurship enhanced by the portion of immigrants it has. The 12 most valuable companies in the Bay Area alone have a combined value that is 6X the value of Germany's entire stock market, 4X the value of France or the UK's entire stock market, and 2X the value of Japan's. There is no place or time in history that has even come close to the Bay Area's ability to create wealth, an ability enhanced by its diversity.

Of course most Americans are far more interested in taking power from women over their own bodies and lowering the portion of immigrants in their communities than they are in creating wealth and prosperity.

And the American leading in the polls for president thinks that state legislatures rather than individual women should have control over women's bodies, and actually thought that the country's first African-American president was literally from Africa ... and because of that won the affection of nearly half of Americans for whom such a claim seemed sensible and brave. In the eyes of some, Kamala Harris is a wonderful success story: in the eyes of most Americans she is alarming.

Biden - and presumably Harris - will win the Bay Area by a 4 to 1 vote but will lose rural Mississippi and quite possibly Ohio, Georgia and other states that value "tradition" more than progress, places that find immigrants alarming.

How alarming? Trump is leading in the polls, a majority of Americans delighted with his promise to deport about 15 to 20 million immigrants. To put the scale of this roundup, internment and deportation in context, only 4 states have populations greater than 15 million. Trump has expressed a willingness to to create internment camps to hold these immigrants. We could have a total internment camp population greater than the population of all but 36 states. And Americans who got angry about wearing face masks are very excited by the prospect of armed immigration officers busting into homes and businesses across the US to roundup people without proper documentation. (And of course this will mean millions of children born here, with citizenship, who presumably have a choice between orphanages or being deported from a country in which they have citizenship, causing the numbers who will be rounded up to swell.)

Hitler's was the last administration in the West to attempt internments at this scale.

But Joe Biden is old so we'll have to go with the much younger (by more than 2 years) Donald who promises us chaos and violence that will dwarf his last presidency. (How violent was his last presidency? His own VP had his life threatened on January 6 and now refuses to endorse the president he served with. Only one other time in all of American history has a VP turned against the president he served under. In 1832 - nearly a century ago - Calhoun resigned as Jackson's VP.)

It is doubtful that we'll have Harris as VP next year - and certainly won't have a minority woman as president. Not in a country where nearly half of Americans are convinced that if only history gave some nation a second chance at internment camps they could get it right. We have millions of angry Americans because, you know, egg prices went up last year. Polls now suggest that most Americans prefer the prospect of immigrant roundups and internment camps with populations greater than Ohio's to a president who stutters. It's a curious set of values we have.

Americans. We're not interested in creating wealth or in progress. We just don't want to be around people who look different.

The Transformation in Trade Has Made Tariffs More Terrible Since the Time of David Ricardo in the Early 1800s

I don't think that enough is made of the inflation impact of Trump's tariffs.

When David Ricardo introduced the concept of comparative advantage in trade in 1817, he explained it using the example of Portugal trading wine for England's cloth. He demonstrated that even if one country could produce both goods more efficiently, it still benefits from specializing in the good it can produce at a relatively lower cost and trading for the other.

Today, trade is much more complex. Products like cars, computers, smartphones, and TVs involve hundreds of parts and multiple production steps across different countries.
In Ricardo's time, tariffs would typically be applied once to a simple finished product, like a bottle of wine. Today, with global supply chains, each part of a product might cross several borders before the final product is assembled. Each crossing could incur a tariff, leading to multiple tariffs on a single product.

With multiple border crossings for complex products like TVs, cars, and smartphones, a world with tariffs could mean prices 10 to 100 percent higher. In Ricardo's world, a tariff would impact a single product once. In our world, tariffs can affect each component multiple times, significantly increasing costs. This makes modern tariffs a much more expensive proposition, as they add up with each border crossing.

High tariffs in such a world are a curious proposal from a party that has incessantly complained about inflation that is now about 2 to 3 percent and quickly falling.

AI Writes About My Book The Fourth Economy and The Transformation of Church, State, Bank and Corporation

The concept from "The Fourth Economy" posits that since the Dark Ages, major societal transformations have been driven by shifts in defining institutions, shaping how these institutions serve individuals. Here’s an evaluation and explanation of this idea:

Historical Transformations of Defining Institutions:

The Protestant Reformation:
Transformation: The Protestant Reformation in the 16th century fundamentally altered the religious landscape of Europe.
Outcome: It challenged the authority of the Catholic Church, leading to religious freedom and pluralism. The church's role shifted from a monolithic authority to a tool that individuals could use to explore their faith.
Impact: This laid the groundwork for individual rights and freedom of conscience, influencing modern concepts of religious liberty.

The Democratic Revolution:
Transformation: The democratic revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries (e.g., the American Revolution, the French Revolution) redefined the role of the state.
Outcome: These revolutions established democracy, transforming the state from a sovereign entity into a mechanism of governance that serves the people.
Impact: This shift empowered individuals with political agency and rights, institutionalizing concepts of citizenship and representative government.

The American Dream:
Transformation: The notion of the American Dream in the 20th century democratized finance and credit.
Outcome: Access to credit and investment opportunities expanded, allowing a broader segment of the population to participate in economic growth and wealth creation.
Impact: This economic democratization contributed to a burgeoning middle class and widespread prosperity, emphasizing the individual's potential for upward mobility.

Prediction: Transformation of the Corporation:
The Fourth Economy:
Prediction: The book predicts that the next major transformation will involve the corporation, shifting it to become a tool for individuals who work within it.
Rationale: This prediction is based on emerging trends where employees seek more autonomy, purpose, and a stake in their organizations.
Possible Outcomes:
Employee Empowerment: Corporations could evolve to offer more democratic work environments, profit-sharing, and collaborative decision-making processes.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): A greater emphasis on CSR could align corporate goals with the broader interests of society and the environment.
Innovation and Flexibility: Empowering employees could lead to greater innovation and adaptability, essential in the rapidly changing global economy.
Evaluation:
Historical Continuity: The notion aligns with historical trends where transformative periods redefined major institutions to better serve individual needs and rights.
Current Trends: There is evidence supporting this prediction. For instance, the rise of employee-owned companies, the gig economy, and increased focus on workplace culture and values suggest a shift towards more inclusive and employee-centric corporate models.
Challenges: The transition may face resistance from entrenched corporate interests and require substantial changes in corporate governance, legal frameworks, and cultural attitudes towards work and employment.
Conclusion:
The Fourth Economy’s notion is a compelling framework for understanding societal transformations. By drawing parallels with historical shifts, it provides a coherent narrative for the potential future evolution of corporations. If corporations do transform as predicted, the change could herald a new era where businesses not only drive economic growth but also enhance individual well-being and societal progress.

Is the Fourth Economy Still Valid? - What Chat GPT Has to Say About My First Book, the Fourth Economy (Part One)

Part One:

"Is the Fourth economy still valid?"

****
The validity of the "Fourth Economy" theory can be evaluated based on its relevance to current economic trends, technological advancements, and societal impacts. Here’s an analysis of its ongoing relevance:

*1. Technological Advancements*
- *Still Relevant:* The theory's emphasis on technology as a key driver of economic change remains valid, particularly with the rise of AI, machine learning, blockchain, and other cutting-edge technologies.
- *Current Examples:* AI is transforming industries, enhancing productivity, and creating new markets, consistent with the Fourth Economy's focus on innovation.

*2. Innovation and Entrepreneurship*
- *Still Relevant:* The importance of fostering innovation and entrepreneurship continues to be a cornerstone of modern economies.
- *Current Examples:* Startups, especially in tech, continue to disrupt traditional industries, and innovation hubs like Silicon Valley remain vital economic engines.

*3. Globalization and Competition*
- *Still Relevant:* The interconnectedness and competition on a global scale, as highlighted in the Fourth Economy, are more pronounced than ever.
- *Current Examples:* Global supply chains, international trade, and multinational corporations thrive, driven by technological advancements and digital platforms.

*4. Impact on the Workforce*
- *Still Relevant:* The shift in skill requirements, job displacement, and creation of new roles align with current trends.
- *Current Examples:* The need for digital literacy, AI expertise, and continuous learning are evident in today’s job market.

*5. Flexible Work Arrangements*
- *Still Relevant:* The trend towards remote work and gig economy jobs predicted by the Fourth Economy has accelerated.
- *Current Examples:* The COVID-19 pandemic has further entrenched remote work and freelance opportunities, supported by digital tools.

*6. Education and Training*
- *Still Relevant:* The call for changes in education systems to prepare for a rapidly evolving job market remains pertinent.
- *Current Examples:* Increasing emphasis on STEM education, coding boot camps, and lifelong learning programs.

*7. Urban and Rural Transformation*
- *Still Relevant:* The growth of tech hubs and the transformation of urban and rural areas continue.
- *Current Examples:* Smart cities, tech parks, and digital infrastructure projects are expanding globally.

*8. Income Inequality*
- *Still Relevant:* Addressing potential income inequality remains a critical issue.
- *Current Examples:* The disparity between high-skilled tech jobs and low-skilled jobs is growing, necessitating inclusive policies.

*9. Sustainability and Inclusivity*
- *Still Relevant:* The focus on sustainable and inclusive growth is increasingly important.
- *Current Examples:* Growing emphasis on green technologies, corporate social responsibility, and inclusive economic policies.

*10. Proactive Measures*
- *Still Relevant:* The need for proactive measures by governments, businesses, and individuals to navigate economic changes remains crucial.
- *Current Examples:* Regulatory frameworks for AI, public-private partnerships, and individual reskilling initiatives.

*Conclusion*
The "Fourth Economy" theory remains a valid and insightful framework for understanding contemporary economic trends and preparing for future challenges. Its emphasis on technology, innovation, globalization, workforce transformation, and proactive measures continues to resonate with the current and evolving economic landscape.

2024 Lost Perspective in Politics

History books in 50 years:

One candidate had tried to violently overthrow democracy when he lost his last election, shrugged his shoulders at the mob's attempt to assassinate his VP, was found guilty of 32 felony counts, told NATO allies he would do nothing to stop Putin from invading their countries and proposed tariff policies that would cause inflation to surge, and only gained an endorsement from 4 of the 44 cabinet members from his presidency.

The other candidate looked old and didn't finish a few sentences in a debate.

Pundits across the spectrum called for the other candidate to drop out of the race.

Mellon's $50 Million MAGA Donation Sets New Record for Single Donation to a Political Campaign

Andrew Mellon, a financier who served as Treasury Secretary, faced investigation by the Roosevelt administration for alleged tax evasion starting in 1933. Mellon had a vast collection of art. For years, after his tax bill was calculated, Mellon would “donate” art to a nonprofit institution he had formed, a donation each year equal in value to his tax bill. The art would not move, most continuing to hang in one of his homes. By the time of the trial, he had donated some $40 million worth of art, yet he had done nothing to suggest that the paintings would be used for public good.
In 1936, amidst the scrutiny, Mellon announced his plan to donate his collection to the nation, and he provided funds for a national gallery. This donation led to the establishment of the National Gallery of Art, which opened on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., in 1941. Mellon's collection formed a significant part of the museum's initial holdings.

Related, Timothy Mellon - an heir of Andrew Mellon’s – recently made the largest political donation on record - $50 million to Trump’s campaign through the MAGA PAC. No word as to whether any art was included.

Parenting, Politics, and Stages of Development

The actual meaning of the word parent evolves all the time. The parents of an infant, a kindergartener, and a teenager have vastly different responsibilities. There are a number of ways to succeed or mess up as a parent but one sure way to mess up as a parent is to master what it means to parent, say, a 9-month old and then never change your behavior towards the child even as they grow older. It would be a disaster to parent a toddler as if they were 15 or a teenager as if they were a toddler.

I think something very similar is true of politics and policy with evolving economies. What makes for great policy during a time when 90% of your population is farming is very different from what makes for great policy when you're in an industrial or information economy. Originalists who seem to dominate the Supreme Court and have really robust representation in Congress are the folks who insist that what made you a great parent of a toddler is just what will make a teenager love you.

Income Tax and The Contrast Between the Republican Party's First President (Lincoln) and Last President (Trump)

Trump has suggested that he could get rid of income tax and simply replace it with tariffs. As Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post points out, 40% of Americans don't pay income tax (and some of them actually "pay" a negative income tax) but everyone would pay tariffs. (Tariffs are not charged to foreign producers. They are paid by any American who buys an import, from an avocado to a smart phone.)

I've argued before that Lincoln was the first Republican president and Trump will be the last. This policy proposal is just one of many reasons why.

Trump was born rich and thinks that government does too much for the poor. Lincoln was born poor and thought that the government could do so much more for the poor. Lincoln initiated the income tax and sweeping public investments; Trump may end both.

The Democrats dominated American politics from the time of Jefferson to Lincoln, from 1801 to 1861. One of their core beliefs was that government should not engage in any investments - not roads or canals or schools or research. Everything should depend on individual rather than government initiative. It is weirdly congruent with the philosophy of a lot of conservatives, libertarians and Republicans today. That is, the modern Republican Party is a lot like the old Democratic Party. The one presidential portrait Trump hung in the Oval Office was of Jackson - the Democratic president who vetoed the national bank that Lincoln did so much to resurrect.

Lincoln was a strong proponent of government investment to create more affluence and opportunity for ordinary Americans. He signed legislation that created Morrill Land-Grant Colleges - creating a list of state universities that includes Iowa State, Michigan State, Pennsylvania State, Texas A&M, University of California, Berkeley, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and University of Wisconsin-Madison - more than 100 universities.
Lincoln grew up poor - born in a one-room log cabin (not a one-bedroom but one-room) and had only one year of formal education. He strongly believed that government should invest to improve the lives of everyone - particularly children born in poverty.

What were the result of Lincoln's investments in the country? During the time of Lincoln's administration and the decades after, the US economy grew faster than any other economy in the world and faster than any economy had in the history of the world.

Lincoln's policies faced fierce opposition from Democrats who thought government had no role in making investments like transcontinental railroads or universities or regulating banks and financial markets. Democrats who thought that the federal government could get all the financing it needed from ... tariffs.

Lincoln's most significant act was freeing slaves but that was almost incidental to his broader vision of creating an industrial economy and opportunity. Lincoln thought that more could be done to create opportunity for everyone - particularly the poor and enslaved.

Unlike some of my liberal friends, I don't think billionaires are a sign that the economy is broken. I think its awesome. Unlike my conservative friends who support Trump, I don't look at current reality and say, "What the rich need are more tax cuts and what the poor need is less welfare." I think that's demonstrably absurd. (Rather than get rid of income tax I think we should begin wealth tax.) At least as much as in the time of Lincoln we can and should tax the rich to fund investments in the poor. But of course, no contemporary Republican would agree with Lincoln's economic policies today. It's not Lincoln's party anymore. It's Trump's. And he has actually resurrected the party of Andrew Jackson - and is putting the final knife into the party of Abraham Lincoln.

No D-Day with the Donald

Before American troops ever landed in Europe, FDR had said, "We must be the great arsenal of democracy. For us, this is an emergency as serious as war itself. We must apply ourselves to our task with the same resolution, the same sense of urgency, the same spirit of patriotism and sacrifice as we would show were we at war."

In his radio address to the nation on the evening of June 6, 1944 - 80 years ago today on D-Day - Roosevelt led the nation in prayer. Here’s an excerpt from that address about American soldiers and our allies:

"They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home."

Putin is the first European leader to lead an invasion of a neighboring country since Hitler. Here's what Trump said to European allies concerned about Putin's invasion of Ukraine and his threat to other European neighbors.

"No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them [Putin and the Russians] to do whatever the hell they want."

Imagine WWII with Trump in the White House instead of FDR. There would be no D-Day celebration today. Hitler would have been unstopped. Stop pretending that there is anything normal or noble about Donald Trump.

Women Will Decide the 2024 Election

In 2020, if only women voted, Biden would have won the states 5 to 1 and the electoral college nearly 3 to 1.

Women. You will decide this election.

America's Great Institutional Recession

In 1984, over 60% of Americans were satisfied with democracy. Today, that number has plummeted to just 28%, reflecting a deep disillusionment with our 236-year-old system of government. There is a particular kind of poignancy in the fact that in the world’s first modern democracy, democracy itself no longer has enough support to win an election.

Gallup tracks the nation’s trust in some of America’s most defining institutions - churches, banks, the Supreme Court, the military, public schools, newspapers, Congress, organized labor, and big business. To varying degrees, Americans have lost confidence in all of them. In 1979, nearly half of the population had a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in these institutions. Now just 26% do.

We are in the middle of a very weird and long recession, one that has left many Americans anxious, angry, and convinced that conditions are bad and getting worse.

We are not in an economic recession. Labor and capital markets are thriving. Last month continued the longest streak of unemployment under 4% in half a century. The NASDAQ is up 12% so far this year – up 35% from a year ago. Inflation at 3.4% is still higher than its 21st century average of 2.6% but it continues to fall. In most periods of American history these numbers would be feeding talk about an economic boom.

We are in an institutional recession. That’s scarier. Why? We know how to deal with an economic recession but haven’t even begun the discussion about how to confront an institutional recession. Save for the dwindling handful of nerds who stand up to argue for the importance of church, universities, big-tech, or government bureaucracies, you’re more likely to hear loud criticism of institutions than any defense of them.

And that’s dangerous because our quality of life depends on institutions. We depend on thousands – millions - of people we don’t even know to grow, ship, and prepare our food, to make our clothes, to update our apps, and operate the seemingly invisible systems with thousands of parts that regulate our supply of goods, water, electricity, and information. And through "tasks" like work, worship, and learning, these institutions even create meaning.

These strangers create value for us through a vast web of institutions: schools that educate workers, law enforcement and courts that regulate, and corporations that make, ship, and deliver goods and services. Our small network of family and friends would collapse under the weight of the complexity our quality of life depends on. The decline in quality of life from where we are now to what we could sustain with the small groups our tribal impulses draw us toward would be precipitous. While we can afford to be unhappy with the myriad institutions that define our lives, we cannot afford to discard them or follow our worst impulses into a world of Hatfield and McCoy-style alliances. Our modern world depends on millions of strangers working through and within hundreds of thousands of institutions. We need them to function.

It is difficult to understand Trump's allure without recognizing the deep disenchantment Americans feel toward their institutions. When people anywhere grow frustrated with their institutions, they often turn to strong men who promise to blowup or marginalize institutions.

There is a big problem with this. Strong men never deliver. The modern world is simply too complex to be run by dictate.
It's true that Putin literally kills political opponents. More prosaically, 20% of Russians do not have indoor plumbing. While the US has never defaulted on its bonds, Russia has al always defaulted on its 30-year bonds. Putin doesn’t deliver.

North and South Korea have been divided by a border since 1948. The stark contrast between the two countries cannot be attributed to differences in race, deep history, or language. One nation has been ruled by dictators, while the other has been led by democratic leaders who have generally respected South Korea’s institutions. The difference between strong men and strong institutions is striking. A South Korean generates as much GDP in seven days as a North Korean does in an entire year. South Korea’s per capita GDP exceeds $33,000, compared to just $900 per year in North Korea. Strong men capture attention and create great lives for themselves but deliver dismal results for their people.

We are living through a dramatic institutional recession that has been largely ignored and yet explains so much about America’s current mood and politics. The first step to addressing it is to appreciate how vital institutions are, how much they define us. The second step is to begin a conversation about how to redefine the institutions that define us. These steps could mark the beginning of the end of our institutional recession.

Are You Better Off Than You Were 4 Years Ago? Maybe if You Were in a Coma and Blissfully Unaware

Are you better off than you were 4 years ago? In May of 2020?

The United States first reached 1,000 daily COVID-19 deaths in early April 2020. This grim milestone marked the beginning of a period where the country consistently saw high daily death rates due to the pandemic. The daily death rate remained above 1,000 until late February of 2021, peaking at roughly 3,000 a day just after the 2020 election during Trump's last month in office when he did nothing to mitigate the pandemic but focused instead on overturning the vote of a majority of Americans.

In May, the BLS announced that 20 million jobs had been lost in April, shattering all previous records for jobs lost in a year, much less one month.

During the period from late May to June 2020, it is estimated that between 15 million and 26 million Americans participated in the Black Lives Matter protests. These demonstrations were sparked by the murder of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, and quickly spread across the United States, becoming the largest protest movement in American history.

The anti-fascist (Antifa) and anti-Trump protests also saw significant activity during this time. Protests against President Donald Trump's policies and rhetoric were frequent throughout his presidency, but they intensified in the summer of 2020, particularly in response to his handling of the protests and the federal government's aggressive tactics against demonstrators. These protests often coincided with the BLM demonstrations, adding to the overall atmosphere of civil unrest across the country.

4 years ago Americans
were dying,
protesting, and
losing jobs
at the fastest rate in American history.

Oh, and Trump was tweeting at an unprecedented rate even for him, much less any other president: Trump averaged 34 tweets a day in his final year in office, in the midst of all this.

Entering a Global Pandemic With a President Who Had Unprotected Sex with a Porn Star - High On the List of Poor Decisions Made by Americans

Stormy Daniels' testimony is a reminder that we went into a global pandemic with a president who had unprotected sex with a porn star. What a shock that under his leadership the US suffered so much more tragedy than comparable countries. A keen medical mind that thought we might be able to spray bleach inside the body to fight this virus.

data: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-cases-deaths-per-million?tab=map

The Longest Streak of Unemployment Rate at or Below 4% That You Can Remember

You have to go back more than half a century to find a longer streak of months with unemployment at or below 4%. Or as the memes and journalists desperate for clicks like to describe it, "Might this be the worst economy ever?" {Spoiler alert: no. No it is not.]

Only in the 1950s and 1960s did the US economy have a longer stretch of unemployment rate under 4%. It's now 30 months in a row of unemployment at 4% or lower. Hard to believe that the Fed will hit its target rate of inflation of 2.something without bringing unemployment above 4%, suggesting that this streak could end within a month or two, falling just short of the streak from the early 1950s. You remember that streak, right? [Second spoiler alert in a single post: no. No you don't. The last streak longer than this was from before you can remember.]

Even Deep History is Not That Far Away

The Dunbar Number is 150. It is an estimate of the number of people one might have in a social circle.

If we go back 150 lifetimes - assuming 40 year life expectancies - we go back 6,000 years, which takes us to around 4000 BC.

4000 BC corresponds roughly to the early Bronze Age, a time when human societies were increasingly using metalworking, developing urban centers, and establishing complex social structures in various parts of the world.

How far back is that?

Well, Mesopotamia was just in the Copper Age, leading into the Early Bronze Age. Mesopotamia, particularly in the region of modern-day Iraq, was seeing the rise of complex societies. These groups would eventually develop into the Sumerian civilization, one of the world's first known civilizations, which arose in the later parts of the 4th millennium BCE. No dynasties had yet emerged in what would become ancient Egypt, China, or the Indus Valley.

The people you know represent enough lifetimes to take us back to pre-history.

What do I take from that? Even deep history is not that far away - fewer generations than the number of people we know.

 

Time to Move Beyond Blase to Bedazzled at Biden's Policies and the Biden Economy

The Biden presidency is setting a bar for economic performance that has never before been hit and is unlikely to be matched again. This is not by chance.

A few things to remember about Biden.

1. Obama gave him responsibility for leading the 2008 Great Recession recovery efforts. Obama was opposed at every step of his presidency and in the economic recovery, with unemployment persistently and depressingly high, his recovery plan was one more defined by austerity than stimulus. The unemployment rate in his first term averaged 9%. That was an extraordinarily painful period for Americans that - unsurprisingly - created extremists on both side of the political divide, from the Occupy Wall Street crowd who denounced markets and banks to the Tea Party folks who denounced government and regulation. Biden clearly learned that cautious recoveries are of little benefit to communities, families, or government budgets. Austerity in the face of a recession is a ridiculous way to recover.

2. Biden has been around forever and this is an asset. Biden knows the personalities and weaknesses of world leaders you've heard of and policy makers and staffers who you've never heard of. Biden knows which sharp policy wonks have ideas for stimulating investments, create jobs, and lower carbon emissions. He knows how to get people from across the aisle to vote for his infrastructure spending. Put more simply, Biden knows policies, policy makers and politicians - American and foreign. This makes him incredibly effective.

3. Biden's policy wonks are at work on programs that will never get properly covered because they're largely too ... well, wonky to appeal to the average reader who just wants to hear why they should be offended at Trump today or get confirmation that this week - sure enough - Biden is another week older. Someday some of his policy makers will write fascinating books about the causes and consequences of this economy and a few of us weird people who delight in things like that will delight in that; most people will remain blissfully unaware.

4. Biden consciously incurred a big fiscal deficit in his first year knowing that the best way to reduce long-term debt is to stimulate an economy to its full potential. He realized that the first priority was to put Americans back to work and then household and government budgets will strengthen. But his policy was not a one year, one trick policy. He's stimulating investments in local communities that result in new infrastructure, new factories, and new training programs. And the result is dramatic: projections of long-term deficits have halved since Biden has taken office. link

Biden's policies are stimulating the economy from a number of directions. He's ignited a variety of infrastructure projects. The interstate highway bill Eisenhower signed into law stimulated GDP growth by roughly 0.5% per year for decades. (And when average GDP growth is close to 2%, 0.5% extra is extraordinary.) The interstate highway bill stimulated the economy during highway construction. That won't surprise you. And then it stimulated the economy as people used it, stimulating travel, trade, and inter-city and interstate exchange as chains like McDonalds and Hilton Hotels emerged. Biden is not just stimulating the economy with various infrastructure projects and subsidies to alternative energy projects and manufacturing, he's setting us up for years of extra economic activity as these new bridges continue to stimulate trade and travel and these new factories continue to support jobs and productivity.

The most extraordinary outcome of Biden's policies is the incredible rate of job growth. One of the elements behind that that is rarely reported? The extraordinary rate of new business formation. This statistic gets hardly any coverage and yet seems to me the most important of all economic statistics - speaking as it does to the levels of optimism and long-term implications for the creation of new jobs, new products, new services, new markets, and new wealth. New business formation in the decade of the 2020s is running at TWICE the level it did in the decade of the 2000s. Double. 2X. So, so much more. And the ripple effect of that is one reason that in the first quarter of 2024 - now in the fourth year of the recovery from the worst of COVID - job creation is running at an even higher rate than it did last year.

The phenomenal rates of business formation and job creation are not the product of chance. They are the result of policy choices from a politician who delights in politics and policy in a time when it is so very stylish to hold politicians, politics and policy in contempt. Fortunately, Joe Biden still thinks that politics and policy matter, and rather than blow things up the way his predecessor did, he's building an economy that creates jobs and businesses at the fastest rate in your lifetime.

Lincoln's 44 Days Without War

In 1861,
March 4, Lincoln was inaugurated for his 1st term as president
April 12, Confederates fired on Fort Sumter, officially beginning the Civil War.
Lincoln had 39 days of peace in his first term.

In 1865,
March 4, Lincoln was inaugurated for 2nd term
April 9 - Sunday - Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox
April 14 - Good Friday, Lincoln was shot
April 15 - Saturday morning - Lincoln died
Lincoln had 5 days of peace in his second term.

In the 1,504 days of his presidency, Lincoln had only 44 days without war.


"There have been 16,000 books and articles published on Lincoln—125 on the assassination alone—more than any other American."

Regret in the UK - Post-BREXIT GDP Slowdown and the Case for Globalization

It was the British and Dutch who became the wealthiest communities in the world by pioneering globalization. BREXIT was a decisive vote to withdraw from the world as part of the retreat from globalization. Brits - whose economy has been in a slog since voting for BREXIT - now regret it.

How much of a slog? Look at the graph below. Real GDP growth in the UK in the 6 years before BREXIT was 13.0%. In the 6 years after it has been only 7.7% - a drop in growth rate of about 40%. (By contrast, US GDP grew by 12% in the 6 years before and by 13.1% in the 6 years after.)

This isn't complicated. Communities that become part of the larger world prosper.

Communities that cut themselves off - or are cut off - from the world languish.

Reversing globalization is fear-based politics that is bad for the economy. It's exciting to attack globalists but they're right about the benefits of being connected to the world outside your borders.

Communities that Least Understand the Economy Are Most Likely to Find Trump Persuasive

One of the most underreported facts of the modern world is simply this:

communities that know how to create great paying jobs overwhelmingly reject Trump's policies. Communities that can't create great paying jobs think he knows what he's talking about.

Nationwide, Trump got 47% of the vote.

In the communities that create the highest paying jobs, Trump got only 20% of the vote.

In the communities with the lowest-paying jobs, Trump got 58% of the vote.

Put differently, people who least understand the economy are most likely to find Trump persuasive.

In the 10 counties with the highest average wages, Biden got nearly 4X as many votes as Trump.
In the 10 counties with the lowest average wages, Biden got only 0.8 votes for each vote Trump got.
What is the difference in wages in the 10 highest and 10 lowest paid counties? The highest make 2.7X as much on average.

Here is the latest data (3Q 2023) on the 10 highest and 10 lowest paying counties.
Average Annual Wages
US: $69,368
Bottom Ten Counties: $46,160
Top Ten Counties: $123,415

The Land Battle for States Gives Way to the Cultural Battle for Nations - the Modern World as a Lava Lamp

Imagine a map with all its neat lines and borders, like a giant puzzle where each piece is a different country, clearly marked and separate. That's a state, like the one you live in, defined by those lines on the map.

Now, think about your favorite playlist, the sports you follow, the memes you share, and the beliefs you stand up for. That mix, the feeling it provokes, isn't tied to a line on any map. It's more like the shifting shapes in a lava lamp, always moving, coming together, and breaking apart. That's what a nation is all about - it's the music, the games, the drama and comedy, and the serious stuff that matter to you and yours.
In the 20th century, people fought with tanks and planes over those map lines, trying to say, "This land is mine." But now, the big battles are more about who we are and what we believe in, like sustainability, equality, rules, and investments. These fights aren't about grabbing a piece of land; they're about shaping the world with our ideas. And of course these battles don't end with a flag in the ground. They keep going, evolving, just like the ever-changing swirls in a lava lamp.

I've been staring at this lava lamp for decades. It's mesmerizing.

The Religious Right's Pyrrhic Victory (Or, The Cost of Using Trump As A Representative)

Trump began selling Bibles this week to raise money for his trial for using campaign funds to pay for sex with a porn star.

There is nothing else you need to know about the intersection of for-profit religion, crime and politics in these United States. The religious right got their ban on abortions by making Trump their partner. They have also lost another swath of active church members who've simply walked away from churches in the last few years. (According to a study by Faith Communities Today, the median congregation size dropped from 137 people in 2000 to 65 by 2020. There is evidence that it has fallen further since.)

The religious right may think they are selling bibles. Others may simply see it as selling out.

Kahneman On Substituting Easy Questions for Uesful Questions

Daniel Kahneman died this week. He won a Noble Prize in Economics made remarkable by the fact that not only did he not have a degree in economics, but he never even took an economics class.
Here is a blog post from 2011 that I wrote about one of his key ideas – our tendency to substitute trivial questions for hard questions.

One of the great mysteries of life is how we get sucked into political arguments of no consequence. Can you burn a flag? Can he wear a dress? Can she say that?

Which questions, by contrast, have real consequence? Questions like Will this economic policy make more people rich? Will that economic policy make fewer people poor? Will this political policy give more people rights? Will this policy extend or shorten life expectancies?

I think I found the answer to why we waste so much time trying to sound smart talking about such stupid issues in Daniel Kahneman’s new book, Thinking, Fast and Slow.

One concept Kahneman shares has to do with our tendency to substitute easy questions for hard ones. For me, this explains why so much airtime in politics is taken up with questions of little consequence.
Kahneman gives an example of an analyst who bought stock in Ford. Asked why, the analyst replied that he'd just been to a car show and left convinced that Ford "sure can make great cars." As Kahneman points out, the real question when buying stock is whether or not the stock is undervalued. But the analyst substituted that difficult question for the simpler question of whether Ford was making good cars. All of us, when faced with a difficult question, tend to substitute a simpler - albeit irrelevant - one.
It seems to me that the big question in politics should be, How do we improve quality of life for more people? That’s a big question and answering it is one that isn’t easy. It is a challenge to feel confident about one's ability to answer it.

By contrast, the little and largely irrelevant questions – silly questions best characterized by whether or not we should be able to burn the flag or use a bathroom that says Woman or Man – are ones for which we have clear answers as long as we have strong opinions. We don't need data. We don't need studies. Answering these questions leaves us feeling confident in our own judgment. Answering the big questions, by contrast, makes us feel uncertain. For most of us, we prefer feeling confident to feeling ignorant. The result? We choose questions because of how they make us feel rather than what their answers will do to improve the world.

And that’s a pity. Just think what we could do with all the attention paid to politics if it were focused on real, albeit difficult, questions. Questions that have the potential to make us more humble and the world better - rather than make us more smug and make the world no better.