As you know we live in Bread and Circus times and Pols responding to incentives will look to tell the prospective voters what they want to hear regardless of how good or bad a given policy might be over a longer period of time.
The ignorance of the public is appalling and Pols are armed and ready to take advantage of this shortcoming. Too many independent voters may think that elevated prices are due to corporate greed and hence Harris addressing that via price controls is rational from her point of view, regardless of it being untrue so long as it benefits her and gets her votes.
Yes, leadership should be concerned with more than the short run, but it seems that we have not had leaders for quite some time who see the trade-offs and are willing to be truthful with the public.
Gov spending , increased yearly deficits have been ongoing for far too long and issues related to Soc Security, and Medicare are continually ignored and will remain so until some kind of crisis takes place.
So, Pols will respond to incentives and right now in instant gratification nation truth telling and addressing issues that the public does not seem to understand will have to wait.
the article is a good critique of the two democrat candidates, especially their populist bent -- it would help if the author commented the stance of the republican candidates, be they populist or not
I think that explains America the last 30-40 yrs overall - at least politically . Lower rates and the peace dividend carpeted over a lot of problems building up. We have 9–10 yrs before a return to some focus on solving problems - once SS trust fund is done it’s going to get messy
I respectively disagree, Allison. The evidence of the past several years shows that the electorate (both Left and Right, but especially the Right) prefer pandering over “here’s-the-tough-truth-of-the-matter” leadership.
As you know we live in Bread and Circus times and Pols responding to incentives will look to tell the prospective voters what they want to hear regardless of how good or bad a given policy might be over a longer period of time.
The ignorance of the public is appalling and Pols are armed and ready to take advantage of this shortcoming. Too many independent voters may think that elevated prices are due to corporate greed and hence Harris addressing that via price controls is rational from her point of view, regardless of it being untrue so long as it benefits her and gets her votes.
Yes, leadership should be concerned with more than the short run, but it seems that we have not had leaders for quite some time who see the trade-offs and are willing to be truthful with the public.
Gov spending , increased yearly deficits have been ongoing for far too long and issues related to Soc Security, and Medicare are continually ignored and will remain so until some kind of crisis takes place.
So, Pols will respond to incentives and right now in instant gratification nation truth telling and addressing issues that the public does not seem to understand will have to wait.
I’m not quite sure about this: You say, “bullish on the future of the U.S. economy”, and “the outlook is less certain in the short to medium term”.
Then “We have some big long-term structural issues, but I’m bullish in the short run.”
Bullish on the future, or bullish in the short run?
the article is a good critique of the two democrat candidates, especially their populist bent -- it would help if the author commented the stance of the republican candidates, be they populist or not
I think that explains America the last 30-40 yrs overall - at least politically . Lower rates and the peace dividend carpeted over a lot of problems building up. We have 9–10 yrs before a return to some focus on solving problems - once SS trust fund is done it’s going to get messy
Can’t wait to hear what you think about Powell’s speech
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1974/hayek/lecture/
I respectively disagree, Allison. The evidence of the past several years shows that the electorate (both Left and Right, but especially the Right) prefer pandering over “here’s-the-tough-truth-of-the-matter” leadership.
Very interesting idea to think about the risk-taking and financial portfolio of our political leaders in this context
Any updates on the status of your next book?