@interfluidity@econtwi**er.net Profile picture
Sep 20, 2020 10 tweets 3 min read Read on X
One of the more interesting and nuanced calls for devolution to address bitter US political divides, by @RajaKorman. 1/
I don't see those divides as purely or even mostly geographic. (In fact, I see them largely as artifacts of the incentives that govern the political parties who n turn reshape our politics and our selves, qua @leedrutman isbn.nu/0190913851) 2/
So I'm skeptical of devolution as a solution to our deadlocked bitterness. If we became several fully independent nations that kept our current electoral system, we'd soon all become little UKs, bitterly divided within while also scapegoating greater America like an EU. 3/
But @RajaKorman isn't calling for this, I don't think. He's calling for a rebalancing within, which could usefully cross-cut national politics and reduce the destructive homogenizing power of the two national political parties. 4/
I don't think that it's a good idea at all to imagine we could divide into "Red America" and "Blue America", as if those represent pre-existing stable preferences of different peoples who'd get along if only they had self-determination. 5/
I think that you have basically been conned by our political parties, if you think that would work for more than a short period of time. 6/
But readjusting American federalism to build internal "superstates" that might be fiscal rivals of the Federal government, in order to restore more heterogeniety of allegiances to US politics and reduce the binary, zero-sum game, aspect of it, seems not unreasonable. 7/
I think it'd be much easier to remedy America's "doom loop" (in @leedrutman term) as Drutman suggests, by a simple act of Congress that alters our electoral system towards one that favors several parties and proportional representation. 8/
But finding ways of increasing the fiscal salience of subnational, but super-state, provinces would not be ridiculous (it's kind of a Canadian solution, I think). I think it harder in practice, and more indirect, than other reforms. But worth thinking about. 9/
Encouraging reforms like the issuance of municipal scrips interfluidity.com/v2/7513.html or the chartering of state-affiliated banks by subnational governments could also increase the fiscal flexibility and relevance of subnational units, and so diversify the tropism of US politics./fin

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with @interfluidity@econtwi**er.net

@interfluidity@econtwi**er.net Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @interfluidity

Sep 9, 2022
@scottsantens @aaronfhamlin @StevenHill1776 I think this piece is off about a couple of things. At a normative level, it presumes that it’s wrong somehow if a 55% 1st preference doesn’t win. But what if the other 45% detest that candidate, and there’s a third candidate 80% would be okay with? 1/
@scottsantens @aaronfhamlin @StevenHill1776 I’d argue the health of our polity is better served (in single winner elections) by the voting system that chooses the consensus candidate rather than a polarizer who can command a small majority. 2/
@scottsantens @aaronfhamlin @StevenHill1776 strategic voting (“bullet voting” for approval voting) is indeed a problem. but it is also a problem for ranked choice voting, where it often makes sense to support the candidate whose other supporters would favor the shittiest second-choice, lest a victory over that… 3/
Read 8 tweets
Mar 2, 2022
I see a lot of blame of Russians for complicity—they should have checked their vicious ruler long ago. Maybe, though in a complicity olympics we all have a very great deal to answer for. 1/
But going forward, we want Russians NOT to rally behind Putin as their country collapses out of modernity. We want to them to know there is a world community that would welcome them under a political order that lives in peace with its neighbors. 2/
“Why do we need a world if Russia is not in it?” Putin famously asked, signaling his willingness to destroy the world if his idea of Russia is sufficiently threatened. But we all need a world, and we need one with Russia in it. 3/
Read 5 tweets
Jan 12, 2022
A way to understand it is that, under US antitrust, it’s dangerous for participants in concentrated industries to restrict “ordinary” supply, but nothing prevents them from designing *inflexible* supply. i/

re @glastris washingtonmonthly.com/2022/01/12/pre…
Inflexible supply has two desirable characteristics:

(1) it’s cheaper and narrowly more “efficient” to arrange, reducing costs and increasing profit in ordinary times; and

(2) it offers firms a convenience yield in the form of pricing power during spikes in demand. ii/
When there are spikes in demand, the structure of production forces the very supply restrictions that an antitrust regulator would otherwise attack. You get thrown by circumstance into the briar patch of the old-school profiteering US antitrust still plainly forbids… iii/
Read 8 tweets
Jan 4, 2022
.@MattBruenig suggests a very direct form of competition policy: when an industry is concentrated, have the state buy and manage one of the oligopolists in the public interest. peoplespolicyproject.org/2022/01/04/why…

i/
Two concerns immediately spring to mind:

(1) How do you set the price of the acquisition? (The premium demanded over prior-to-government-interest market cap will be very high if you just let the sellers name their price.)

ii/
(2) As an institutional matter, how should such a firm be managed, so that it neither behaves as a pure profit maximizer (which would just continue the oligopoly squeeze) nor is captured by one stakeholder (industry peers, vendors, customers) at the expense of others?

iii/
Read 4 tweets
Jan 1, 2022
When demand increases, two things typically both happen: quantities supplied increase and price increases. There is a name in economics for the quantitive relationship between these two effects: "price elasticity of supply". 1/
A good "infinitely" elastically supplied would see no price change at all in response to an increase in demand. All of the effect would be absorbed by an increase in quantity supplied. 2/
A good completely inelastically supplied would simply be price-rationed. In response to an increase in demand, no additional units would be produced at all, the fixed quantity supplied would just be allocated to the highest bidders, pushing all response into price. 3/
Read 13 tweets
Dec 4, 2021
there’s a sense in which Donald Trump’s administration was the best thing that could happen to the professional-managerial class that most loathed him. he drew all kinds of fire that otherwise would turn towards them. 1/
i just listened to @LRCkcrw, and (on COVID stuff) it might have been Rush Limbaugh talking, the way all three of (“left”) @ebruenig (“right”) @DouthatNYT and (“center”) @jbarro used the term “bureaucrats”. castro.fm/episode/4N02rT 2/
i found this particularly striking with respect to @jbarro, who five years ago, in the wake of Trump’s election, became a pretty full-throated defender of elites and deference to elite guidance. 3/
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(