We know with absolutely certainty that we will be 30 years older by 2050. And guess what? The world is going to be pretty aged except for few pockets such as South Asia, the Stans, and Africa.
Here is the question relevant for economics & politic, ready?
If the share of the elderly rises, then political power of the elderly would rise as they got vote & in a democracy vote = power.
So if we want the future to belong to the young & not the elderly to support growth, then shouldn't we weight votes?
In Japan, as the share of the elderly rises, the silvered Japanese gets more political power & that is economic power.
Society becomes sensitive to the elderly (more toilets, robots to help them live longer, & vote against noisy day care of kids etc) at the expense of the young.
In Europe, u see that as well. Votes = protecting the status quo, protecting labor that already has gainful employment that translates to a RIGID LABOR MARKET for those in the in.
Guess what? YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT high. How do we solve economics w/o politics if demographic shifts?
We have a rule in the US that only >18 year-old people can vote. What if we have rules for the elderly?
We already WEIGHT VOTES. People from 0-17 have NO VOICE in politics in a democracy. Should we have the same for the elderly at a certain age?
Radical or realistic?
Lee Kuan Yew proposed this idea as he thought about his city-state getting older & that democracy & votes should be weighted based on responsibilities so political decisions don't pander to the mass.
Why is it easy for us to accept that 0-17 yr-olds can't vote yet not super old?
The point here is that we have a circular situation in aging societies:
*As the share of the elderly rises, they exert pressure on the composition of the economy to shift towards the elderly
*They gain more political power to support elderly vs young
*Accelerates existing trend.
Meaning, in such as society, the youth, or the people that will be adults & ultimately the new elderly, likely face a more rigid society as elderly policy = conservative to support the status quo, leaving out opportunities for the young.
So lower growth & deflated future. 🤷🏻♀️
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Redfin, a real estate app that shows houses & charges a smaller commission than typical agent, is sued for redlining, which I learned is the idea that some areas being discriminated & house prices don’t rise or get investment. Idea has a racial connotation vs just poor vs rich.
Basically Redfin doesn’t service homes below a minimum price & they say it is racial discrimination or redlining.
Anyway, it makes me think of gentrification, which is an increase of investment & improvement that raises prices & people complain too that it displaces poor people.
Redlining & gentrification are polar opposites. Those that complain that being redlined robs minorities of the rise of house prices or wealth creation.
But then I don’t understand the complaints about gentrification that raise prices, the reverse of redlining.
Good morning!!! Today is 17 November & the USA has 2 vaccines that have great results! 🇺🇸🔥 And so more of risk-on!!!
*Dollar down
*Equities up!
Details:
*Both are mRNA vaccines, a brand-new tech. Not made w/ Covid
*Both vaccines require 2 shots, given several weeks apart.
*US hope to have about 20 mn Moderna doses &another 20m of Pfizer & German partner BioNTech to use in late December
*>65 likely to have priority.
Both Russia & China have deployed their vaccines to people without finishing the final trial. So you ask, what's the difference b/n the US & China vaccines?
*China uses old tech: use a dead version of the Sars-CoV-2 virus rather than more advanced techniques deployed elsewhere
Agreed w/ Emmanuel Macron. Wasn't the NYT criticized recently for making up stories about ISIS etc? What the the media business model care about isn't the objective truth but the political direction of society its want to push to pander to the core readership, for better or worse
Here is a thread on George Orwell famous essay on the Freedom of the Press, which was what he wanted as a preface to 1984 but edited out because it attacked the press.
Another great vote by California on Proposition 19. To understand this, we must go back to Prop 13, which basically is property tax in CA that's 1-2% of purchase value per yr (yes, pretty high) & the increase is capped by inflation.
As property prices in California go up by double digits but inflation by less, then the assessed value of the property & the tax rate is not AT MARKET VALUE.
Low property taxes = inventive to not sell ur house & move b/c u'll get taxed on 1-2% of market price vs price ages ago.
So what? The unfair thing is this, say your parents were just teachers but they bought a house in Malibu say 40 years ago when it was dirt cheap & now worth say 50 million dollars. Before Prop 19, u'd inherit their cheap tax rate too & that's rather unfair as new buyers pay more.
Susan Rice'll have to be confirmed by the Senate that is now 50 Republican vs 46 Democrats (48 if we count the independents that will lean D anyway). That means they have to take 2 seats in Georgia on 5 January 2020 to gain 50-50 to give Kamala Harris the deciding vote. Unlikely.
All the GOP has to do is gain 1/2 seat to retain & both GOP candidates led the race but didn't have >50% so we have runoffs. The losing side is more motivated to vote so odds of the Democrats pulling a "Blue Wave" are low.
Democrats'll have house at smallest margin in 18 yrs.
Question: Why is Susan Rice considered soft on China?
Did u know that she was considered a replacement for Hillary Clinton in 2012 but due to controversy related to Benghazi that she withdrew. Her comments about the event made people think she misled the public.