Voters’ perceptions of the economy are starting to flip along partisan lines
I mean, no shit. People act like partisanship is arbitrary, but it isn’t. We fundamentally disagree about what economic policies, or even which economic systems are best. If you think unregulated, free-market capitalism is best, you’re going to be happiest when the free-market capitalist party is in power. If you’re a neoliberal, you’re going to be happiest when the neoliberals are in power, if you’re a social democrat, you’re going to be happiest when the social democrats are in power. If you’re a socialist, you’re going to be happiest when the socialists are in power.
They also disagree on basic reality and thinks things are good because of Trump when Trump isn’t even in power yet and things are exactly the same as yesterday. It’s not just policy preference, or even regular politics, it’s cult behavior.
they perceive things as better because right wing propaganda pumps people full of negative emotions so they’ll vote right, and now that the election is over, they don’t need to be made to feel scared all the time
I think things are better because the guy who was talking about the rates of chronic disease now gets to dictate health policy. I’m excited because the only politician to ever mention the issue most important to me — diet and health — just got elected.
if you think rfk is gonna make us all healthier with the powers of raw milk and no vaccines, i have a bridge i’d like to sell you. it goes to teribithia
Or you get even more nuanced and say unregulated free market is best only on the frontier of emerging new market sectors, and that areas we depend on should be heavily regulated, socialized, and run at cost for the public for free supported by tax dollars.
Have different systems for different things depending on which works best for what.
Nuance is important, but it’s also difficult for laypeople. Not because they’re unintelligent, necessarily, but because they haven’t studied and trained like experts have. That’s why we have to be able to rely on experts. But, deferring to the authority of experts means giving up at least some power. I think that can work when there’s trust between the experts and the laypeople, but when trust is lost, laypeople will no longer respect the authority of experts. That’s what the experts, the “elites” have to understand: their expertise gives them authority, and with authority comes power, and, well, as uncle Ben would say, with power comes responsibility, and accountability. I don’t think the experts of today take their responsibility seriously enough, nor do I think they take proper accountability.
I say it’s the opposite. Given that markets distribute more reliably and equitably than any other system including direct redistribution of goods and services, it should be considered more heinous to distort markets around things we need.
Healthcare and education are two markets that have been royally fucked (in terms of access to affordable options for poor people) by government attempts to do the opposite. We decide something’s too important to leave open, so we start dumping money into aid programs, and prices absolutely skyrocket.
Oh and housing too. Dems were talking about offering up to $X of down payment assistance on houses. Provide buyers with government money to help them buy this thing we’ve decided people cannot be without. Same thing we’ve been doing for decades in education and healthcare. Same thing that has driven both those markets into ridiculously high prices, and created massive ranks for debtors from the lower class in both of those.
Subsidized demand drives prices up. It closes the door to market access for lower income individuals and forces them to use the government assistance to get access.
I mean, no shit. People act like partisanship is arbitrary, but it isn’t. We fundamentally disagree about what economic policies, or even which economic systems are best. If you think unregulated, free-market capitalism is best, you’re going to be happiest when the free-market capitalist party is in power. If you’re a neoliberal, you’re going to be happiest when the neoliberals are in power, if you’re a social democrat, you’re going to be happiest when the social democrats are in power. If you’re a socialist, you’re going to be happiest when the socialists are in power.
They also disagree on basic reality and thinks things are good because of Trump when Trump isn’t even in power yet and things are exactly the same as yesterday. It’s not just policy preference, or even regular politics, it’s cult behavior.
they perceive things as better because right wing propaganda pumps people full of negative emotions so they’ll vote right, and now that the election is over, they don’t need to be made to feel scared all the time
I think things are better because the guy who was talking about the rates of chronic disease now gets to dictate health policy. I’m excited because the only politician to ever mention the issue most important to me — diet and health — just got elected.
if you think rfk is gonna make us all healthier with the powers of raw milk and no vaccines, i have a bridge i’d like to sell you. it goes to teribithia
The article doesn’t say people think the economy is better now. It just says they “feel better about” the economy.
Ok but why
Or you get even more nuanced and say unregulated free market is best only on the frontier of emerging new market sectors, and that areas we depend on should be heavily regulated, socialized, and run at cost for the public for free supported by tax dollars.
Have different systems for different things depending on which works best for what.
Noting should ever be completely unregulated. Humans are the worst.
Nuance is important, but it’s also difficult for laypeople. Not because they’re unintelligent, necessarily, but because they haven’t studied and trained like experts have. That’s why we have to be able to rely on experts. But, deferring to the authority of experts means giving up at least some power. I think that can work when there’s trust between the experts and the laypeople, but when trust is lost, laypeople will no longer respect the authority of experts. That’s what the experts, the “elites” have to understand: their expertise gives them authority, and with authority comes power, and, well, as uncle Ben would say, with power comes responsibility, and accountability. I don’t think the experts of today take their responsibility seriously enough, nor do I think they take proper accountability.
I say it’s the opposite. Given that markets distribute more reliably and equitably than any other system including direct redistribution of goods and services, it should be considered more heinous to distort markets around things we need.
Healthcare and education are two markets that have been royally fucked (in terms of access to affordable options for poor people) by government attempts to do the opposite. We decide something’s too important to leave open, so we start dumping money into aid programs, and prices absolutely skyrocket.
Oh and housing too. Dems were talking about offering up to $X of down payment assistance on houses. Provide buyers with government money to help them buy this thing we’ve decided people cannot be without. Same thing we’ve been doing for decades in education and healthcare. Same thing that has driven both those markets into ridiculously high prices, and created massive ranks for debtors from the lower class in both of those.
Subsidized demand drives prices up. It closes the door to market access for lower income individuals and forces them to use the government assistance to get access.