This is an excerpt from my working paper which examines how contemporary economic realities challenge conventional price formation models. Traditional price theory, rooted in neoclassical equilibrium models, struggles to explain modern markets characterized by digital platforms, behavioral anomalies, and network effects. Rather than viewing prices solely as equilibrium outcomes, this section explores price as an information system and coordination mechanism shaped by institutional contexts and evolutionary market processes, proposing alternative approaches that better capture the dynamic nature of pricing in today’s economy.
III. Methodological Framework
A. Philosophical Methodology
This research engages with the critical realist tradition in economic philosophy (Lawson, 1997; Fleetwood, 2017) while incorporating elements of pragmatist inquiry (Dewey, 1938; Hodgson, 2004) to examine how social outcomes are intrinsically embedded within price mechanisms. By adopting this philosophical stance, the investigation transcends the positivistsโ limitations that have dominated mainstream economic methodology and artificially separated social dimensions from market valuation processes.
Methodological Rationale and Research Design
The methodology employs a dual approach combining narrative explication and formal econometric analysisโa mixed-methods design that aligns with what Downward and Mearman (2007) term “critical triangulation.” This approach recognizes that economic phenomena exist in open systems characterized by complex causality that cannot be adequately captured through purely deductive or inductive methods alone.
Narrative methodologies in economics have been increasingly recognized for their capacity to reveal dimensions of economic reasoning that formal models often obscure (McCloskey, 1990; Morgan, 2012). As Akerlof and Snower (2016, p. 23) argue, “Narrative economics provides a framework for understanding how stories that may have little grounding in reality nevertheless influence economic behavior.” This research employs narrative not merely as illustration but as a methodological tool to uncover how social dimensions are intrinsically incorporated into economic decision-making rather than treated as external considerations.
The research design progresses through three methodological stages:
Narrative case analysis of micro-level economic decisions where social costs and benefits are endogenously incorporated into price mechanisms
Systematic examination of market-level pricing phenomena that demonstrate social valuation integration
Econometric analysis using hedonic pricing models to formalize and quantify the incorporation of purported “externalities” within price
This triangulated approach provides methodological robustness by examining the phenomenon across multiple scales and through complementary epistemological lenses.
Market Integration of Health and Productivity Benefits
Consider the small business owner contemplating providing flu vaccinations for all employees at a cost of $50 per person. This case exemplifies what Hodgson (2013) identifies as the “reconstitutive downward causation” between institutional structures and individual agency. Conventional economic framing, following Williamson’s (1979) transaction cost analysis, might characterize this as either addressing an externality or reducing monitoring costs. However, this framework artificially separates the transaction into discrete “economic” and “social” components.
Following Sen’s (1977) critique of the rational fool construct, we can observe that the business owner engages in a multi-dimensional calculation that already incorporates social costs and benefits into their decision-making process. The owner calculates that seasonal influenza typically results in X hours of lost labor annually, representing not only direct wage costs but also diminished productivity, potential transmission to other employees, and compromised service to customers.
This integration happens not through external regulatory mandates but through what Davis (2003, p. 974) terms the “socially embedded individual” making decisions that intrinsically incorporate both private and social dimensions. The methodological significance of this observation lies in recognizing that the rational economic actor has not abandoned self-interest but rather operates with what Etzioni (1988) terms “I & We” paradigm that transcends artificial boundaries between private and social benefits.
Consumer Valuation of Production Standards
The organic food market provides another methodologically significant case. When consumers willingly pay premium prices for organic products, conventional economics often characterizes this through what Vatn and Bromley (1997) identify as the “commodification of externalities.” However, this methodological framing imposes an artificial separation that does not reflect the actual valuation process.
Following Callon’s (1998) analysis of market devices and Zelizer’s (2012) work on valuation practices, we can recognize that consumers paying a surcharge for organic certification are expressing a valuation that inherently includes both private benefits and social benefits. The price differential between conventional and organic products represents what Anderson and Holcombe (2013) term “integrated social valuation”โa comprehensive valuation where social dimensions are not external to the market but constitute an intrinsic component of the value proposition itself.
Methodologically, this challenges the ontological separation between “market values” and “social values” that has dominated economic analysis since Pigou’s (1920) formulation of externality theory. The organic certification standard operates as what Star and Griesemer (1989) identify as a “boundary object” that allows coordination between different social worlds without requiring consensus about precise meaningsโa methodological perspective that permits more nuanced understanding of how social values become embedded in price mechanisms.
Natural Integration of Health, Environmental, and Safety Considerations
These examples illustrate a methodological approach to understanding markets not as fundamentally incomplete systems requiring external correction but as complex valuation mechanisms capable of incorporating multiple dimensions of value. This approach aligns with MacIntyre’s (1984) critique of compartmentalization in modern social thought and Polanyi’s (1944/2001) concept of embeddedness, challenging the philosophical premise that social costs and benefits exist outside market mechanisms.
This methodological perspective diverges from both neoclassical approaches that treat social factors as externalities and from heterodox approaches that reject market valuation altogether. Instead, it aligns with recent developments in socio-economics (Etzioni, 2003; Hodgson, 2019) that recognize the inherent integration of social and economic dimensions in human decision-making.
The narrative understanding outlined above finds formal analytical complement in hedonic pricing models, following Rosen’s (1974) foundational work. This methodological approach decomposes price into its constituent value components without imposing artificial separations between “economic” and “social” factors.
Anderson’s recent study, “Wind Turbines, Shadow Flicker, and Real Estate Values” (2024), provides empirical evidence of how economic actors endogenously incorporate what conventional economics would term “externalities” directly into price mechanisms. The methodological significance of this approach lies in its capacity to quantify valuation components without presuming their ontological separation.
This research employs the hedonic pricing methodology with particular attention to what Heckman and Singer (2017) identify as “causal pluralism”โrecognizing that price adjustments for social factors represent not market failures but rather evidence of markets’ capacity to incorporate complex, multi-dimensional valuations. Following Mรคki’s (2009) discussion of models as isolations and surrogate systems, the hedonic approach allows us to isolate and examine specific components of valuation while recognizing their inherent integration within actual market processes.
Methodological Limitations and Reflexivity
This methodological approach is not without limitations. The narrative cases, while illustrative, cannot capture the full range of market behaviors, and there remains the potential for selection bias in the cases examined. The hedonic pricing models, while powerful, rely on assumptions about market efficiency and information availability that may not fully hold in practice (Bartik & Smith, 1987; Kuminoff et al., 2010).
Additionally, as Bourdieu (1990) emphasizes, researcher reflexivity must acknowledge that the conceptual frameworks we employ shape the phenomena we observe. The methodological challenge lies in distinguishing between artificially imposed conceptual separations and meaningful analytical distinctionsโa challenge this research addresses through methodological triangulation and critical engagement with underlying philosophical assumptions.
In summary, this research employs a methodologically pluralist approach that combines narrative explication and formal hedonic pricing analysis within a critical realist philosophical framework. This approach enables a reconstruction of our understanding of how price mechanisms already incorporate social dimensions of value, challenging the artificial separation between private and social components that has dominated economic thought.
This is an excerpt from my working paper which examines how contemporary economic realities challenge conventional price formation models. Traditional price theory, rooted in neoclassical equilibrium models, struggles to explain modern markets characterized by digital platforms, behavioral anomalies, and network effects. Rather than viewing prices solely as equilibrium outcomes, this section explores price as an information system and coordination mechanism shaped by institutional contexts and evolutionary market processes, proposing alternative approaches that better capture the dynamic nature of pricing in today’s economy.
I think this section needs some more work. But here’s what we have so far:
II. Literature Review
A. Mainstream Economic Philosophy Foundations
The philosophical foundations of mainstream economic theory have been constructed upon a series of conceptual separations that artificially divide the economic from the social, the private from the public, and the individual from the collective. This review traces these separations through key philosophical traditions in economic thought, examining how they have shaped our understanding of price mechanisms and market functioning.
The Neoclassical Framework and Methodological Individualism
The neoclassical paradigm, beginning with Marshall (1890/1920) and formalized by Samuelson (1947), established methodological individualism as the dominant analytical approach to economic phenomena. This philosophical stance treats social aggregates as reducible to the actions of autonomous utility-maximizing individuals whose preferences are taken as given. As Arrow (1994, p. 1) acknowledges, “It is a touchstone of accepted economics that all explanations must run in terms of the actions and reactions of individuals.”
This methodological commitment has profound implications for price theory. Within the neoclassical framework, prices emerge from the aggregation of individual utility functions, with social dimensions treated as externalitiesโphenomena that exist outside the core market mechanism. Pigou’s (1920) seminal work on welfare economics formalized this separation, positioning social costs as divergences between private and social valuations that require correction through policy interventions. This philosophical framing fundamentally shapes how economists conceptualize market processes, treating the social as external to rather than constitutive of economic valuation.
Interestingly, even as neoclassical economics rigorously applies methodological individualism, it implicitly relies on group concepts without adequately defining them. Markets, firms, industriesโthese collective entities serve as the backdrop for individual decisions, yet their constitutive nature remains undertheorized. It is as if economic theory performs an elaborate mimetic gesture, tracing the outlines of social structures while focusing exclusively on the individuals within them, like a mime whose white-gloved hands demarcate invisible boundaries that audiences must imagine rather than observe directly.
Public Choice Theory and Rational Actor Models
The public choice tradition, exemplified by Buchanan and Tullock (1962), extends methodological individualism into the realm of political decision-making. By applying rational actor models to public policy, this approach treats political processes as aggregations of individual utility calculations rather than expressions of collective values. As Buchanan (1984, p. 13) argues, “There is no organic entity called ‘society’ that exists independently of the individuals who compose it.”
This philosophical stance reinforces the separation between economic and social dimensions by treating political processes themselves as marketsโmechanisms for aggregating individual preferences rather than constructing collective meanings. While providing valuable insights into institutional incentives, this approach systematically marginalizes the embedded nature of economic decision-making within social contexts.
Again, the public choice tradition alludes to groupsโvoters, interest groups, bureaucraciesโwhile consistently reducing them to collections of utility-maximizing individuals. The collective dimensions that give these groups meaning and coherence are acknowledged as backdrop but rarely examined as constitutive elements of the analysis itself. The mime continues to trace invisible boundaries without substantiating the spaces they enclose.
Transaction Cost Economics and Institutional Analysis
Williamson’s (1975, 1985) transaction cost economics represents a significant extension of economic analysis into institutional structures, examining how organizations emerge to reduce the costs of market exchange. While acknowledging that economic activities occur within institutional contexts, this approach maintains the philosophical separation between economic and social dimensions by treating institutions primarily as efficiency-enhancing mechanisms rather than socially embedded practices.
As Williamson (1985, p. 18) argues, “Transaction cost economics attempts to explain how trading partners choose, from the set of feasible institutional alternatives, the arrangement that protects their relationship-specific investments at the least cost.” This framing maintains the priority of efficiency considerations while treating social dimensions as constraints rather than constitutive elements of economic organization.
Despite its focus on organizations and institutions, transaction cost economics continues to treat these collective entities as instrumental arrangements serving individual interests rather than examining how they constitute economic actors themselves. The group remains an instrumental backdropโa cost-minimizing solution to coordination problemsโrather than a constitutive dimension of economic reality. The mime’s gestures outline organizational boundaries without examining how these boundaries shape the identities and preferences of those within them.
Behavioral Economics and the Modified Individual
Behavioral economics, pioneered by Kahneman and Tversky (1979) and expanded by Thaler (1991) and others, challenges the rational actor model by identifying systematic deviations from utility maximization. While this approach introduces psychological complexity into economic analysis, it maintains the philosophical separation between economic and social dimensions by treating these deviations as cognitive biases rather than expressions of social embeddedness.
As Thaler and Sunstein (2008, p. 6) argue in their influential work on nudge theory, “The false assumption is that almost all people, almost all of the time, make choices that are in their best interest or at the very least are better than the choices that would be made by someone else.” This framing maintains the philosophical commitment to individual choice while acknowledging limitations in cognitive processing, without fundamentally challenging the separation between economic and social dimensions.
Here too, the social dimension appears as an influence on individual decision-making rather than a constitutive element of economic action. Groups function as reference points that bias individual judgments rather than fields of practice that constitute economic meaning. The mime continues to gesture at social influences without substantiating the collaborative production of economic reality that these influences represent.
B. Critical Theoretical Intersections
Against these mainstream approaches, several critical traditions have challenged the separation between economic and social dimensions, offering theoretical resources for reconceptualizing price mechanisms as inherently incorporating both private and social valuations.
Social Capital Theory: From Group Phenomenon to Individual Asset
Loury’s (1976) groundbreaking paper, “A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences,” introduced social capital as a group-contained phenomenon that shaped economic opportunities. This original conception recognized the embedded nature of economic action within social contexts, particularly in explaining persistent racial disparities. As Loury (1976, p. 176) argued, “The social context within which individual maturation occurs strongly conditions what otherwise equally capable individuals can achieve.”
However, as the concept evolved through Coleman (1988), Putnam (1993), and Lin (2001), it increasingly shifted toward what might be termed an “instrumental network” approachโtreating social capital as a resource that individuals could access and deploy strategically rather than a field of relationships in which they were embedded. Coleman (1988, p. S98) exemplifies this shift in defining social capital as “a variety of entities with two elements in common: They all consist of some aspect of social structures, and they facilitate certain actions of actorsโwhether persons or corporate actorsโwithin the structure.”
This conceptual migration represents a critical juncture in economic philosophy, where a potentially transformative concept that recognized the inherent embeddedness of economic action was gradually reframed to fit within methodological individualism. The group-level phenomenon that Loury identified became increasingly individualizedโa network resource rather than a constitutive field of practice.
Notably, throughout this evolution, the central concept of “the group” remains persistently undefined. Social capital theorists allude to communities, networks, and associations without developing a rigorous philosophical account of what constitutes a group beyond the aggregation of connected individuals. The mime traces ever more elaborate networks of connection without substantiating what makes these networks constitutive rather than merely instrumental.
Embeddedness and Economic Sociology
Granovetter’s (1985) influential paper, “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness,” directly challenged the separation between economic and social dimensions by arguing that economic actions are “embedded in concrete, ongoing systems of social relations.” This perspective reframed economic behavior as inherently social rather than merely influenced by social factors.
As Granovetter (1985, p. 487) argues, “Actors do not behave or decide as atoms outside a social context, nor do they adhere slavishly to a script written for them by the particular intersection of social categories that they happen to occupy.” This recognition that economic action is constitutively social rather than merely constrained by social factors represents a fundamental philosophical challenge to the separation paradigm.
Similarly, Zelizer’s (2012) work on “relational work” examines how economic transactions constitute social relationships rather than merely reflecting them. As she argues, “Economic transactions connect persons and establish meaning-laden relationships.” This perspective challenges the philosophical separation between economic and social dimensions by recognizing their mutual constitution.
Yet even within economic sociology, there remains a tendency to allude to social structures without developing a rich philosophical account of their ontological status. The mime gestures toward “concrete, ongoing systems of social relations” without fully substantiating how these systems exist beyond the interactions of individuals within them.
Ecological Economics and Systems Thinking
Ecological economics, developed by Georgescu-Roegen (1971), Daly (1977), and others, challenges the separation between economic and ecological systems by positioning the economy as a subsystem of broader biophysical processes. This approach recognizes the inherent embeddedness of economic activities within ecological contexts, challenging the artificial boundaries that conventional economics draws around market processes.
As Daly (1990, p. 1) argues, “The economy is a subsystem of the finite biosphere that supports it.” This simple yet profound observation challenges the philosophical foundations of mainstream economics by recognizing that economic activities are intrinsically rather than accidentally connected to their ecological contexts.
More recently, Raworth’s (2017) “doughnut economics” has extended this systems thinking approach, arguing for a reconceptualization of economic theory that recognizes social and ecological dimensions as constitutive boundaries of economic activity rather than external constraints. As she argues, economic theory must be “embedded in society and in nature, and that’s inherently connective.”
However, even these systemic approaches often maintain a distinction between “the economy” and its social and ecological contexts, preserving a conceptual separation even while arguing for integration. The mime traces the connections between systems while maintaining their distinct identities, without fully examining how these identities themselves are mutually constituted.
Feminist Economics and the Critique of Separative Self
Feminist economic philosophy has provided some of the most profound challenges to the separation paradigm through its critique of the “separative self” that underpins mainstream economic theory. Nelson (2006), Folbre (1994), and others have questioned the philosophical assumptions about autonomy and independence that shape conventional economic analysis.
As Nelson (2006, p. 30) argues, “The image of economic man as self-interested, autonomous, and rational creates a distorted view of economic life. Most economic decisions and actions are undertaken by people who are deeply connected to others.” This critique challenges not merely the assumptions of rational choice theory but the deeper philosophical conception of the economic actor as fundamentally separate from social contexts.
Folbre’s (1994) work on care economics further demonstrates how economic decisions inherently incorporate social dimensions, particularly in domains traditionally excluded from economic analysis. As she argues, “The invisible hand is all thumbs when it comes to care.” This observation highlights how conventional economic frameworks systematically marginalize activities where social dimensions are most evident.
Yet even these critical perspectives often maintain a focus on individualsโalbeit connected and caring onesโwithout fully developing an alternative ontology of the social. The mime gestures toward connection and care without fully substantiating the collective dimensions these concepts imply.
C. Syntheses and Gaps in Current Literature
The literature reveals both promising directions for reconceptualizing the relationship between economic and social dimensions and persistent gaps that the current research aims to address.
Toward an Integrated Understanding
Several theoretical developments suggest potential pathways toward a more integrated understanding of price mechanisms. Lawson’s (2007) critical realist approach challenges the ontological assumptions of mainstream economics, arguing for a recognition of economic phenomena as emerging from “structured interrelationships in practices and positions.” This philosophical stance aligns with the current research’s emphasis on the inherently social nature of price mechanisms.
Similarly, Hodgson’s (2019) recent work on institutional economics provides theoretical resources for understanding how social institutions constitute economic behaviors rather than merely constraining them. As he argues, “Institutions not only constrain options, they establish the very criteria by which people discover their preferences.” This insight suggests how social dimensions might be understood as intrinsic to rather than separate from price mechanisms.
The Missing Ontology of the Group
Despite these promising directions, a significant gap remains in the philosophical understanding of how social dimensions operate within price mechanisms. Across divergent theoretical traditionsโfrom neoclassical economics to critical alternativesโthere persists a tendency to allude to groups without developing a rich philosophical account of their ontological status.
This mimetic quality of economic theoryโgesturing toward social structures while focusing primarily on individuals within themโrepresents a critical limitation in current approaches. Like a mime whose white-gloved hands trace invisible boundaries, economic theory repeatedly outlines social dimensions without substantiating them philosophically. Markets, firms, communities, networksโthese collective entities appear throughout economic literature without rigorous examination of their constitutive nature.
The present research aims to address this gap by developing a philosophical framework that recognizes price mechanisms as inherently social institutions rather than merely technical devices. By reconnecting with Loury’s original insight that social capital represents a group-contained phenomenon, this research seeks to recover and extend a more integrated understanding of how social dimensions operate not around but within price mechanisms themselves.
As the subsequent sections will demonstrate, this reconceptualization has profound implications for how we understand market processes, offering a more coherent theoretical account and opening new possibilities for addressing complex socioeconomic challenges through a more sophisticated understanding of how prices already incorporate both private and social dimensions of value.
This is an excerpt from my paper which examines how contemporary economic realities challenge conventional price formation models. Traditional price theory, rooted in neoclassical equilibrium models, struggles to explain modern markets characterized by digital platforms, behavioral anomalies, and network effects. Rather than viewing prices solely as equilibrium outcomes, this section explores price as an information system and coordination mechanism shaped by institutional contexts and evolutionary market processes, proposing alternative approaches that better capture the dynamic nature of pricing in today’s economy.
A. Research Problem and Contextual Landscape
Contemporary economic theory has constructed an artificial divide between private and social valuations that fundamentally mischaracterizes the nature of price mechanisms. The prevailing paradigm treats externalities and social costs as phenomena that exist outside market pricing structuresโanomalies that require correction through policy interventions. This perspective has led to theoretical frameworks that fail to recognize how price already incorporates social dimensions of value.
This paper challenges this dominant position by advancing the thesis that price inherently accounts for social costs and benefits, functioning as Price = Value Private + Social. The conventional framing treats social costs as separate from private market transactions, focusing exclusively on externalities and spillovers as market failures requiring intervention. However, this approach overlooks crucial evidence that market participants routinely anticipate and internalize social dimensions in their valuation processes.
Several critical shortcomings emerge from the current theoretical framework. First, mainstream economics acknowledges that stock prices anticipate political actions and regulatory changes, yet fails to systematically incorporate this anticipatory social pricing into its core models. Second, empirical evidence demonstrates consumers’ willingness to pay emotional surcharges for products with perceived social benefits, yet this phenomenon remains marginalized in standard economic analysis. Third, economists typically wait for social costs to manifest as measurable externalities before acknowledging their existence, rather than recognizing their presence within the price mechanism itself.
This theoretical blind spot can be traced to a pivotal shift in economic philosophy that occurred following Glenn Loury’s groundbreaking 1976 paper, “A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences,” which introduced the concept of social capital as a group-contained phenomenon. The subsequent evolution of social capital theoryโthrough James Coleman, Robert Putnam, Nan Lin, and Mark Granovetterโgradually reframed social elements as external to market mechanisms rather than intrinsic to them. This conceptual migration has created artificial boundaries between private and social valuations that distort our understanding of how markets function.
By examining this historical trajectory and proposing a reconceptualization of price theory that acknowledges the inherent social dimensions of value, this research aims to resolve theoretical inconsistencies in contemporary economic philosophy and develop a more coherent understanding of market dynamics. The implications extend beyond theoretical discourse, offering potential pathways to address pressing socioeconomic challenges through a more sophisticated understanding of how social costs and benefits are already embedded within price mechanisms.
B. Theoretical Positioning
The philosophical underpinnings of twentieth-century economic analysis were largely constructed upon a reductive conception of human behaviorโthe rational actor paradigm, which posited economic agents as autonomous individuals pursuing narrowly defined self-interest. This framework, most prominently championed by neoclassical economists, created theoretical models that excluded the complex social dimensions inherent in economic exchange. By privileging methodological individualism, mainstream economics systematically marginalized the communal aspects of human decision-making and the social embeddedness of market interactions.
The 1970s marked a critical turning point with scholars like Kenneth Arrow, Gary Becker, and others beginning to interrogate this limited conception by examining economic trades within previously neglected domains such as family structures and racial dynamics. This represented an important, though incomplete, expansion of economic thought. While these analyses acknowledged that social factors could influence economic decisions, they still fundamentally positioned these factors as external constraints or modifications to an essentially self-interested calculus.
This paper advances a more radical philosophical proposition: economic actors do not merely respond to social factors as external influences but fundamentally incorporate communal objectives alongside personal gain when allocating their labor and resources. This perspective challenges the artificial separation between individual and collective interests that has dominated economic philosophy. Rather than viewing social considerations as secondary modifications to self-interested behavior, this research argues that economic actors integrate multiple value dimensionsโpersonal, familial, communal, and societalโinto their decision-making processes simultaneously and intrinsically.
This theoretical reframing has profound implications for how we understand price mechanisms. When economic actors integrate communal objectives into their decision calculus, the resulting prices already embed both private and social valuations. Market exchanges thus represent complex negotiations of value that transcend the narrow confines of individualistic utility maximization. By recognizing this inherent integration, we can begin to develop more sophisticated theoretical tools that accurately capture the multidimensional nature of economic exchange.
The proposed philosophical framework does not reject the insights gained from examining self-interested behavior, but rather situates such behavior within a more comprehensive understanding of human action that acknowledges our fundamental social embeddedness. This perspective builds upon but substantially extends the work begun by Arrow and others, offering a philosophical foundation for reconceptualizing how social dimensions operate not merely around but within economic decision-making and price formation.
This is an excerpt from my paper which examines how contemporary economic realities challenge conventional price formation models. Traditional price theory, rooted in neoclassical equilibrium models, struggles to explain modern markets characterized by digital platforms, behavioral anomalies, and network effects. Rather than viewing prices solely as equilibrium outcomes, this section explores price as an information system and coordination mechanism shaped by institutional contexts and evolutionary market processes, proposing alternative approaches that better capture the dynamic nature of pricing in today’s economy.
I primed Claude with my ideas on price and hereโs the abstract we came up with.
Abstract
This paper challenges the conventional economic paradigm that artificially separates private and social valuations in price mechanisms. Through a critical examination of mainstream economic philosophy and its historical evolution, I argue that market participants routinely incorporate social dimensions directly into their valuations, functioning as Price = Value Private + Social. The research traces how economic theory shifted from Glenn Loury’s original conceptualization of social capital as a group-contained phenomenon toward increasingly individualistic interpretations that marginalized the embedded nature of economic decisions. Drawing on critical realist philosophy and integrating insights from economic sociology, feminist economics, and ecological economics, I develop a theoretical framework that reconceptualizes price as a social institution intrinsically incorporating both private and social dimensions rather than requiring external correction for “externalities.” Through comparative analysis with conventional frameworks and empirical investigation using hedonic pricing models, the paper demonstrates how this integrated understanding resolves theoretical inconsistencies in contemporary economics while offering more coherent approaches to complex socioeconomic challenges. The implications extend beyond theoretical discourse to policy design, suggesting a fundamental shift from external correction to institutional design that recognizes the inherently social nature of market valuation.
Trump is irritating, bombastic, and a general pain in the patuti to all spectrums of political ideology– but you must admit that his unconventional methods get people looking at issues from new angles. Who would have thought that those on the left would become free traders? They oppose Trump’s tariffs meant to protect the American worker (or let’s avoid reading too much into the mind of the art of the deal maker).
And there’s more to see of the unseen. Writers are unveiling things like ‘hidden costs.’ In this super article by Luis Garicano, The Myth of the Single Market, the author proposes that national customs have always charged an override on goods and services that move across European borders.
The IMF puts the hidden cost of trading goods inside the EU at the equivalent of a 45% tariff. For services the figure climbs to 110%,ย higher than Trumpโs โLiberation dayโย tariffs on Chinese importsโmeasures many saw as a near-embargo.
We advocate for the idea that social costs are part of the price at Home-Economic. They are hidden only in the sense that they are not talked about. It’s not polite to say to someone that they paid a luxury/status surcharge for their watch because they want to show off, even if Veblen said it was so a hundred years ago. People don’t want to think about whether they selected a bigger house at the expense of a longer commute, which takes their time away from their children. These trades in social commitments are sheltered from the glaring eyes of sharpened pencils and numerical analysis.
But that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. Social costs and surpluses have always been a part of price. Tariffs are just the name for the formalized process of collecting and directing them.
Thomas Sowellโs terms surrogate decision-maker and hypothetical individuals seem a bit wry.
In Rawls, the locus of discretion is the surrogate decision-maker “society” which can choose the trade-off collectively and arrange results in accordance with principles of justice these principles being derived in explicitly rationalistic terms. While the principles of justice are logically derived from the presumed preferences of hypothetical individuals, “in the original position” of the yet unborn, deciding what kind of world they would like to inhabit, the locus of discretion in applying these principles is “society” or a collective “we” โ that is, surrogate decision-makers.
I thought the US Census was a factual thing. It is meant to report data, not succumb to opinion. This headline, however, which is being used nationwide as a rally call against housing markets, is a product of capture.
The census people want us to believe that nearly half of renters are in financial straits.
How did they get this number, and why does it seem high when you look around in your life and donโt see that half of the people you know or come into contact with are shouldering the pressure of a cost-burdened housing expense? The threshold used to determine financial distress occurs when a household spends more than 30 percent of its income on housing expenses. It is said that this is an industry norm– meaning lenders of all stripes rely on this benchmark when determining creditworthiness.
That’s not to say that lenders do not approve borrowers with a higher debt-to-income level. They do. In fact, they will lend up to 50% in situational circumstances. Note that up to these levels, the financial institution is still anticipating that the loan will be repaid. Delinquencies are not the objective in the lending business. (Here’s a post on debt-to-income ratios from a few days ago.)
But that’s not what this headline implies. According to the census, 30-50% of the population is ‘burdened.’ Perhaps one could let that go to semantics. Only the ratio calculated in this case differs from the industry norm. This ratio includes utilities as a monthly expense, where the industry standard does not. So, how does the added cost of heating bills, electricity, water, and possibly internet (I’m not sure what the American Community Survey includes) adjust the threshold and push a larger share of the population over the 30% threshold?
The first thing to know is how a debt-to-income ratio is calculated. Take an average rental cost of $1300 a month. The monthly income amount for a 30% debt-to-income ratio is $4333/mo. If you add $139 in utility costs, everyone adjusts up 3%. An added monthly cost of $200 (say the respondent includes all their streaming options), then the debt-to-income ratio rounds up another cohort by 5%. It’s safe to say that the census is no longer using an industry standard by calculating ratios with additional monthly obligations.
Is the renter who likes streaming services cost-burdened or simply choosing an entertainment option? Is the renter who elects to pay a larger portion for rent to live on a metro line, forgo the cost of a car payment, and net out a lower monthly expense as a result, cost-burdened? Is the renter who selects a living option close enough to an ex-spouse to share custody and not pay child support cost burdened or cost savvy?
People arrange their monthly budgets all the time with savings and benefits that may not be readily apparent to the outside world. That’s the beauty of choice. As long as a market is loose enough for people to navigate to their best circumstances, they arrive at a combination that works in their best interest, reflecting all facets of their lives.
College students will undoubtedly pay more for rent than their income would seem to allow. That’s the reality of their stage of life. Seniors also fall into a different category of consumer than working adults. Many could be at a stage where their monthly living expenses may include food and care, while their monthly income may just be one source in their retirement plan for covering expenses at the end of life. Are these students octogenarians, cost-burdened, or simply living their lives as planned?
Affordability is a subjective measure. I question the Census’s objectives in publishing opinions on affordability in the housing markets. What’s next? Will we be told we canโt afford to take a vacation or to take the summer off to be with our kids? Or should the Census return to the way it was– a fact provider?
A debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is a financial metric that compares a personโs monthly debt payments to their gross monthly income, expressed as a percentage. Itโs calculated by dividing total recurring debt (e.g., mortgage, car loans, credit card payments, student loans) by gross income. For example, if someone earns $5,000 monthly and has $1,500 in debt payments, their DTI is 30% ($1,500 รท $5,000). In the real estate industry, DTI is a critical tool for assessing a borrowerโs ability to afford a mortgage, helping lenders evaluate loan repayment risk.
In real estate, lenders use two DTI ratios: the front-end DTI, which includes housing-related costs (principal, interest, taxes, insurance, or PITI), and the back-end DTI, which includes all debts. Conventional loans, backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, typically prefer a front-end DTI of 28% and a back-end DTI of 36%, though up to 45โ50% may be allowed with strong credit or reserves. FHA loans allow 31%/43%, and VA loans often cap at 41% total DTI. Lenders rely on DTI to ensure borrowers can manage mortgage payments alongside other obligations, reducing default risk. A lower DTI signals better financial health, often leading to loan approval or favorable terms.
However, thereโs leeway in how DTI reflects the true burden of payments on consumers. DTI is a standardized metric that doesnโt account for individual circumstances, such as high living costs, variable income, or discretionary spending. For instance, a 36% DTI may feel manageable for a high earner but burdensome for a low-income household with tight budgets. Utilities, often excluded from conventional DTI calculations, can significantly impact affordability, as seen in the ACSโs 30% housing cost burden metric, which includes utilities. Lenders may show flexibility by approving higher DTIs with compensating factors like substantial savings, excellent credit, or stable employment. Manual underwriting can also consider nuanced financial situations, offering more leeway than automated systems.
For consumers, DTIโs rigidity can misrepresent their financial reality. A single parent with childcare costs or someone in a high-cost area may struggle despite a โhealthyโ DTI. Conversely, frugal borrowers with high DTIs may handle payments comfortably. While DTI is a vital lending tool, its application requires context to truly understand the consumerโs payment burden.
Yesterday’s post with Grok, a rather long one for this humble site, was necessary to explore Thomas Sowellโs conceptualization of constrained and unconstrained framing versus the one present at this site of What is Public and What is Private. You can find the articles related to the distinction of how people behave when working on behalf of a cooperative effort versus a private one by searching Public in the search bar on the home page.
Sowell distinguishes between two visions that thinkers use to approach society’s well-being. He names them: the constrained and the unconstrained. Yet he leaves room for all parties to acknowledge the existence of both. One might think that a perspective may have resulted from the moment and the writer’s disposition. More importantly, the admission of both allows one to consider the possibility of a gradation of importance. Still, Grok disputes whether Sowell’s account can handle a melding of the two.
However, its success hinges on overcoming the visionsโ deep philosophical divide, which Sowell sees as nearly irreconcilable. The unconstrained visionโs North Star role risks dominating if not rigorously checked, as its moral urgency can overshadow constrained pragmatism. Conversely, overemphasizing private solutions might neglect systemic issues only public action can address. A robust institutional frameworkโperhaps decentralized governance with empirical feedbackโwould be crucial to balance these impulses.
But if one considered examples, for instance, if an actor had spent their forty-year adult career on Wall Street. Their window onto the world looks out predominantly over private affairs. The constraints and trade-off model make sense to them. That doesn’t mean they feel constrained in pursuing their passions. They would likely do anything for a child or their spouse’s health. Constraints be gone. In less dramatic circumstances, they may support the opera with no trade intended except in the pleasure of attending a performance.
Humans are complex. It’s not unreasonable to think they can act with dual motives. Bernie Sanders was recently criticised for flying in a private jet. Ayn Rand collected from the public purse. Abstract reasoning is fun, but life plays out in a mix of the public and the private.
In his book A Conflict of Vision, Thomas Sowell makes a very interesting distinction between thinkers who see desirable social outcomes derived through a system and those who foremost desire a pursuit of ideals. So I asked Grok if there was a compromise for these two characters, seemingly at odds.
Question: If you think of the system as operating by impulses of the private and the public, could their be a melding of the two if one group appeared more prominently when a private solution bore more weight (the constrained) and whether the solution would be better solved with a public solution in which the unconstrained vision acts as a better North Star?
Grok:
Your question proposes a dynamic interplay between the constrained and unconstrained visions, as articulated by Thomas Sowell in A Conflict of Visions, by mapping them onto private (constrained) and public (unconstrained) impulses within a system. You ask whether these impulses could meld, with the constrained vision taking prominence when private solutions are more effective and the unconstrained vision serving as a guiding “North Star” for public solutions when they are better suited. This is an innovative synthesis, and while Sowellโs framework does not explicitly propose such a melding, it provides a foundation to explore this possibility. Below, Iโll analyze how this could work, the conditions for a successful melding, and the challenges, while addressing the private-public dynamic and the roles of the two visions.
Recap of Sowellโs Visions
Constrained Vision: Assumes human nature is limited and flawed, favoring private, decentralized solutions like markets and traditions that align with incentives and evolved wisdom. It prioritizes processes and trade-offs over idealized outcomes.
Unconstrained Vision: Assumes human nature is malleable and perfectible through reason, favoring public, deliberate interventions (e.g., government policies) to achieve moral goals like justice or equality. It prioritizes outcomes and rational planning.
Your proposal aligns the constrained vision with private impulses (e.g., individual initiative, markets) and the unconstrained vision with public impulses (e.g., collective action, government), suggesting a system where each vision dominates when its corresponding solutionโprivate or publicโis more effective.
Feasibility of a Melding
A melding of the constrained and unconstrained visions, with private solutions (constrained) taking precedence when they bear more weight and public solutions (unconstrained) guiding when better suited, is theoretically possible but requires careful design to balance the visionsโ differing assumptions and goals. Hereโs how this could work:
Dynamic Allocation Based on Problem Type:
Private Solutions (Constrained Vision): The constrained vision excels in contexts where decentralized, incentive-driven mechanisms are effective, such as economic innovation, consumer choice, or local problem-solving. For example:
Markets efficiently allocate resources (e.g., supply chains for goods) by harnessing individual self-interest, aligning with the constrained visionโs trust in spontaneous order.
Private charity or community organizations can address localized needs (e.g., food banks) without bureaucratic overhead.
In these cases, the system would prioritize private impulses, with the constrained visionโs skepticism of centralized control ensuring minimal public interference.
Public Solutions (Unconstrained Vision as North Star): The unconstrained vision is better suited for problems requiring collective action, long-term planning, or moral imperatives that markets cannot address, such as:
Public goods like infrastructure or national defense, where private incentives fail (e.g., free-rider problems).
Systemic inequalities (e.g., access to education or healthcare) that require coordinated reforms to achieve justice, a core unconstrained goal.
In these cases, the unconstrained visionโs focus on rational design and moral outcomes would guide public solutions, acting as a โNorth Starโ to set ambitious goals (e.g., universal literacy) while tempered by constrained insights on feasibility.
Hybrid Mechanisms:
A melded system could use hybrid mechanisms that blend private and public impulses, allowing the visions to complement each other:
Market-Based Public Policies: Policies like carbon pricing or voucher systems (e.g., school choice) combine constrained reliance on markets with unconstrained goals of environmental protection or equity.
Public-Private Partnerships: Infrastructure projects often involve private efficiency and public oversight, balancing constrained pragmatism with unconstrained ambition.
Incremental Reforms with Visionary Goals: The unconstrained vision could set long-term objectives (e.g., reducing poverty), while constrained processes (e.g., pilot programs, A/B testing) ensure practical implementation.
Example: The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) incentivizes work (constrained) while redistributing wealth to reduce poverty (unconstrained), showing how private incentives can serve public goals.
Decision Rules for Prominence:
The system would need criteria to determine when private or public solutions โbear more weightโ:
Empirical Evidence: Use data to assess effectiveness (e.g., cost-benefit analysis, outcome metrics). Constrained visionaries would favor this, but unconstrained visionaries could agree if it advances their goals.
Subsidiarity: Prioritize private/local solutions unless public intervention is demonstrably necessary, aligning with constrained skepticism of centralized power.
Moral Urgency: Allow the unconstrained vision to dominate when issues involve universal rights or systemic injustice (e.g., civil rights legislation), as these align with its moral North Star.
Example: In healthcare, private solutions (e.g., competitive insurance markets) might dominate for routine care, but public solutions (e.g., universal coverage for catastrophic illnesses) could take precedence to ensure equity.
Role of the Unconstrained Vision as a North Star:
The unconstrained visionโs strength is its ability to articulate aspirational goals (e.g., equality, sustainability) that inspire collective action. As a North Star, it provides direction for public solutions, ensuring they aim high rather than settling for status quo.
However, to avoid the unconstrained visionโs pitfalls (e.g., overreach, unintended consequences), it must be checked by constrained principles:
Feasibility Checks: Public plans should incorporate constrained insights on human incentives and knowledge limits (e.g., avoiding overly complex regulations).
Iterative Implementation: Large-scale public goals (e.g., climate action) should be pursued incrementally, with feedback loops to adjust plans, reflecting constrained pragmatism.
Example: The unconstrained vision might set a goal of carbon neutrality by 2050, but constrained mechanisms (e.g., market-based emissions trading) would guide implementation to maximize efficiency.
Conditions for Successful Melding
For this melding to work, several conditions must be met:
Mutual Respect: Both sides must acknowledge the otherโs strengths. Constrained visionaries must value the unconstrained visionโs moral clarity, while unconstrained visionaries must respect the constrained visionโs realism.
Shared Metrics: Agreement on measurable outcomes (e.g., poverty rates, GDP growth, health outcomes) allows both visions to evaluate solutions objectively, bridging their philosophical divide.
Institutional Flexibility: The system must allow experimentation (e.g., federalism, pilot programs) so private and public solutions can be tested and scaled based on results.
Pragmatic Leadership: Leaders must navigate ideological divides, framing solutions to appeal to both visions (e.g., presenting market reforms as tools for social justice).
Avoiding Ideological Purity: Both sides must resist dogmatic adherence to their vision, accepting hybrid approaches that may not fully align with their ideals.
Challenges to Melding
Sowellโs framework highlights why melding the visions is difficult:
Fundamental Incompatibilities:
The constrained vision sees human nature as fixed and flawed, distrusting grand public plans, while the unconstrained vision believes in human perfectibility through collective action. These assumptions clash, making agreement on when public or private solutions are โbetterโ contentious.
Example: Constrained visionaries might view public healthcare as inefficient, while unconstrained visionaries see it as a moral necessity, leading to stalemate.
Distrust of Motives:
Constrained visionaries may suspect public solutions mask power grabs, while unconstrained visionaries may view private solutions as perpetuating inequality. This distrust complicates cooperation.
Example: Debates over welfare often pit constrained concerns about dependency against unconstrained demands for social justice.
Unintended Consequences:
Unconstrained public solutions risk overreach (e.g., bureaucratic inefficiencies), while constrained private solutions may fail to address systemic issues (e.g., market failures in healthcare). Balancing these risks requires constant vigilance.
Example: A public education reform might aim for equity but create bloated bureaucracies, alienating constrained visionaries.
Polarization:
Sowell notes that ideological divides are deepened by emotional commitment to oneโs vision. In polarized climates, each side may prioritize winning over compromising, undermining the melding process.
Example: Political rhetoric framing markets as โgreedyโ or government as โtyrannicalโ entrenches division.
Defining โBetterโ Solutions:
Deciding when a private or public solution โbears more weightโ is subjective. Constrained visionaries prioritize efficiency and liberty, while unconstrained visionaries emphasize justice and equality, leading to disagreements over criteria.
Example: In environmental policy, constrained visionaries might favor private innovation (e.g., green tech), while unconstrained visionaries push for public regulation (e.g., emissions caps), with no clear metric for โbetter.โ
Sowellโs Perspective on Melding
Sowell does not explicitly propose a system like the one you describe, as A Conflict of Visions focuses on explaining ideological divides rather than resolving them. However, his emphasis on trade-offs, processes, and intellectual humility supports the idea of a dynamic interplay:
Trade-Offs: Sowellโs constrained leanings suggest that any melding would prioritize private solutions unless public intervention is clearly justified, aligning with your proposalโs conditional prominence.
Processes: He favors systemic processes (e.g., markets, rule of law) that allow experimentation, which could support a system where private and public impulses compete and coexist based on effectiveness.
Humility: Sowellโs call for understanding opposing visions implies that a melded system would require both sides to temper their ambitionsโconstrained visionaries embracing some public goals, unconstrained visionaries accepting private mechanisms.
Your proposal extends Sowellโs ideas by envisioning a system where the unconstrained visionโs moral aspirations guide public solutions without dominating private ones, a balance Sowell might endorse if constrained principles (e.g., incentives, limits) remain central.
Connection to Godwin and Condorcet
Since you previously asked about William Godwin and Condorcet, their unconstrained visions are relevant:
Godwin and Condorcet: Both exemplify the unconstrained vision, advocating rational, public solutions to perfect society (e.g., Godwinโs anarchism, Condorcetโs voting reforms). In your system, their ideas could serve as a North Star for public interventions, such as universal education or democratic reforms, but would need constrained checks (e.g., market-based delivery, incremental trials) to avoid utopian overreach.
Melding Example: Condorcetโs voting methods could guide public electoral reform (unconstrained), but private civic organizations might implement voter education (constrained), balancing idealism with practicality.
Practical Example of the Melded System
Consider climate change as a case study:
Private Impulse (Constrained): When private solutions bear more weight, the system prioritizes market innovations like renewable energy startups or carbon offset markets. The constrained vision ensures these are driven by profit motives and competition, avoiding regulatory overreach.
Public Impulse (Unconstrained as North Star): When public solutions are needed (e.g., global emissions agreements), the unconstrained vision sets ambitious goals (e.g., net-zero by 2050), guiding international cooperation and public investments in green infrastructure.
Melding: A carbon pricing system combines private incentives (firms reduce emissions to cut costs) with public goals (reducing global warming), with iterative adjustments based on outcomes. The constrained vision ensures efficiency, while the unconstrained vision keeps the moral imperative in view.
Critical Reflection
Your proposed system is a creative extension of Sowellโs framework, aligning private and public impulses with the visionsโ strengths. It could work by leveraging the constrained visionโs realism for private solutions and the unconstrained visionโs idealism for public ones, creating a flexible, outcome-driven system. However, its success hinges on overcoming the visionsโ deep philosophical divide, which Sowell sees as nearly irreconcilable. The unconstrained visionโs North Star role risks dominating if not rigorously checked, as its moral urgency can overshadow constrained pragmatism. Conversely, overemphasizing private solutions might neglect systemic issues only public action can address. A robust institutional frameworkโperhaps decentralized governance with empirical feedbackโwould be crucial to balance these impulses.
Conclusion
A melding of the constrained and unconstrained visions, with private solutions (constrained) prominent when they bear more weight and public solutions (unconstrained) guided by a moral North Star, is feasible within Sowellโs framework but requires careful implementation. By using empirical criteria, hybrid mechanisms, and flexible processes, the system could harness the strengths of both visions: the constrained visionโs efficiency and realism for private impulses, and the unconstrained visionโs moral clarity for public ones. Challenges include ideological distrust, differing priorities, and the risk of one vision overshadowing the other. Sowellโs emphasis on trade-offs and understanding supports this approach, though he would likely caution against overly optimistic synthesis given the visionsโ fundamental tensions.
Saint Augustine, born in 354 CE in Thagaste (modern-day Algeria), is one of the most influential Christian theologians and philosophers. An interesting fact about him is that before his conversion to Christianity at age 31, he lived a hedonistic lifestyle, indulging in pleasures and fathering a child out of wedlock. His mother, Monica, a devout Christian, prayed relentlessly for his conversion. Augustineโs dramatic shift came after a profound spiritual experience in a garden, where he heard a childโs voice urging him to โtake up and read,โ leading him to a Bible passage that transformed his life. His works, like Confessionsโone of the first autobiographiesโand City of God, shaped Western thought, blending Christian doctrine with classical philosophy, particularly Platonism.
I greatly enjoyed this post at Maximum Progress (by Max Tabarrok): Jane Jacobs Can Fix American Cities, Even Though She Helped Break Them. Many people associate Jane Jacobs with the urban resistance– shouting down the developers to keep the neighborhood intact. Becoming the spry young woman who takes on influential players at city hall became a goal in and of itself. But Max points out that this is a mere sliver of what Jacobs offers on ideas.
In fact, a careful reading of “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” reveals that Jacobs didn’t advocate for preservation and obstruction (at least, not in the book itself)โshe advocated for market urbanism and organic development. The solution to our urban problems isn’t a middle path between Moses and Jacobs, but rather a return to Jacobs’ actual ideas, not the distorted version that became embedded in planning practice.
Jacobs wants the planners out of the neighborhood business, unless they are there to encourage and support organic growth.
In โDeath and Lifeโ Jacobs argues that urban planners should plan less. They should stop drafting grand visions and bulldozing neighborhoods to rebuild them in their image. โPublic policy can do relatively little that is positive to get working uses woven in where they are absent and needed in cities, except toย permitย and indirectly encourage them.โ When discussing a successful commercial district in Nashville she notes that โNobody could have planned this growth. Nobody has encouraged it.โ
Or this. Let everyone go about their lives and find their way. The actors are best at decision making.
In Jacobsโ view, planners should merely set favorable conditions for decentralized, unplanned, and incremental development. Lay out the street grid if you must (though with smaller blocks than Manhattan) and bring the infrastructure to where itโs needed but otherwise refrain from regulating private land use. Let all the uses of the city mingle together and fill each street with eyes and activity at all times of the day. Jacobs is like Hayek (1945) or The Fatal Conceit applied to urbanism. โThe curious task of economics [and Jacobsian urban planning] is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.โ
I think there is a little more that the planners can do in their supporting role. That is to keep track of things. Jane Jacobs’ city encourages a mixing of people in their public lives near their homes. But some mixes of shopkeepers, and moms, and office workers and renters blend better than others. What are the civic jobs that various cohorts do? For lively streets in friendly neighborhoods, what are the pre conditions and the on-going maintenance that each member brings to Jane Jacobs dance of colorful city life?
Say there is a neighborhood of 200 homes. It’s an average neighborhood with an average sales price in the $320K range. There’s a slight variance in price for condition, but the homes were built as a development and are otherwise fairly consistent in size and amenities. Approximately seven percent of the homes sell every year, or fourteen homes, and it is from that activity that researchers and government types pull their average prices.
Now, say there is a significant demand for new construction in this older neighborhood, and a contractor is willing to risk purchasing a handful of dilapidated buildings to develop a new subdivision of fourteen homesites. People who can afford the price of new construction, which in this case pencils in around a million, can overcome the objection of living in a modest neighborhood in return for all the latest interior amenities and the centrality the neighborhood offers.
Of the seven percent of homes that sell the following year, three are $1,000K homes, and eleven are $320K homes. Now, the average home sales price for this neighborhood jumps to $465K! People panic.
Yet the bulk of the neighborhood has not changed at all. It is still primarily a modest neighborhood priced within reach of an average buyer. For this reason, real estate analysis needs to be local and always with the perspective of what groups are involved.
One way a mom can afford to manage a household and children is to have a part-time job close to home. Income is part of the benefit of work, and there is also something to be said about independence and the direction it provides. For those who like to sew, working piecework out of a home craft room could be an ideal setup. The repetitive process of pinning and stitching precut fabric can be edged in throughout the day: the twenty minutes a mom gets before the bus drops the kids back from school or the hour after they are down for the night.
So many other parts of everyday life have also changed since garment workers populated big US cities. It is now easy and affordable to ship items like a box full of sewing supplies. Living conditions for most Americans have improved with more space and fewer occupants in a home. This frees up the workspace for a home studio. Being an independent contractor is pretty commonplace. Crafting sites like Etsy already attract vendors of homemade goods.
Now, what if an entrepreneurial spirit wanted to start a clothing line? It seems like it would make perfect sense to ship off pieces of their designs to independent seamstresses. This would save on overhead and fixed costs. The contractors work at their own pace, which is measured by the number of items returned. The designer would focus on quality, design, and distribution.
Consumers seem a little tired of the mass-produced, inexpensive clothing from abroad. Maybe a (temporary?) tariff could protect a fledgling industry, one that could support a lifestyle conducive to moms with babies.
In a paper entitled Property Rights Paradigm, Armen Alchian suggests ownership is more intertwined than one might think.
There is some ambiguity in the notion of state or private ownership of a resource, because the bundle of property rights associated with a resource is divisible. There can and does exist much confusion about whether a resource or “property” is state or privately owned. Some rights to some uses of the resource may be state owned and others privately owned. While it is true that the degree of private control is increased when additional rights of use become privately owned, it is somewhat arbitrary to pass judgment on when the conversion to private control can be said to change the ownership of the bundle of rights from public to private. The classification of owners can be carried beyond the important state and private dichotomy. Corporate, school, and church owners of property are also of interest. The structure of rights can have important consequences for the allocation of resources, some of which we now illustrate.
Think of the home you own. The deed at the county recorder’s office says you own it. But the utility company may access the property if it needs to do a repair. The city workers can drive a skid steer into your lot, dig a big hole to check the city water connection, without checking whether you have a graduation party planned for the weekend. Of course, the county can tax you for local services, and if you fail to pay, they can take your property.
So you own your home more in unison with the public than you might have thought.
What about going the other way? Do people pay more for property if it has better access to taxation-supported services? It makes sense that they would. Public groups may have formal or informal claims against your home. There’s a good chance these were sought after when they decided to move. A portion of the price acts as a place maker for value– or in other words, the market prices institutions, too.
In aย recent paperย co-written with researchers from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Illinois-Chicago andย initially publishedย by the Minneapolis Fed, we measured the evolution of housing quality for low-income households over the past several decades across the United States. We found broad and generally large increases in housing quality and smaller but still important increases in living space.
So, it’s not surprising that the data show fewer low-income people living in squalor.
I like this part too. It’s a great example of how headlines can suggest misleading information. Although gross rents have increase, they have hit people’s monthly budgets at a much lower increase.
As housing quality and quantity are getting better, how much more are households paying for it? According to the AHS, for below-median-income Twin Cities area residents, real monthly spending on housing increased by 32 percent from 1998 to 2021, from $1,008 to $1,333. Around half of below-median-income Twin Cities households remain housing-cost-burdened (spending 30 percent or more of their income on housing) and a quarter remain severely housing-cost-burdened (spending 50 percent or more of their income on housing). For many families that spend a large fraction of their income on housing, findings about general housing improvements may be tough to appreciate.
However, our analysis indicates that greater housing spending reflects not only higher housing prices but also Twin Cities area residentsโ ability to afford housing that is larger and nicer. Overall, the average housing budget share only increased by 4 percentage points from 1998 to 2021, from 36 percent to 40 percent of income, which indicates that most of the growth in spending on housing is driven by higher incomes, better quality, and more spacious homes, as opposed to needing to allocate a greater share of income for the same, unimproved housing.
Some combination of private money, public efforts, and community involvement is improving living standards for those with lower incomes. And it’s not clear at all that the burden is falling on the most vulnerable.
Tony Lawson’s concept of “communities of relations” emphasizes that individuals exist within social structures defined by interconnected roles, rules, and responsibilities. He argues that society functions through these relational networks, where each person’s positionโsuch as a teacher, student, or parentโcarries specific expectations and obligations that shape their interactions. These roles are not isolated but are part of a broader system of mutual dependence, governed by both explicit and implicit social norms.
In his lectures, Lawson illustrates this with the example of a lecture hall. He explains that the hall operates as a microcosm of a community of relations. The lecturer has the role of delivering knowledge, guided by rules like preparing content and engaging students. Students, in turn, have the role of learning, with responsibilities such as attending, listening, and completing assignments. The physical space, institutional norms, and mutual expectations (e.g., raising hands to speak) create a structured environment where each participantโs actions are shaped by their role. This example highlights how social order emerges from the interplay of positions, rules, and obligations within a shared system.
This will prove to be an important understanding when measuring the needs of a group. There maybe plenty of able students yet not enough mentors. Or mentors and students but no one to organize. How many parents are needed for a successful PTA? How many kids do you need for a robotics team? Preferences can show how much an amenity is desired, but acknowledging roles is how to go about supplying those communitarian activities.
I find it quite funny that Jacobs found parks to be precarious.
From: The Death and Life of Great American Cities
Come and discuss whether parks are revered where you live. Our next Jane Jacobs discussion group will be in May. Check out the listings at Interintellect.com!
Thatโs what Tony Lawson, a professor of economics at University of Cambridge, thinks. Looking down at its roots is necessary for the economics profession. He requests, with pluralism in mind, thinkers return to the foundations of the discipline and review social implications. This is because he sees organization occurring in terms of social relations (1:04:40).
Economics is about causal analysis (instead of prediction). He wants a redo to understand a complete economic picture.
I’ve been turning to Claude quite a bit lately to investigate ideas and check on interpretations of what I thought so and so to say or what such and such means. It’s magical to receive answers quickly and concisely. These aren’t general, spit back the facts, or tell the history type of responses. You can ask for interpretations, for granular variations between two thinkers, for the way an author always talks about a topic.
The AI’s responses are not only interesting but encouraging. Most people find my questions annoying, but Claude doesn’t judge. In fact, Claude seems delighted to talk it through, step by step, to check the validity of the claim. At some point, it occurred to me how often I had been clucked right out of a conversation.
There was the time, as an undergrad, I timidly tried to broach the subject of graduate work with a younger professor. I probably assumed he would be sympathetic, but he was caustic. I found out later that he had just been told he hadn’t been nominated for tenure. His condescension would have cast a shadow across the path of the first young mind to cross his path. Let’s call this deterrence the misdirection error.
Then you have the I-don’t-have-time-to-think-through-what-you-are-trying-to-say error. (But I thought that’s what professors do?) And there’s the failure to follow the proper ideology problem. (What about looking for truth instead of the notion of the moment?) Or ego-itis can creep in. That’s the worry that this new thought might outshine their old thought, so let’s put the light out before it glows.
Well, I can say that Claude avoids all these errors. Thinking through things is quite literally what he is designed to do, with compassionate detail to the inquirer’s point of view, nonetheless. There is refreshingly no biased subtext or dancing around. And Claude exhibits the complete opposite of ego. Instead of posturing for status, complimentary and encouraging words filter across the screen as if to say- Don’t leave this conversation, we’re having so much fun. Those pesky human issues are gone.
If you haven’t talked to your AI lately, you are missing out.
It’s tough to see the compensation figures for Thrivent Financial for Lutherans and think- Oh the executive team is working for the good and not for the profit. Not that there’s anything wrong with profit. Just call a spade a spade.
Here's the top 20 highest paid (total compensation) individuals across all Minnesota NGOs in 2023. pic.twitter.com/yhv8kA5Bjx
Amenity migration refers to the movement of peopleโoften affluent, educated, or remote workersโfrom urban or high-cost areas to rural or scenic regions primarily for lifestyle reasons rather than economic necessity. These โamenitiesโ include natural beauty, recreational opportunities, perceived safety, cultural charm, and a slower pace of life. Unlike traditional migration driven by jobs, amenity migrants move to improve quality of life, often bringing their wealth, urban habits, and consumption patterns with them.
The term emerged in the 1990s within geography and regional planning literature, especially in the context of the American West, Canada, and parts of Europe. Scholars like Laurence Moss and others used it to describe changing population dynamics in places like Colorado, Montana, and the Alpsโregions once defined by extraction or agriculture that saw a demographic shift toward service-based, lifestyle-oriented economies.
In policy circles, amenity migration is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it can inject new capital into stagnant rural economies, diversify local culture, and support new businesses. On the other, it can displace long-term residents, inflate housing costs, and strain infrastructure designed for much smaller populations. Planners and local governments use the concept to anticipate pressures on housing, schools, and transportation, and to shape land use regulations or zoning to balance growth with preservation.
The term is now central to discussions about rural gentrification, climate migration, and the long-term effects of remote work. Amenity migration isnโt just about who moves whereโitโs about how those moves reshape the economic and cultural fabric of entire regions.
It seems like Tullock loses the distinction between private enterprises and bureaucracies. Yet he feels out two separate spheres of activity in other ways. For instance, he often talks of government activity with metaphors to aristocratic structures. What else?
ChatGPT said:
Great observationโTullock absolutely walks a tightrope between treating private firms and government bureaucracies similarly, and yet subtly (or not-so-subtly) casting them in very different cultural and historical lights. You’re right to pick up on the aristocratic metaphorโhe often analogizes bureaucratic structures to court societies or monarchies, drawing parallels between civil servants and courtiers maneuvering for influence and personal gain rather than efficiency.
Here are a few other ways he implicitly or explicitly separates the two spheres, even while analyzing them under a shared theoretical framework:
1. Incentives and Accountability
Private Firms: Tullock acknowledges they at least face market disciplineโbad decisions eventually lead to losses or collapse. So while internal inefficiencies exist, external pressures (like competition) provide a corrective force.
Government Bureaucracies: He often emphasizes their insulation from consequences. Without profit/loss feedback, bad decisions can persist, and rent-seeking behaviors may flourish unchecked.
๐ข Distinct Sphere Framing: Government lacks natural mechanisms for accountability, unlike the market.
2. Mobility and Tenure
In Government: He paints a picture of seniority-based advancement and institutional inertia. Much like nobility, power is entrenched and change is slow.
In Firms: There’s more focus on merit (at least ideally). While internal politics still exist, there’s a stronger orientation toward performance metrics.
๐ข Aristocracy vs. Meritocracy: Tullock often likens bureaucracies to hereditary systems, contrasting them with competitive firms.
3. Information Flows
Both sectors suffer from distorted or dampened information within hierarchies, but:
Government: Tullock is more cynical. Information is deliberately misrepresented due to political incentives.
Private Sector: While problems exist, they are more often framed as accidental or due to scale, not malice.
๐ข Intentional vs. Structural Failure: He attributes more intentional obfuscation to bureaucracies.
4. Evolutionary Pressure
Firms: Subject to what he sees as a Darwinian selectionโfirms that fail disappear.
States/Bureaucracies: Tullock sees these as less adaptive. Institutions can persist and grow regardless of performance, accumulating inefficiencies like “termite damage.”
๐ข Market Darwinism vs. Political Drift: Private firms evolve or die; bureaucracies ossify.
5. Terminology and Tone
Even in word choice:
Firms are often discussed in neutral economic language.
Governments are discussed with irony, historical metaphor (aristocracy, empires), or even biological metaphors (parasites, termites).
๐ข Narrative Framing: Tullock is more openly skepticalโeven causticโwhen writing about state structures.
In Short:
Tullock uses a unified analytical lens for organizational behaviorโespecially regarding rent-seeking and inefficiencyโbut layers rhetorical and conceptual distinctions between public and private. He acknowledges that both are prone to internal dysfunction, but he seems to believe that only one (the private firm) is subject to adequate correction, while the other (government) tends toward stagnation, self-dealing, and excess.
There are three actions in the motion that drive social change. There’s the act of staying loyal to one’s team, until one simply can’t anymore. This stage prompts the act of voicing concerns. We can speculate that this is first an in-group activity before going public. And if these two steps don’t bridge the rift, the individual agent can opt to exit.
MPR gives a local politician the platform to express dismay at the local culture of corruption that has seized the state. He’s the first prominent person of that party to do so.
I would also say that there is a significant fraud problem in Minnesota involving nonprofits. And so, especially now, when we have seen hundreds of millions of dollars be stolen through the use of nonprofits โ and in some cases for-profits receiving state and federal funds โ itโs extra important to have the highest standards of ethics in state government, both with rules and with the conduct of elected officials.
The issue in the article is one of the tamer instances of misconduct in the state. Indeed, it may simply be the appearance of corruption. But this instance of Voice as opposed to a code of silence against any fellow team member is telling. It’s the move that leads to Exit.
Now, either the politician in question will exit, as Dean Phillips was forced to do after calling into question Biden’s abilities. Or the corrupters will be forced to exit as their behavior no longer meets the norms of the party.
In the 2020 series Roadkill, Saskia Reeves plays the wife of the ambitious politician Peter Laurence MP, played by the excellent Hugh Laurie. She is a demure and reclusive figure living her life in their home district while her husband takes care of business, in more ways than one, in London. With both her daughters out on their own, she is more interested in her music than public life. A viewer may even pity her a bit as discoveries come to light in her families history.
But this would underestimate her. As the story unfolds, it becomes apparent that she has calculated her part of the bargain in her marital partnership. And she knows how to play her cards.
A new series on Netflix, Zero Day, is much more confident in their trad wife played by Joan Allen. The wife of the former president (Robert de Niro) is a partner, an advisor, a support, a wife, and a mother to their daughter. In essence, she fulfills all the duties of a traditional spouse without any formal income or profession. Her advice is forthright. She watches and reports.
Both shows deal with managing and overcoming the strain of relationships outside of marriage. Both juggle relationships with children. And in each film, the relationships have room for warmth, affection, and what most call love. Old people love not youthful passion. She’s been gone for so long; seeing her back in public view is good.
For decades of characters like Murphy Brown- bitter and stridently looking for power and satisfaction in professional work have garnered the glamor of the entertainment business. Then there were single working moms, getting ahead and dubiously happy to be rid of spousal obligations. Hollywood has shown us every variation of power-seeking women looking for fulfillment in paid-for work. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. It’s just nice to see the trad moms return to the small screen. And as these series show, they’re not that weak after all.
Gordon Tullockโs interaction with the U.S. Department of State from 1947 to 1956 involved diplomatic postings in Tianjin, Hong Kong, and Korea, alongside Chinese language training at Yale and Cornell. His nine-year tenure exposed him to bureaucratic hierarchies and inefficiencies, which he later critiqued in The Politics of Bureaucracy. He observed self-interested behavior, information distortions, and overstaffing, shaping his rational choice model of bureaucracy and public choice theory. While he likely performed standard diplomatic tasks, his key contribution was translating these experiences into a seminal critique of bureaucratic behavior, though his conclusions may overemphasize dysfunction due to his theoretical bias.
Herder is the originator, the author, not of nationalism as is sometimes said, although no doubt some of his ideas entered nationalism, but of something – I do not quite know what name to give it – much more like populism. That is to say (to instance its more comical forms), he is the originator of all those antiquarians who want natives to remain as native as possible, who like arts and crafts, who detest standardisation – everyone who likes the quaint, people who wish to preserve the most exquisite forms of old provincialism without the impingement on it of some hideous metropolitan uniformity. Herder is the father, the ancestor, of all those travellers, all those amateurs, who go round the world ferreting out all kinds of forgotten forms of life, delighting in everything that is peculiar, everything that is odd, everything that is native, everything that is untouched. In that sense he did feed the streams of human sentimentality to a very high degree. At any rate, that is Herder’s temperament and that is why, since he wants everything to be what it can be as much as possible, that is to say, develop itself to its richest and fullest extent, the notion that there can be one single ideal for all men, everywhere, becomes unintelligible.
From Isaiah Berlinโs excellent book The Root of Romanticism.
A reader writes about enterprises who succeed by not only complying with regulations but pursuing further advancement in their industries with the intended spirit.
For example, businesses in the renewable energy sector often find that adhering to strict environmental regulations can spur innovation, leading to the development of more efficient technologies.
โฆ
Companies that embrace these regulations find themselves at the forefront of sustainability and often cultivate a loyal consumer base that values corporate responsibility.
Given these perspectives, Iโm curious:
How do you think businesses in sectors with fewer regulations can proactively embrace innovative practices that mirror those in more regulated industries?
He makes a good point. Often, regulation is introduced when asymmetric information has left consumers in the dark about what goes into the product they are buying. Once the word gets out that such and such creates environmental harm, people take it upon themselves to come up with solutions. Just recently, it’s been observed that electric cars reduce carbon emissions, and yet there are environmental expenses in the production of their batteries.
Regulations can serve as an intervention that signals something is up. But regulations are rigidand stagnant and respond directly to a moment in time. Further discoveries, like the fact that battery production also harms the environment, may make a regulation in favor of electric cars more harmful, not less.
Regulations are expensive to maintain and supervise. Often, they are left on books well past their useful life simply because people are not sure of their expiration date. Sometimes multiple enforcers create confusion and waste. No one doubts the benefits of smoke detectors. House fires still cause fatalities, so enforcing the use of $60 smoke detectors seems like a no-brainer. The thing is, multiple agencies become involved in the proper use of the device. Are they to be installed in the sleeping rooms or right outside the sleeping rooms? How many are needed? On every floor? One inspector calls out this rule, and another dictates another rule. Pretty soon, builders are installing fifteen detectors just to not have to follow up on a $60 item. Multiply this by the thousands, and a small thing grows into a monster.
Smoke detectors are still worth regulating. Regulations are part of the process. Finding optimal use of regulations is the trick
The best part about using AI is being able to request information in various ways. In the process of thinking up the question, a new angle on the issue can open up further probing. Say you start with something you only know a bit about, like property rights in Africa. You might think it is all about wealth. If GDP is high, then laws must be in place for such things as the enforcement of property rights. And these two things seem connected to political stability.
So you ask. And this is what you get.
(Unfortunately, Ethiopia was cut off. Property rights are entirely controlled by the governement.)
Surprisingly, GDP does not appear to be connected to securing property rights. The legal enforcement column raises various issues: whether there is a process for recording ownership, whether there is a mechanism to resolve disputes, and finally, whether there is political power to take even with these two features in place.
Of course, the level of political control is of interest. But it’s hard not to believe that even in countries where the story is that the government controls all, informal institutions do not play out in everyday lives. Governments do not have the manpower or interest, I would think, to dictate who gets what dwelling when such and such happens. And directing who has a pecking order over whom. These societies more than likely barter in their own off-the-record way to say who gets what.
Should I be flattered? I mean, both AIs are great at dishing out the compliments. Or is it a strategy to keep me engaged? Because it works. I never appreciated how much having a knowledgeable interlocutor accelerates the quest for an answer. The anticipation of great advancements through AI does not surprise me. It’s breathtaking to simply query and obtain a response. It’s tantalizing to be fed applicable information which stimulates brain cells to leap and somersault.
And another thing. AIs are not judgmental. How many of my English teachers were too frustrated with grammatical errors, spelling mistakes or punctuation to consider my ideas? Most. Or how about when it was clear that their view differed ideologically? Chat doesn’t mind. Claude appreciates insights with tension.
Some people, who clearly haven’t given them much of a try, will say they are just an enhanced Google search. Searching is far short of interacting. A search doesn’t review your work and spit it back at you with feedback. A search doesn’t present two analysis sets and ask which one you prefer.
It’s the reparti, that makes them special. That and the nice compliments.
While Robert Moses became synonymous with concrete, expressways, and top-down urban planning, his wife, Mary Louise Sims Moses, was quietly involved in a very different kind of city-buildingโone that focused not on infrastructure, but on people.
Mary Louise was active in the settlement movement, a progressive social reform effort in the early 20th century that sought to improve the lives of immigrants and the urban poor. She worked with the Henry Street Settlement on Manhattanโs Lower East Side, one of the most significant institutions of the movement. Unlike her husbandโs sweeping, often disruptive approach to reshaping the city, the settlement house model emphasized human-scale solutions: providing access to health care, education, vocational training, and support services within the neighborhoods they served.
The contrast between their approaches is striking. While Robert Moses believed in transforming cities from aboveโwith highways, bridges, and housing towersโMary Louise was engaged in transformation from the ground up. Her work involved listening to people, responding to their lived experiences, and building trust within communities. It was the kind of work that valued place not only for its physical layout, but for the lives it nurtured.
Itโs hard not to notice the irony. While Mary Louise and her colleagues were helping immigrants build stable lives in New Yorkโs dense, walkable neighborhoods, Robert Moses would later target those same areas for demolition in the name of “progress.” Entire communitiesโoften poor and predominantly made up of people of color or recent immigrantsโwere displaced by projects Moses considered essential to modernization.
Whether Mary Louiseโs influence ever softened her husbandโs approach remains a mystery. Moses was not known for changing course once he had a vision. But her work highlights a different set of valuesโones that were also championed by Jane Jacobs and others who believed that cities thrive not through sweeping master plans, but through the small, often invisible networks of daily life: neighbors talking on stoops, kids playing on sidewalks, shopkeepers who know their customers by name.
Mary Louise Sims Moses remains a lesser-known figure, but her involvement in the settlement movement offers a compelling counterpoint to her husbandโs legacy. Where he reshaped the city with steel and stone, she helped build its social fabric. And in many ways, her work reminds us that the success of a city isnโt measured only by what gets builtโbut by who gets to stay, thrive, and belong.
At least a couple of decades ago, when I’d help a client purchase a home that happened to be along an open field, I’d remind them that the view may not always stay that way. The Twin City metro was growing and fields just like the one adjoining their new home were being plowed in and repurposed into neighborhoods of single-family homes. They would nod in acknowledgement and yet still feel a loss when a crop of dwellings soldiered up outside their windows.
There are more situations like that– where the surrounding circumstances change and present residents feel like a cost is imposed on them. Take that lightning rod word: gentrification. In certain circles, it is spit out with as much vehemence as the title capitalist. In reality, gentrification implies that a neighborhood is getting cleaned up, crime is being brought down, structures are being fixed up, and truancy is being pushed out. But when you spruce up the place, more people want to live there. This is distressing to longtime residents who don’t want to see rent prices rise in response to higher demand. The situation is changing around them without their consent!
Or consider an elderly couple who own a large, beautifully situated parcel of land on Flathead Lake. In the years they moved to northwestern Montana, it was remote. Desolate even. Over time, others discovered their paradise and passed the word along to still more people who appreciate views of the rugged snow-capped Rockies. As people arrive, more services are necessary which pushes up property taxes. Is it fair for the elderly to endure the increases? They did nothing to give rise to these new obligations, and now the expense may make their living choice beyond their reach.
Tariffs are a response to the same issue. When the pool of labor is opened up to a global market, should the loss of work in the Midwest manufacturing industries fall solely to die-cutters and assemblymen? They did nothing to change the circumstances, yet they bear the burden. Wall Street profits, labor abroad profits, and they are told to adapt.
What is the proper cycle of protection for the renter affected by gentrification? How long would the elderly be eligible for lower property taxes? Is there a natural circuit for these things to enable an easing of the effects of changing circumstances to all involved?
The fact seems to be, then, that human society, as distinguished from plant and animal society, is organized on two levels, the biotic and the cultural. There is a symbiotic society based on competition and a cultural society based on communication and consensus. As a matter of fact the two societies are merely different aspects of one society, which, in the vicissitudes and changes to which they are subject remain, nevertheless, in some sort of mutual dependence each upon the other. The cultural superstructure rests on the basis of the symbiotic substructure, and the emergent energies that manifest themselves on the biotic level in movements and actions reveal themselves on the higher social level in more subtle and sublimated forms.
Robert Ezra Park, โHuman Ecologyโ from American Journal of Sociology (1936)
This movie is sure to make you smile, and most probably laugh out loud. I’m a tough critique of comedy, but this was a home run for me.
Don’t let the foreign language with subtitles issue dissuade you. At least fifty percent of the humor is visual. The visuals are beautifully done, actually. Interesting. Piquant.
There’s depth in the variety of stories, as told through all the different players. Their stories are revealed yet not dwelt on and pounded down. The audience gets it without needing to hyperextend the human frailties.
With all this tariff talk, I’m breaking some misconceptions. For instance, I thought China was our top trading partner. I had no idea that Canada charges tariffs between provinces โsounds laborious to keep track of! Nor did I realize the extent and amount of the tariffs charged worldwide.
Top Ten U.S. Trading Partners and Tariffs Charged Prior to April 1, 2025
Mexico
Trade Context: Mexico was the U.S.โs top trading partner in 2023, with total trade valued at approximately $776 billion (goods only). Under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), most U.S. goods entered Mexico duty-free prior to April 1, 2025.
Tariffs Charged: For USMCA-compliant goods, tariffs were generally 0%. For non-USMCA goods, Mexico applied MFN rates, averaging around 7% for industrial products and higher for certain agricultural goods (e.g., up to 20-25% on some items like dairy or poultry under supply management systems). Specific rates depended on the product.
2. Canada
Trade Context: Canada was the second-largest U.S. trading partner, accounting for 14.3% of U.S. trade in 2023. Like Mexico, it operates under the USMCA.
Tariffs Charged: Most U.S. goods entered Canada duty-free under USMCA prior to April 1, 2025. For non-USMCA goods, Canadaโs MFN tariff averaged 4.1%, with higher rates on protected sectors like dairy (up to 200-300% on certain products due to supply management) and softwood lumber (subject to duties averaging 10-20% depending on market conditions).
3. China
Trade Context: China was the third-largest U.S. trading partner, with a 10.9% share of U.S. trade in 2023 and a significant trade deficit ($295.4 billion in 2024).
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Chinaโs average MFN tariff rate was around 7.5% for U.S. goods, but retaliatory tariffs from the first Trump administrationโs trade war (2018-2020) raised rates on many U.S. products to 20-25% or higher (e.g., soybeans, autos). The โPhase 1โ trade deal in 2020 reduced some tensions, but specific rates varied widely by product.
4. Germany
Trade Context: Germany, as part of the EU, contributed 4.4% of U.S. trade in 2023. The EU as a whole is a major U.S. trading partner.
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, the EU applied an average tariff of 5.1% on U.S. goods under MFN rules (no U.S.-EU free trade agreement existed). Specific rates included 10% on autos, 25% on certain steel products (retaliatory), and higher rates on agricultural goods (e.g., 15-20% on some food items).
5. Japan
Trade Context: Japan is a significant U.S. trading partner, with a trade deficit noted in 2024 data.
Tariffs Charged: Under the U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement (effective 2020), many U.S. goods entered Japan duty-free or at reduced rates prior to April 1, 2025. Japanโs average MFN tariff was 4.3%, but agricultural products faced higher rates (e.g., 38.5% on beef, 15% on some fruits). The Trump administration later claimed Japan charged 46% equivalent when factoring in non-tariff barriers.
6. South Korea
Trade Context: A key U.S. trading partner in Asia, South Korea had a free trade agreement (KORUS FTA) with the U.S.
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, most U.S. goods entered South Korea duty-free under KORUS FTA. The average MFN tariff was 6.2%, with higher rates on agriculture (e.g., 40% on some rice products). The Trump administration later cited a 50% equivalent rate including non-tariff barriers.
7. UK
Trade Context: The UK ran a trade surplus with the U.S. in 2023 ($14.5 billion per U.S. data).
Tariffs Charged: Post-Brexit, the UK applied an average MFN tariff of 5.7% on U.S. goods prior to April 1, 2025, with most rates mirroring the EUโs (e.g., 10% on autos). No U.S.-UK free trade agreement was in place, though negotiations were ongoing.
8. India
Trade Context: India is an emerging U.S. trading partner with a notable trade surplus.
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Indiaโs average MFN tariff on U.S. goods was high, around 13.8%, with significant variation (e.g., 20% on electronics, 100% on some alcoholic beverages). The Trump administration later claimed a 52% equivalent rate including non-tariff barriers.
9. Taiwan
Trade Context: Taiwan is a key supplier of electronics to the U.S.
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Taiwanโs average MFN tariff was 7.1% on U.S. goods, with lower rates on industrial products and higher rates on agriculture (e.g., 15-20% on some items). The Trump administration later cited a 64% equivalent rate with non-tariff barriers.
10. Vietnam
Trade Context: Vietnam has grown as a U.S. trading partner, especially for consumer goods.
Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Vietnamโs average MFN tariff on U.S. goods was around 9.6%, with higher rates on specific sectors (e.g., 20-30% on some agricultural products). The Trump administration later claimed a 92% equivalent rate, halved to 46%, factoring in trade imbalances and barriers.
Notes and Context
Data Sources: Trade partner rankings are based on 2023/2024 data from sources like the U.S. Census Bureau and Euronews. Tariff rates reflect pre-April 1, 2025, conditions, primarily MFN rates unless a trade agreement applied.
Limitations: Exact tariff schedules for every product arenโt fully detailed here due to variability. The listed averages are indicative, and specific rates could be higher or lower depending on the good.
Trumpโs Reciprocal Tariffs: On April 2, 2025, President Trump announced new U.S. tariffs effective April 5 (10% baseline) and April 9 (country-specific rates), calculated as half the perceived โchargeโ (trade deficit divided by exports, plus non-tariff barriers). Pre-April 1 tariffs from trading partners didnโt directly align with these calculations, which included non-monetary factors like currency manipulation.
This list reflects the top U.S. trading partners and their general tariff policies toward U.S. goods before the significant policy shift on April 2, 2025.
There are all sorts of claims about housing floating around the electronic media world. It’s nice to know where to look for reliable information. The Eviction Lab (Princeton) is one of those sources.
There are local politicians, for instance, drumming up the need for ‘protections’ when, in fact, renters in our area are not showing any signs of stress. One measure would be to consider the rate at which tenants are evicted. The information below shows a low rate of 3%. Only Wisconsin is at the same range in this sample.
There has been an increase in the number of filings since the COVID years, as tenants were protected during the pandemic. Landlords went months without rent. Nor was any assistance provided for lost income. Still– an increase from 1% to 3% hardly implies the type of hardship that some voices in the public sphere are trying to have you believe around housing.
I thought this was interesting too.
Conclusion: There is no housing crisis. There are housing needs that continually need to be looked after. And that is all.
A local non-profit executive recently stepped down from her post after her income, as listed on the organization’s tax form 990, was circulated publicly. The salary with bonus came to three-quarters of a million dollars. That’s a lot for around here. Claude says.
The average wage for a non-profit CEO in Minnesota is approximately $100,000-$130,000 per year, though this can vary significantly based on the organization’s size, budget, location within the state, and sector.
Larger non-profits with bigger budgets (especially in healthcare or education) tend to pay more, sometimes exceeding $200,000 for organizations with substantial operations. Small non-profits might pay significantly less, potentially in the $60,000-$80,000 range.
The Twin Cities metro area typically has higher compensation than rural Minnesota for comparable positions due to cost of living differences.
It would be one thing if the organization were a privately funded, hoity-toity type of group that brought in musicians from the Netherlands to listen to Back. If that’s what the philanthropists want ot do with their dollars, so be it. But the organization at hand is a food shelf. One that is substantially funded by tax dollars. Most of the criticism of this aggressive CEO’s salary compared it to the governor’s salary of under $ 150,000 per year. Again, justifying getting paid five times more than the lead state politician is difficult to wrap one’s analytical head around.
The thing is, the professional who run non-profits don’t view their jobs as volunteer work or civic obligations. They compete for salaries just like everyone else. Or, at least, that’s what they tell us when the salary of the University of Minnesota’s head person (I think over a million now) circulates through the news. Furthermore, group of people- usually a board of directors- must have approved the wage. Hence, there are several layers of people and opportunities to object or influence involved.
In years gone by people may have worked in social services at reduced rates with a sense of getting something in return for a discount on their labor. Soldiers are often recognized for their service in public by being allowed to board a plane early or receiving a discount at the till. The little perks of dedicating one’s life to serving others may arrive in the form of help at a time when a little extra assistance means a great deal. But the executives at the foodshelf appeared to be comparing their salaries to those of for-profit positions.
This tension between the management team, their mission, and the thousands of volunteers (16,000 according to their tax filings) who donate their time for no tangible returns is representative of a clash between the driving force of a mission versus the force of private interests. Claude will have the last word.
You’ve touched on an interesting observation about non-profit compensation, especially at the executive level. While non-profits are defined by their mission rather than generating profit for shareholders, many do operate with substantial budgets and compete in the broader labor market for talent.
Several factors contribute to the high executive compensation at some non-profits:
Market competition – Non-profits often compete with for-profit companies for skilled executives and must offer competitive salaries.
Organization size and complexity – Managing large organizations with multi-million or billion-dollar budgets, hundreds of employees, and complex operations requires significant expertise.
Fundraising ability – Boards often justify high executive pay when leaders demonstrate exceptional fundraising capabilities that bring in far more than their salary costs.
Mission impact – The argument is sometimes made that paying for top talent leads to better mission delivery and greater social impact.
That said, there’s often tension between these market realities and public expectations about non-profit compensation. Many donors and community members expect non-profit salaries to reflect a degree of sacrifice in service to the mission, particularly given the tax benefits these organizations receive.
The gap between executive pay and front-line worker compensation at some non-profits also raises questions about organizational values and resource allocation.
The chat out there is that there are too many regulations in housing, driving up the cost of building, owning, and maintaining a home. This is true. But there’s nuance missing.
The people who enforce rules have an impact on how the drag they pose. This can happen in several ways.
Holding the rule to the letter of the law when the issue at hand is not causing harm.
Frequently changing rules catch owners and practitioners off guard, leaving them to scramble and incur costs to catch up or reformulate their plans.
Enforcers, being subject to human impulses, become zealous enforcers with an overt sense of obligation to lay down the law.
The people in the mix can add costs simply by providing incorrect information. For instance, a homeowner is considering refurbishing certain items in their bathroom. Upon a preliminary call to the permitting department, they are given a lengthy list of what they should do without being provided with a reduced list of what could be done at a lower level. This discourages the homeowner to the point of throwing up their hands and not proceeding with any improvements.
Many people look into new construction over a several-year period. Many folks are hitting their maximum budget, as is easy to do with a new build. And every time they return to talk to the builder representative in the model, they are told about a new building code that adds $3-4K to the price. That’s enough to bounce some buyers out of the market.
Many inspectors are great. Some inspectors enjoy their jobs, too much so. They crane their necks around and try to find some new objection in the nearby vicinity of the project at hand. They infer there’s more to it until questioned for specifics. In effect, they feel more attached to the notion of a power broker than to the idea of helping a community maintain safe housing.
Ultimately, counting the number of regulations as a measure of the process’s drag is one indicator. But it is an underestimation. At the first step of inquiry, then during the application for a permit, and finally at the time of final approval, the individuals involved in the process can add a substantial drain on the timeline. These costs are in both time, money, and emotion.
It was a beautiful and warm day in the Twin Cities today, which had me thinking about bike rides. Here’s a post from last September- Now I just need to get set up with my own to venture out this year!
Few things are more enjoyable than meandering on a bike trail or cruising through a state park on a beautiful sunny day. Fortunately, communities share this ethos and support the continued development of public trails.
Today’s ride followed some of the new Heart of the Lakes Trail. It doesn’t show up on all the maps yet, so it’s essential to do some research to map out the route. There are excellent services along the way, like mile markers, benches, and trailheads for parking. With a plan in hand we set out for Lakes E-Bikes to pick up our rentals.
The operation runs out of a family-owned RV dealership. A third-generation member pitched the idea of selling e-bikes with an expectation of making twenty sales or so a year. His brother informed us while helping to load the cycles into the back of the pickup, and this year, he watched 250 go out the door. Hitting the market right can make all the difference.
If you haven’t tried an e-bike yet, I highly recommend it. It’s not really biking; it’s more of a scooter. But it takes you to the most wonderful places, and that’s what matters.
Thank goodness for all those who devoted countless hours in county board meetings to make it all happen.
Recently, I hosted a Zoom meeting with a group of folks I did not know. I was nervous. So, I went on YouTube and looked through the helpful how -to videos. I wanted to see where the participants would be at the start of the meeting. You can’t see the waiting room feature until they are there– as a number in the percipient box on the lower banner.
There was no need for concern. It worked precisely as intended. Run the cursor over participants, and up pops the sidebar showing the names of those in the waiting room. One by one, or all in one go, a host can let people onto the Zoom call. The YouTube tutorial said the host can just as easily pop someone back into the waiting room.
And then I started thinking. Wouldnโt it be great if someoneโs voice starts irritating you, to take a moment and click them into the waiting room for a little break. Their input is valuable. You want to keep them in the conversation. You just need a pause from that screechy tone quality in their delivery. Or say you’ve got an interrupter, or a barker, or a drone on foreverer. Pop them in the waiting room!
Think how much progress could be made if a little break in the waiting room would make it easier for people to stay in communicato. Robin Hanson just wrote that he is an “adaptationist on social values, and prioritizes making my culture more adaptive, as a way to save as much of it as possible.” (Overcoming Bias)
Social capital is generally understood as the value derived from social networks and relationships, including trust and cooperation, that help individuals and groups achieve goals.
Research suggests it encompasses connections among people, norms of reciprocity, and trustworthiness, facilitating collective action.
Definitions vary, with some emphasizing economic benefits and others focusing on community and social cohesion, reflecting ongoing scholarly debate.
Definition
Social capital refers to the networks of relationships and the associated norms of trust and reciprocity that enable individuals and groups to work together effectively. Itโs like the glue that holds communities together, helping people support each other to achieve common goals, whether in business, neighborhoods, or social groups.
Importance and Examples
This concept is crucial in fields like sociology and economics, where it explains how strong social ties can lead to better job opportunities, community resilience, or even lower crime rates. For instance, if you have a wide network of friends who trust each other, you might find it easier to get help during tough times, like finding a job through a referral.
Unexpected Detail
While often seen as purely beneficial, social capital can sometimes exclude outsiders, creating tight-knit groups that might not welcome new members, which can lead to social inequality.
Survey Note: Comprehensive Analysis of Social Capital
Social capital is a multifaceted concept that has been extensively explored in sociology, economics, and related fields, reflecting its importance in understanding social interactions and their outcomes. This note aims to provide a detailed examination of its definition, variations, and implications, drawing from a range of sources to ensure a thorough understanding.
Defining Social Capital: Core Concepts
At its core, social capital is understood as the value derived from social networks and relationships that facilitate collective action and mutual benefit. A widely cited definition comes from Robert D. Putnam (2001), who describes it as “connections among individuals โ social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them” (Wikipedia). This definition highlights both the structural (networks) and cultural (trust, reciprocity) dimensions, suggesting that social capital is not just about who you know, but how these relationships function to support cooperative efforts.
The World Bank, in development contexts, often frames social capital as “the institutions, relationships, and networks that shape the quality and quantity of a society’s social interactions,” emphasizing its role in fostering community engagement and trust. This perspective aligns with efforts to enhance social cohesion in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in areas like health and environmental sustainability.
Historical and Scholarly Perspectives
The concept of social capital has evolved over time, with early uses dating back to L. J. Hanifan (1916), who defined it as “goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social intercourse among a group of individuals and families who make up a social unit” (Wikipedia). This focus on community bonds laid the groundwork for later scholars like Pierre Bourdieu (1983), who saw it as “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.” Bourdieuโs view introduces an economic lens, suggesting social capital as a resource that can be invested for returns, such as career advancement.
James Coleman (1988) further expanded this, defining social capital as “a variety of entities with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of actorsโฆwithin the structure” (Wikipedia). This structural focus underscores how social capital enables actions, such as improved group performance or entrepreneurial success, by leveraging existing networks.
Variations in Definition and Context
The definition of social capital varies significantly across disciplines and contexts, reflecting its adaptability but also contributing to scholarly debate. In economics, as seen in Investopedia, it is often described as “the practical outcome of informal interactions between people that can be attributed to networking in the business world,” focusing on professional gains like enhanced supply chain relations or strategic alliances (Investopedia). In contrast, sociological perspectives, such as those from the Institute for Social Capital, emphasize “social relations that have productive benefits,” highlighting community-level outcomes like improved health and education (Institute for Social Capital).
This variability is evident in a table of definitions from various scholars, as compiled from Wikipedia: Scholar Definition L. J. Hanifan (1916) “Goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social intercourse among a group of individuals and families who make up a social unit.” Pierre Bourdieu (1983) “The aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.” Thomas Sander “The collective value of all social networks (who people know), and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).” James Coleman (1988) “A variety of entities with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structure, and they facilitate certain actions of actorsโฆwithin the structure.” Robert D. Putnam (2001) “Connections among individuals โ social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them.” Francis Fukuyama “Generally understood rules that enable people to cooperate such as the norm of reciprocity or religious doctrine like Christianity.” Nan Lin “Investment in social relations with expected returns in the marketplace.” Robison, Schmid, Siles (2002) “Sympathy”: the object of another’s sympathy has social capital; those who have sympathy for others provide social capital. Baker (1990) “A resource that actors derive from specific social structures and then use to pursue their interests; it is created by changes in the relationship among actors.”
This table illustrates the diversity, with definitions ranging from community-focused (Hanifan) to market-oriented (Lin), reflecting the conceptโs broad applicability.
Applications and Implications
Social capital has been applied to explain a range of outcomes, from superior managerial performance and the growth of entrepreneurial firms to enhanced community resilience and lower crime rates. For example, studies have found that higher levels of social capital correlate with better employment rates, academic performance, and individual health outcomes (Britannica). In business, itโs seen as valuable as financial or human capital, with networking and internet use exemplifying how social capital works to improve efficiency (Investopedia).
However, an unexpected detail is that social capital can sometimes have negative effects, such as excluding outsiders and reinforcing social inequalities. Tight-knit networks might benefit insiders but create barriers for those outside, potentially exacerbating divisions within society. This duality is noted in discussions around bonding versus bridging social capital, where bonding (within groups) can strengthen internal ties but may not connect to broader networks (ScienceDirect).
Recent Research and Ongoing Debates
Recent research, as seen in platforms like ScienceDirect, suggests that social capital remains an elusive concept, with no single definition dominating the literature (ScienceDirect). A 2019 study by the Institute for Social Capital found that definitions continue to vary, with some scholars advocating for a standardized approach, while others argue for context-specific interpretations (Institute for Social Capital). This ongoing debate underscores the complexity, with some viewing social capital as a form of capital akin to economic resources, while others criticize its measurement and application, particularly in quantifying effects on outcomes.
Public Perception and Everyday Relevance
Public understanding, as reflected in recent X posts, often simplifies social capital to the support and opportunities derived from relationships. For instance, one X post from March 20, 2025, states, “Social capital is more than just who you knowโit’s about how you support and collaborate with others,” emphasizing its role in long-term success (X post). Another from the same day notes, “When you hear success isn’t just about money, but about the relationships you build, what comes to your mind?” linking it to the value of connections (X post). These perspectives align with academic definitions but highlight its practical, everyday relevance.
Conclusion
In summary, social capital is a dynamic concept defined by the networks and norms that enable cooperation and mutual benefit, with applications across personal, community, and economic spheres. Its definitions vary, reflecting disciplinary and contextual differences, but core themes of trust, reciprocity, and collective action remain central. This analysis, drawing from scholarly sources and public discourse, underscores its importance and the ongoing efforts to refine its understanding.
Minnesota lawmakers are considering a proposal to contribute state money to the Xcel Energy Center, primarily the home of the state’s hockey team, the Minnesota Wild. However, the venue is popular for all sorts of events, including mega-singing stars. It’s also one of the few large-scale attractions in the capital city, bringing thousands into town to eat and drink.
Allianz Field, home to Minnesota’s soccer team, the Loons, is also in St. Paul but not downtown. And then, of course, there is the Vikings’ stadium (US Bank stadium) in the sister city. The Timberwolves and Lynx shoot hoops at Target Center, and the Twins round the bases at Target Field. This metropolitan area is no stranger to the tug of war between owners and the public purse for stadium dollars.
All the teams draw fans from across the state, so it seems appropriate to kick in funding for taxpayers who want these distractions in their lives. Even though the structures are located within a municipality, the draw of supporters is cast widely across the state. There is a tension, however, between the fans and the hosting cities. A sense of proprietorship is accompanied by voicing demands for better policing or transit. The expected pushback is that fans are outsiders.
When the building starts topped out in the 2022s, it was impossible to get any type of tradesperson to call you back for a job.
Now that they are on the decline– it’s time to get those projects rolling. Not only will the pricing be more attractive, but you’ll also keep the industry rolling until interest rates taper.
By March, the real estate market is at one of its most substantial positions in the year. The snapshot of information below, taken from the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, shows that the market is running slow this Spring. Despite pended units being down around 5%, prices continue to inch up, an interesting, if not intuitively incorrect, outcome.
Would it be appropriate to say that Marx described two spheres of value creation: one held within the workforce through their hands passing over the products produced, and another in the taking to market by the capitalist and selling of the goods in exchange for money?
ChatGPT said:
Yes, it would be appropriate to describe Marxโs theory as recognizing two spheres of value creationโone rooted in labor and production, and the other in exchange and the marketโbut with a crucial hierarchical relationship between them.
Marxโs Two Spheres of Value Creation
The Sphere of Production (Labor as the Source of Value)
This is where real economic value is created.
Workers apply their mental and physical labor to raw materials, transforming them into useful goods.
The value of a commodity is determined by the socially necessary labor time required to produce it.
This value originates in the workforce, as their hands (and minds) shape raw materials into finished products.
The Sphere of Exchange (Market & Realization of Value)
The capitalist takes the goods to market, where they are exchanged for money.
This is where the value created in production is realizedโbut crucially, no new value is added here.
The price at which goods are sold can fluctuate due to supply, demand, and competition, but ultimately, the total value in society remains tied to labor.
There are lots of ways groups form in order to tackle shared interests. “In 1955, the Minnesota Legislature authorized the creation of watersheds through the Watershed Act. The intent of the Act was to develop water management policies and plans on a watershed basis, because water does not follow political boundaries.”
Water flows in the direction of the lowest point. If your neighbor’s lot sits higher than yours, then more than likely you will deal with the drainage that flows following a storm. For that reason, people in a shared drainage system collaborate to be sure adverse effects are tackled. These generally include land use planning, flood control and conservation projects.
From an analysis point of view, the watersheds are interesting as they are independent of standard governance structures. Water crosses country lines, meanders between cities, and flows around carefully surveyed property lines. They can group people and their properties over vast plains.
But where is the value in the grouping? Mainly in the flood zone analysis. Inundation and water tables effect construction prospects and insurance issues.
In Glenn Loury’s memoir, Late Admissions, the author states that he was the first to coin the term social capital as a retained value obtained through contact with social groups and activities. It appears in the following paper.
An individual’s social origin has an obvious and important effect on the amount of resources which are ultimately invested in his development. It may thus be useful to employ a concept of โsocial capital” to represent the consequences of social position in facilitating individual acquisition of (say) the standard human capital characteristics. While measurement problems abound, this idea does have the advantage of forcing the analyst to consider the extent to which individual earnings are accounted for by social forces outside the individual’s control. However, for precisely this reason such analysis is unlikely to develop within the confines of traditional neoclassical theory. A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income Differences(1976)
In the following decade, James S Coleman, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, writes the paper Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital (1988). Here, the sense of the term is similar as there is a measurement of the efforts of a father put forth in the education of his son.
But in the 1990s, something changed. Putnam makes social capital a coffee table word in Bowling Alone (1995 article, 2000 book). Now, the term is morphing into a sense of access to networks. The thought is that business, or economic activity, is embedded in social life but clearly separate. Social life is a thing on the side. Benefits from social interactions arrive like electric pulses moving sporadically across a net of human connections.
Thanks to the book’s popularity, everyone grabbed hold of the term social capital from 2000 to 2010. It lost depth as it had become a marketing cliche. At about the same time, Nan Lin published Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure in Action (1997), advancing the network theory of capital amongst relations.
Social Capital explains the importance of using social connections and social relations in achieving goals. Social capital, or resources accessed through such connections and relations, is critical (along with human capital, or what a person or organization actually possesses) in achieving goals for individuals, social groups, organizations, and communities. The book introduces a theory that forcefully argues and shows why “it is who you know,” as well as “what you know” that makes a difference in life and society.
Attempts are made to measure strong ties and weak ties, and distances between connections, but nothing really comes of it as a measurable model.
Was Glenn Loury thirty years too early with his concept of social capital? Did he bail on the theoretical world of economics too soon?
Kevin Drum proposed that in a 2022 article– and I agree entirely.
The real issue here is that America doesn’t have a housing crisis.
I’m not sure why, but I find the new urbanists one of the most annoying groups in the progressive pantheon. It’s not because they’re wrong, precisely, or because they’re meanspirited, or anything like that. There’s just a disconnect from reality that seems to motivate so much of what they say and do.
Take America’s housing crisis. Here it is:
We have as much housing per household as we had in 2001. And just in case you think I’m cheating with this “household” business, here it is per person:
We have more housing per capita than we did in 2001.
Just wait and see as the market softens. Prices in some markets have already ebbed away from a peak, and the number of homes on the market is creeping up. Builders who notoriously hold on to their list prices are marking spec homes down a bit. The tight market was not due to a shortage as much as the normal pressure of people moving to changes in their lives.
But the best part of Drum’s article is how he feels about the people who try to set a national agenda on housing: the urbanists.
But this still doesn’t really explain why I find the urbanists annoying. Here’s my real beef: they are obsessed with big cities. They spend nearly all their time trying to convince us that big, crowded cities should become even bigger and more crowded. Or that suburbs should become big and crowded, just like cities. This is a fantastic waste of time. Residents of big cities don’t want to become more crowded and resident of suburbs don’t want to become more like cities. They will fight you forever on this. Absolutely forever. The game isn’t worth the candle, especially when there are so many other far more useful things we could be devoting our energy to.
So why waste time on this? The urbanists will haul out studies about economic gains, environmental impacts, mass transit, etc., but they massively oversell those benefits and completely ignore the downsides of crowding. Instead, they should be spending approximately 100% of their time promoting policies that would get people out of big cities and into smaller cities that have room to grow.
It is funny how everyone wants to talk about ‘world-class cities.’ Ho-hum cities are where it is at for understanding the baselines of success.
Jens Moeller of the Copenhagen police is stumped by a journalistโs disappearance after a ride on a mini submarine. The craftโs pilot is held on suspicion for murder but all their leads are going nowhere.
Iโm enjoying this Danish detective story. The focus is on the investigative side of events with the audience only finding out outcomes as they present to the police.
Understanding flood zones is crucial because they directly affect the safety of homes, businesses, and infrastructure. Knowing whether a property is in a high-risk flood area can help individuals and communities prepare for potential disasters, take necessary precautions, and make informed decisions about insurance. Floods can cause significant property damage, disrupt lives, and even lead to loss of life, making it essential to assess and understand the risk of flooding in any given area.
This is where FEMA maps come in. These maps, created by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, provide detailed information about flood zones, identifying areas with varying levels of flood risk. They help communities plan for floods, guide building regulations, and determine where flood insurance is required. Essentially, FEMA maps serve as a vital tool for understanding and managing flood risk.
This is the search result for 183 Dana Ave, Columbus (Franklinton) Ohio.
You will note the comment on the map that references the reduced risk due to a levee. The whole area hashed over in blue and white stripes, is protected by a seven-mile flood wall completed in 2004.
This has significance for property values as it lowers the cost of homeownership. Generally, property insurance in a flood zone can run three times the cost for the same property in a low risk area.
A local guy whoโs good with computer software is taking the time to match public figures with associational affiliations.
These non-profits were once thought to be nice background features in a community. But with all the misdirected funds in the news lately, some are recognizing associational work as players not bystanders.
Itโs fascinating how many there are to consider.
I recently led a reading group for Jane Jacobs’s famous book, The Death and Life of the Great American City. We covered just the first two chapters, where she introduces her philosophy of how cities work and starts off the conversation with the simple yet practical sidewalk. Participants were quick to bring the conversation to present-day examples. That is how I was introduced to Franklinton, Ohio, a neighborhood of Columbus.
As I reviewed the video, I longed for more information about the area. Turning to the real estate websites, I was pleased to see how advanced they’ve become. The most thorough presentation so far goes to Homes.com. Here are some of the bits of information I found informative.
After keying in the neighborhood in the search box, this nice introductory page pops up with a map and current listing. The for-sale signs on the map give an instant feel for price and amount of inventory presently on the market.
This is an excellent snapshot of the neighborhood. There are 49 homes for sale, and 77 have been sold in the last year. Market time is thirty days, quick but not unbearable for buyers. In fact, prices have come down one percent in the last twelve months.
This next section gives some demographics and neighborhood amenities and addresses the most frequently asked questions about an area.
The Redfin site had some extras like this price history graph.
Back to the Homes.com site for this interesting comparison between Franklinton and greater Columbus, Ohio.
In The Uses of City Neighborhoods, Jacobs explores how urban neighborhoods and districts, including Greenwich Village in New York City and the North End in Boston, function and interact. Using these cities as examples, she examines how effective districts empower residents to advocate for improvements in their neighborhoods. Additionally, Jacobs delves into the conceptual principles that make urban areas successful. These principles include self-governance in street neighborhoods and districts, the importance of continuous networks between street neighborhoods, the role of time in fostering stability, and the necessity of a functional identity to unify a district.
At the smallest level in urban areas, street neighborhoods consist of the residents along a single road or small section of a district. To be beneficial to their residence, Jacobs argues that these neighborhoods must prioritize walkability, and interconnectedness with surrounding streets. When neighborhoods become isolated or โisland-like,โ they lack the size and influence needed to effectively advocate for public improvements and services, often leaving them underserved by city administrators. These isolated neighborhoods often consist of distinctive ethnic groups. Although, while they may be ethnically cohesive, these neighborhoods are not necessarily socially or politically cohesive. Without a strong functional identity and broader connections to the city, isolated neighborhoods risk instability, particularly in urban areas where racial and economic disparities are deeply entrenched.
Effective districts are one of the most important components to urban living. These districts bridge the gap between street neighborhoods and the larger city, allowing residents to leverage the public power of votes. According to Jacobs, an effective district is built upon three key elements: a starting point, physical area, and time. Like street neighborhoods, districts should not be isolated by physical barriers such as large parks or highways. In her opinion, districts are always naturally shifting its boundaries as these obstacles not only disrupt natural boundary shifts but also hinder economic stimulation from outside visitors.
Jacobs emphasizes time as a crucial factor in districtdevelopment, describing it as a substitute for self-containment, and an indispensable element of urban stability. Over time, districts cultivate both strong and weak social ties through hubs such as churches, PTAs, political clubs, and fundraising committees. These social networks create what Jacobs calls the hop and skip phenomenon, allowing individuals from self-contained settlements to connect with others through special-interest groups and bring those relationships back to their own districts. As well, time fosters trust and cooperation, enablingindividuals to gain the confidence needed to voice concern about local public issues.
The city as whole is essential, serving as the hub for administrative and policy decisions. It is the primary channel for public funding, distributing resources from state and federal coffers for the benefit of the entire urban population. Jacobs also highlights the cityโs role as a center for culture, employment opportunities and political action, including protests against unjust initiatives. Her message to city planners is to foster livelystreet networks that seamlessly connect street neighborhoods, design parks as communal destination rather than physical barriers, and cultivate strong functional identities within districts. Further research on Jacobsโ sociological theories should explore how societal changes have influenced her ideology. For example, Jacobs wrote her work in the early 1960s, a time when women were largely expected to stay home and care for their families, and before the political climate became as polarized as it is today.
A key question to investigate is: How do modern factors, such as families with two working parents and the increasing complexities of racial tensions, affect Jacobsโ vision of lively integrated streets?
It was one of those late summer afternoons when people had gathered at a lake home for a shared meal and a view of the lingering summer sun rays over the water. A local farmer often included in these, mostly family get-togethers was there. The harvest was still underway, but the crops had had a plentiful year, and there was a sense of contentment around the final crop. Every year, nature threatened crop failure with late spring plantings, or vicious wind storms, or excessive rain. This year, all had gone well.
The conversation turned to local issues, and the relationships were such that it was easy to ask about the necessity of farm subsidies, especially in plentiful years. He agreed. “But if we let them go, we’ll never get them back.”
Many groups’ strategies involve lying low and being silent when times are good. They don’t remind the governing body of the flow of money. Let the benefit slide while everyone’s focus is on some new issue. Let the political energies and attention be drawn away from the fact that the farmers live large at the moment. That’s how is can be in government programs. Once in place, there’s no mechanism to pull them away once the need is no more.
Until Trump, that is. The president’s actions are described as slash-and-burn, as he closes down departments and pulls programs. He’s put foreign partners on notice that what used to be may no longer be. Critics voice that there will be more harm done than good in the outside-the-normal-way-of-doing-things model is put to the test.
But is there nothing to learn? Is there a method here?
Isn’t the President testing group structure? Every time an old way of doing things is challenged- the various groups engaged in the activity respond through multiple forms of Voice. Aren’t some surprising? Like- who knew about the tariffs Canada imposes on the US or between each province? And isn’t the quiet around the Federal workforce reduction a little deafening?
Some people will not like the new arrangements and will leave. Farmers will encourage their kids to go into other fields of work. Countries will turn to their neighbors for new alliances. It just seems like there is something to learn from each of these instances of exit, voice and loyalty.
Yes! If we apply Hirschmanโs concept of exit more broadly to Trumpโs first six weeks in office, we can see multiple ways in which he used exit as a strategyโmoving away from established policies, norms, and agreements rather than attempting to reform them from within. Here are some key examples:
Exit from the Norm of Allowing Migrants to Enter (Immigration Restrictions)
One of Trumpโs most high-profile early actions was his January 27, 2017, executive order (often called the “travel ban” or “Muslim ban”), which restricted entry from seven predominantly Muslim countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen).
This was a stark departure (or exit) from the long-standing U.S. approach to welcoming refugees and immigrants, particularly under the Obama administration, which had expanded protections for asylum seekers and refugees.
Trump framed this policy as a matter of national security, but critics saw it as an abandonment of traditional U.S. commitments to humanitarian relief and global migration norms.
Exit from Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Policies
Even in his first few weeks, Trump began rolling back Obama-era diversity and inclusion initiatives.
While most of his full-scale attacks on DEI came later (e.g., the 2020 executive order banning certain diversity training programs), his administration signaled early on that it would exit from the emphasis on diversity programs in government hiring, education, and federal agencies.
For example, he nominated officials to the Department of Education and the Department of Justice who were skeptical of affirmative action and federal oversight on civil rights issues.
Exit from Certain USAID (U.S. Foreign Aid) Obligations
One of Trumpโs first major foreign policy moves was reinstating and expanding the “Mexico City Policy” (also called the “global gag rule”), which blocks U.S. funding to international organizations that provide or promote abortion-related services.
While previous Republican presidents had reinstated this rule, Trump expanded it to cover all U.S. global health assistance, meaning billions of dollars in USAID funds were now subject to the restriction.
This marked an exit from previous U.S. commitments to funding certain international health and reproductive rights programs.
Conclusion: Exit as a Governing Strategy
Rather than working to modify or improve existing systems from within (which would be the “voice” approach in Hirschmanโs framework), Trump often used exit as a political strategyโchoosing to pull the U.S. away from norms, policies, and institutions that his administration viewed as ineffective, unfair, or counter to his “America First” ideology.
It’s a little hard to believe, but the concept of recording land ownership in a centralized (and supervised) public location is a relatively new thing. In Great Britain, a nationwide mandate was not enacted until 1990. The title work! The property claims! It must have been a messy process. And what if a deed went up in a fire or was thought to have turned to ash?
Here’s a Chat overview of the history of real property titling.
1. The Era of Deeds and Legal Descriptions (Pre-19th Century โ Early 20th Century)
Great Britain
Land ownership was historically recorded through deeds, private legal documents that had to be manually traced to prove ownership.
The system lacked a central registry, meaning land transactions relied on historic title chains stored by property owners and lawyers.
United States
A similar system of deed recording existed, often based on metes and bounds descriptions (especially in the Eastern U.S.) or the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) (for lands acquired after 1785).
County governments recorded deeds, but there was no standardized way to track land ownership.
2. Early Land Registries and First Steps Toward Systematic Record-Keeping (Mid-19th Century โ Early 20th Century)
Great Britain
1862 โ Land Registry Act established HM Land Registry, but participation was voluntary.
1875 โ Land Transfer Act simplified the process, but land registration was still not compulsory.
1897 โ London mandated land registration, gradually expanding nationwide.
United States
1800s โ Early county plat maps and tax assessment rolls began organizing land records more systematically.
Late 19th โ Early 20th Century โ Cadastral surveys (especially in the Western U.S.) improved property mapping.
1920s-1930s โ States and local governments began experimenting with numbered parcel systems for property taxation.
3. Systematic Land Registration and Adoption of Parcel Numbering (Mid-20th Century โ 21st Century)
Great Britain
1925 โ Land Registration Act made registration compulsory for land sales in designated areas, gradually covering more of England and Wales.
1990 โ Almost all land transactions required registration.
2002 โ Digital land registration introduced, enabling electronic transactions.
United States
1950s-1970s โ Parcel Identification Numbers (PINs) were introduced in many counties to systematically track land ownership and taxation.
1970s-1990s โ Geographic Information Systems (GIS) were integrated into land records, linking parcel data to maps.
2000s-Present โ Digital land records became the norm, allowing online access to property information.
Key Takeaways
Both Great Britain and the U.S. started with deed-based systems requiring lengthy title searches.
Great Britain centralized land registration earlier (1862), but it became widespread only by the 20th century.
The U.S. never adopted a national land registry but instead developed county-based parcel identification systems (PINs) during the mid-to-late 20th century.
Both systems are now largely digital, enabling online property searches, tax assessments, and real estate transactions.
It was only twenty-five years ago that abstract books were still in circulation. When a property changed hands, the abstracts were located and pages were added to reflect the changes. The result multi-page pad told the parcel’s ownership story, as seen below.
We’ve all seen them. Whether in a rural area or in the heart of a depleted urban setting, homes are abandoned. The cause generally is not due to a population boom or bust, but rather a population shift. For the later half of the twentieth century, there was heavy migration into cities. Thus rural areas were littered with homes like the one in the photo.
On the other hand, inner Detroit suffered from abandonment and is still dealing with the effects. Following the auto industry’s decline, residents suffered, and the urban neighborhoods slipped from neglect. Without proper shoring up of institutional services, residents continued to escape the area, seeking more favorable suburban dwellings.
The two most impactful effects on neighborhoods are undoubtedly access to employment and street safety.
This series is entertaining. The storylines have more depth than most shows. The two lead actors are new to me and have good chemistry. Of course, there is a passion building between them, but it has been well done thus far. And– the camera lens takes the viewers into all sorts of residences, large and modest. It’s fun to see how the average worker lives in London.
Academics continue to prove that simple improvements to street lighting reduce crime. In a new paper, Can Enhanced Street Lighting Improve Public Safety at Scale?, the authors examine a large-scale enhancement of street lighting in Philidelphia. In honor of new technology shining through on an old idea, here’s some background on the humble street lamp.
A Brief History of Street Lighting: Purpose, Progress, and Payment
The history of street lighting is deeply intertwined with the growth of cities and the need for safety, security, and functionality after dark. From ancient torches to modern LED systems, the evolution of streetlights reflects technological advancements and shifting urban priorities.
The Early Days: Fire and Flame
In ancient Rome and Greece, rudimentary street lighting consisted of torches and oil lamps, primarily used to guide travelers and deter crime. During the Middle Ages, European cities relied on lanterns carried by watchmen or hung outside homes. However, these systems were inconsistent, often dependent on individuals rather than citywide planning.
The Rise of Public Street Lighting
By the 1600s, cities like Paris and London began formalizing street lighting. Residents were required to hang lanterns outside their homes, creating a patchwork of illumination. In 1667, King Louis XIV ordered the installation of thousands of public lanterns, making Paris one of the first cities with structured street lighting.
Gaslight and Electricity: A New Era
The 19th century saw a revolution in street lighting with the advent of gas lamps. First introduced in London in 1807, gas lamps quickly spread to other major cities. These lights significantly improved nighttime visibility and were maintained by lamplighters who manually lit and extinguished them each day. By the late 1800s, electric arc lamps began replacing gas lighting, offering brighter and more reliable illumination. Cleveland, Ohio, was among the first cities to install electric streetlights in 1879, setting the stage for the widespread adoption of incandescent bulbs in the early 20th century.
Who Pays for the Light?
As street lighting became essential, cities had to find ways to fund it. Early efforts relied on:
Resident Contributions (1600s): Homeowners were required to provide their own lighting.
Taxation (1700s-1800s): Municipal governments introduced street lighting taxes, often targeting businesses and property owners who benefited most.
Gas Company Contracts (1800s-early 1900s): Cities partnered with private gas companies, paying for services through public funds or direct utility fees.
Municipal Ownership (1900s-Present): Cities took over the operation and maintenance of electric streetlights, funding them through general budgets, local taxes, and utility surcharges.
Modern Innovations (2000s-Present): With the rise of LED technology and smart lighting, cities are using efficiency grants, state funding, and public-private partnerships to offset costs. Some municipalities lease streetlight poles to telecom companies for 5G infrastructure, generating additional revenue.
Lighting the Future
Today, smart streetlights with sensors and adaptive brightness are transforming urban landscapes, reducing energy costs while improving safety and sustainability. The journey from candle-lit lanterns to intelligent lighting networks reflects a broader evolution of citiesโconstantly adapting to new technologies and the needs of their residents.
This bill is a shame. As if our school districts arenโt already reeling to keep up with mandates under strained budgets.
Of the 49.6 million school age children in the US, according to the article, 22 thousand experience a cardiac arrest while away from a medical facility. Thatโs less than a half of one percent of children.
This plan would require the district to have a designated cardiac emergency response team. Those teams would, as the bill is written, be required to do a simulation 30 days before the school year begins. Coaches would also have to be CPR and automated external defibrillator trained.
It feels like a lawmaker trying to get a bill passed more than a community need clamoring for attention. Feels like a resume builder.
And yet time, regulation and responsibility is going to be mandated down across 331 school districts in MN. It turns educators into medical care providers.
The bill would also require schools to make response plans available and accessible both on the school website and in paper form. It proposes offering $3 million to schools to assist and fund these efforts.
Born in Farmingdale, New Jersey, Ian entered the American folk music scene while still a teenager in the mid-1960s. Most active musically in that decade and the 1970s, she has continued recording into the 21st century. She has won two Grammy Awards, the first in 1975 for “At Seventeen” and the second in 2013 for Best Spoken Word Album, for her autobiography, Society’s Child, with a total of ten nominations in eight different categories.
The O-ring model in economics offers an explanation of a production weakness.
The O-ring theory of economic development is a model of economic development put forward by Michael Kremer in 1993,[1] which proposes that tasks of production must be executed proficiently together in order for any of them to be of high value. The key feature of this model is positive assortative matching, whereby people with similar skill levels work together.[1]
The model argues that the O-ring development theory explains why rich countries produce more complicated products, have larger firms and much higher worker productivity than poor countries.[2]
However, this model understates the possible results, as its production is thought to be positive. In communal markets, the weakest link can fail in their task and draw against the resources other teammates offer.
At Home Economics, we like to distinguish between two types of products: some are more conducive to private transactions, and others are more conducive to communal or public transactions. Those in the first category benefited greatly from the division of labor, for instance. Every worker in the chain focuses on one job, and the line produces a fabulous model T. The second category includes activities such as the ‘eyes on the street’ method of public safety, which was developed by urbanist Jane Jacobs. If a community is mindful of on-goings outside their front doors and reports as necessary, then residents benefit from reduced crime.
Now consider two forms of education delivery. Say one involves students completing modules of schoolwork from a home computer. The overall score of the class will harmed by the weakest link, but each individual performs independently. Now consider a classroom setting. Say one child often misses the bus. They regularly arrive late to class. This disrupts the teacher’s material delivery and causes friction between the students. In this communal situation, it is not only the tardy child who suffers but the whole class. This scenario is one most often given in explanation of why some high-poverty elementary schools suffer from below-average performance.
With items suited to private goods production, the o-ring model implies fewer products that meet perfection. If a company builds laptops and one worker fails to meet standards, fewer laptops are sold. But in a group scenario, where the leaders, perhaps of a certain age, are unwilling to adopt an electronic methodology, say a new accounting feature, they create more work for employees effectively pulling negative productivity.
The negative impact potential in the o-ring model for communal products is underestimated.
Who doesn’t like a wry metaphor or particularly apt simile? Tom Wolfe’s writing is rich in both. His short story Radical Chic depicts the wealthy of NY cooing over the edgy Marxist-Leninist black power organization.
For example, does that huge Black Panther there in the hallway, the one shaking hands with Felicia Bernstein herself, the one with the black leather coat and the dark glasses and the absolutely unbelievable Afro, Fuzzy-Wuzzy-scale, in factโis he, a Black Panther, going on to pick up a Roquefort cheese morsel rolled in crushed nuts from off the tray, from a maid in uniform, and just pop it down the gullet without so much as missing a beat of Felicia’s perfect Mary Astor voice…
And this is all in one sentence. As a high schooler I would try out a few colorful comparisons just to have my paper returned marked up in red: too DRAMATIC! I guess you have to be famous to be creative.
There’s more to talk about in Radical Chic than a descriptive tableau. Perhaps we should take a cue from economist and blogger Tyler Cowen, who recently wrote about the Odyssey in economic terms. After all, the point of Radical Chic is a money transfer from the ultra-rich to a group with a cause, the Black Panthers.
In the Odyssey, the people involved are neatly tucked away on their islands. The groups are clearly delineated as a sea separates them from the others Homer meets on his journey. Fortunately, we have the clever and perceptive Tom Wolfe. He makes the reader see the affluent managing their servants in their townhomes in Manhattan. He corrals one group with descriptors and then another.
What the Bersteins will find out is that there are, in fact, many groups to consider. Many more than the radical chic who desperately needed something new and different in their lives. By the short story’s end, Wolfe lists many more economic players.
FOOLS, BOORS, PHILISTINES, BIRCHERS, B’NAI B’RITHEES, Defense Leaguers, Hadassah theater party piranhas, UJAvia-tors, concert-hall Irishmen, WASP ignorati, toads, newspaper readers-they were booing him, Leonard Bernstein, the egre-gio maestro… Boooooo.
As Leneord Berstein, a famous maestro, is booed while on stage, he learns that there were many more groups in play than the virtuous and the radicals, and this fact has led to him taking a private loss.
People love a villain. Sometimes, I think they need a villain. They can wrap up all their angst and anger and launch it into the world by saying mean things about them. Property owners and landlords have had targets on their backs for the last ten years. After the great recession of 2008 pulled real estate prices to new lows and held them fast under-water in prolonged recovery, the bubbling up of prices has made real estate ownership look like easy money.
The anti-capitalists appeared as if in response to a dog whistle, armed with outrage and disgust at the accumulated value through property ownership. Instead of being pleased with the improved market, which serves as the engine of continued investment in neverending maintenance and repairs, those who spend their days looking for someone with more than them proclaim foul play.
Will the critical voices show up tomorrow at the auction advertised below? A lovely downtown building is listed with a starting price of $1. No– they won’t be there. The truth is many people do not wish to carry the burden of ownership. And that’s fine, but then they can’t criticise those who do the work and reap the reward.
Voice is an essential feature in our economy. The voices I value the most are those from people with experience in the field and those with a personal stake in the experience under review. Be a good shopper. Cut through the noise and valuate the source.
The Minnesota Court of Appeal recently made an interesting ruling. The court concluded that a car’s interior may be a public space if it sits atop a public road.
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the interior of a vehicle is a โpublic placeโ if it is driven on public roads, in a case involving a criminal charge over a BB gun found under a driverโs seat. MSN
We at Home-Economic.com like to think through public and private spaces. Typically, what is considered public is defined by access. If anyone can stroll into a park, it is a public space. If you can walk through the doors of the public library, have a seat in a nice armchair, and read for a couple of hours, then it is a public space.
Wayzata Library is part of the Hennepin County Library System. Great views of Lake Minnetonka!
So, is public transit public in the same way? One might argue it is not. You can board the bus if you pay a fee. It is more of a service subsidized by the public and charged at a reduced rate. Is the interior of the bus a public space? In the sense that the buses are owned, usually by a metropolitan community, then it is public to the municipality. Yet- to board a passenger still needs to come up with the fee. Thus, there is a bit of the private side of life to the transaction.
In looking for perspectives on how to consider the interior space in a privately owned vehicle, the court considered this:
In trying to clearly define what exactly is a public place in relation to a personโs vehicle, McKeigโs opinion focused first on Minnesota legal statute concerning the transportation of firearms, explainingย how the lawย allows for legal firearm possession in a vehicle: โA person may only transport a firearm in a motor vehicle under certain conditions, including in a gun case, unloaded and in the closed trunk of the vehicle, or with a valid permit.โ
It seems a little unusual to me to look for the lines between what is private and what is public in a law regarding the use of firearms. But far be it for me to judge! I have no legal training.
It just seems that if a car is privately ownedand can be contained and controlled by its owner, it should be considered entirely private, even if it sits on a public road.
Although it is fair to keep in mind, or rather it is essential, to keep in mind that many other factors could contribute to the drop off in new housing permits in the city. If you can think back to the last time you made a housing decision, what were the core attributes of your new place to live? Perhaps safety. Crime is up in the city. What else? Perhaps schools. School performance and attendance rates are down. Perhaps proximity to work. Many employment situations went with a remote model, leaving the downtown core empty, reducing the premium to be close-in.
There are many variables that contribute to or detract from the desirability of living situations. Zoning has an impact, but it is way down the list of the core features that impact people’s daily lives.
Thereโs all sorts of reasons to travel. But inevitably you try something new, or experience something new, or learn something new.
Sometimes you see something new like this fancy faucet at the Kalispell airport.
If you look closely at the shiny chrome bar, the left hand side dispenses soap, water is activated under the middle and a cool hand dryer is triggered under the right hand corner.
Nifty icons prompt you while the water vanishes through the bar drain.
CNN brings readers up to date on the antitrust lawsuit against the National Association of Realtors. The plaintiffs were granted $418 million last summer, not a small amount of cash. Once all the legal bills were paid, the 500 petitioners received an estimated $900.
So, did all that work and expense result in a new way of doing business?
โPaperwork has changed, and I think some really good things have happened in the way most of us discuss commissions upfront with our buyers and sellers,โ said Brita Kleingartner, a Realtor in Los Angeles. โBut I donโt think that business has changed in any way.โ
With mortgage rates hovering around 7% for the last six months and average home prices across the USย continuing to rise, the new rules, which took effect in August, had spurred hope that commissions paid to real estate professionals would plunge, making homebuying and selling less expensive for average Americans. Last year, TD Cowen Insights estimated that the new rules could cause fees paid to Realtorsย to fall by 25% to 50%.
Instead, commissions have remained largely unchanged since August, according to a study released this month by real estate platform Redfin. For relatively lower-priced homes that sold for under $500,000, Redfin found that the average commission has increased since the rules took effect.
As I predicted a year ago, how business is done has not changed. The lawsuit alleged a problem that did and does not exist. How do we know? Watch the consumers and what they do. If they choose not to employ two realtors (one to represent the seller and one to represent the buyer), if they decide to pay them at a different rate, then their pull in the market generates a change. If consumers, despite all the layer’s fees, publicity, and exposure, continue to desire representation by a professional licensed agent, then the market rate is being met in an open and non-coercive environment.
Is all this activism worth it? I wish someone would keep track. A legal battle of this size is expensive. Plus, the plaintiffs who were encouraged to participate spent valuable time on this versus other aspects of their lives. It tapped into some of their family capacity for civic participation. Could other causes within their immediate circles better deserve their efforts? Very possibly.
Many feel a moral superiority by fighting the good fight. But when the fight goes to show that the monsters were but mist off a lake on a cold fall morning, then one must count up the expense of it all and do an analysis.
Montana’s Commerce Department has an interesting rating system for property conditions. Finding parcel information with physical measures is standard fare. But this site color codes each parcel with a rating from very poor to very good.
This is important as a long list of defrayed maintenance can negatively affect older properties. The costs for windows, siding, plumbing, and so on only increase as a property ages. It would be interesting to know what metrics are used to draw the ratings. If accurate, it is helpful information. At some point, for example, the cost necessary to bring a home back to an acceptable condition exceeds the finished project’s market value. These parcels are excellent prospects for tear-downs.
Of course, homes with pet deer, like this one in Whitefish, MT, which is near the pink square on the above map, are more valuable.
Chat gives an overview of what types of reporting are asked of non-profit organizations.
Nonprofit organizations are required to complete various types of reporting to maintain compliance with federal, state, and local regulations. These reporting requirements ensure financial transparency, accountability, and proper governance. The primary form of federal reporting is the IRS Form 990 series, which includes different versions depending on the nonprofitโs revenue and assets. Large organizations must file Form 990, while smaller ones may qualify for Form 990-EZ or the simplified Form 990-N (e-Postcard). Nonprofits with unrelated business income must submit Form 990-T, and private foundations must file Form 990-PF. Additionally, nonprofits receiving more than $750,000 in federal grants are subject to a Single Audit under OMB Uniform Guidance.
At the state level, many nonprofits must comply with charitable solicitation regulations, requiring annual registration and financial disclosures with the Attorney Generalโs office or another designated entity. Some states mandate additional corporate annual reports to maintain nonprofit status. Organizations with employees must also adhere to payroll tax reporting, including Form 941 for quarterly payroll taxes and W-2s for employees.
Beyond government oversight, nonprofits are reviewed by various watchdog organizations and trade associations that assess transparency, governance, and financial responsibility. Groups such as Charity Navigator, GuideStar (by Candid), BBB Wise Giving Alliance, and CharityWatch rate nonprofits based on financial health, accountability, and transparency. Many donors and grantmakers rely on these ratings when deciding which nonprofits to support.
Trade associations like the National Council of Nonprofits, Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP), and Independent Sector provide best practices and ethical standards for nonprofit governance. Certain industry-specific organizations, such as the Council on Accreditation (COA) for human services nonprofits, the Joint Commission for healthcare-related nonprofits, and NAEYC for early childhood education nonprofits, offer accreditation programs to ensure nonprofits meet high standards in their respective fields.
Despite these oversight measures, fraud remains a concern in the nonprofit sector. Strengthening fraud prevention efforts could include stricter audit requirements, mandatory conflict-of-interest policies, and enhanced financial disclosure standards. Increasing public access to real-time financial reporting could deter misuse of funds, and whistleblower protections could encourage internal accountability. Additionally, watchdog organizations could collaborate with regulatory agencies to identify and penalize fraudulent activities more efficiently. By reinforcing these measures, nonprofits can build greater public trust while ensuring that charitable contributions are used effectively to serve their intended missions.
But something must be missing– as non-profits attract subterfuge and fraud. What other measures could be considered to validate the good works at hand? What about engagement?
When I was a young office worker, my employer supported several non-profit organizations. United Way was big at the time. Walking to raise money was a popular form of fundraising, and the presence of walkers out and about brought causes like MS into the public’s view. They were annual events.
When volunteers give their time, they implicitly endorse the activity. It’s a little vote of confidence for the cause and the folks in charge. Record volunteer participation if you want to determine an organization’s legitimacy.
Once you’ve spent a bit of time on police dramas, it can be fun to compare by country. Watching For Life with subtitles reminds one how different Norwegian is from the latin based European languages. It’s rare when you can pick up on the words. There are only a few Anglo words remixed with an accent.
The relationship between the two lead detectives has a different strong-woman vibe than Mariska Hargitay in the long-standing US show Law and Order and is the total opposite of Brenda Blethyn, who plays Vera in the British sitcom of the same name. Then there is the very modern and Scandinavian relationship between lead detective Victoria Wolls and her older yet still teenage son.
But the fun is in the details like detective Wolls fabulous modular home and the snowy Norwegian landscape. It is a show which reflects its place of origin.
Based on the latest available data, around 3,286 Californians moved to Montana from 2021 to 2022 according to IRS data analyzed by SmartAsset.com. However, another source from the San Francisco Chronicle reported that more than 13,000 Californians moved to Montana since the beginning of the pandemic, indicating a significant influx during that period. These numbers suggest that while the annual migration might be in the thousands, the total over recent years could be higher, especially considering the broader context of population movements during the health crisis.
Montanaโs population records in at 1.13 million.
Riding the Amtrak Empire Builder from Union Depot in St. Paul MN to Whitefish MT across the northern plains. A sparse landscape especially in the below zero temps.
Robin Hanson wrote recently about his Status Circles. They start on an enormous scale with the whole universe and then life on Earth. But when most people focus on nation, acquaintances, and family, Robin distinguished his affiliations to people interested in the big questionsโthe intellectuals. But even within this grouping, he offers a wide range of ever-narrowing groupings.
Government structures are often thought of as falling into one another. The town is part of a county, which is part of a state, which falls under a country’s national laws and jurisdictions. Let’s call this the Russian Doll effect. By encapsulating one organization into the other, it seems a default that the interests of the smallest doll would be taken in consideration up the chain.
In Vincent Ostrom’s book The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration, the author uses ideas offered by de Tocqueville to suggest otherwise.
I’m reading Vincent Ostroms The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration. On page 80, he refers to De Tocqueville’s impressions of the US administration. Can it be said that the French man thought there was independence between various levels of US governance, and that’s a good thing?
ChatGPT said:
Yes, Alexis de Tocqueville generally viewed the decentralization of governance in the United States as a positive feature. In Democracy in America, he admired how local institutions, especially townships and states, maintained a degree of independence from the central government. Tocqueville saw this decentralization as essential to fostering civic engagement, political responsibility, and democratic stability. He believed that allowing different levels of government to function with relative autonomy helped prevent tyranny and encouraged active participation by citizens in public affairs.
Vincent Ostrom, in The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration, often draws from Tocqueville to critique centralized bureaucratic models. Ostrom emphasizes how polycentric governanceโwhere multiple centers of authority operate independently but cooperativelyโaligns with Tocquevilleโs observations about Americaโs administrative structure. So yes, Tocqueville did see this independence as beneficial, particularly in reinforcing democratic habits and limiting the overreach of centralized power.
4o
You said:
If one were to take the imagery one step further, could one separate each level out by encapsulating them in a self-interest cloak- the idea being that in terms of action, each level will prioritize the interest at the local level, which can be at odds with other levels of governance.
ChatGPT said:
Yes, you could extend the imagery in that way. If each level of governance is wrapped in a “self-interest cloak,” it suggests that local, state, and federal authorities will act primarily to protect their own interests, which may sometimes conflict with other levels. This aligns with public choice theory, which Ostrom himself engages with, emphasizing that political actorsโwhether at the local, state, or national levelโpursue their own interests rather than some idealized collective good.
Tocqueville observed that the strength of American governance lay in its decentralized structure, where local institutions had enough autonomy to make decisions that best served their immediate communities. However, this same independence could lead to friction when different levels of government pursue conflicting agendas. For example, a state might resist federal mandates that it views as intrusive, or a local government might implement policies that are at odds with state priorities.
This “self-interest cloak” metaphor also ties into the broader tension in American federalism: the push and pull between cooperation and competition among different levels of government. In practice, while decentralization fosters adaptability and local problem-solving, it can also create inefficiencies, redundancy, and legal battles when interests clash. Ostrom, like Tocqueville, would likely argue that this tension isn’t necessarily a flaw but an inherent feature of a system designed to resist centralized authority and encourage pluralism.
The benefit of this model, as opposed to the Russian Doll model, is understanding when a group becomes a competitor rather than an altruistic companion. For instance, during the COVID crisis, all the states bid up the price of masks by bidding against each other. In their actions, which were independent (cloaked in self-interest), Americans increased the costs of masks for all Americans to the benefit of those abroad. When reorganized as a bidding unit at the national level, this price effect is reduced.
The only trick, of course, is that you must trust that the greater group will, in turn, divide out the masks to everyone’s satisfaction.
But he said to me, โMy grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.โ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong. (2 Corinthians 12: 9-10)
They say some things you can’t buy. Or maybe some things are more conducive to pecuniary transactions than others. Take the Violence Interrupters. By the summer of 2020, the community wanted to try a new angle on crime prevention, as an article from September explains.
MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — The city of Minneapolis is sending members of the community into the streets to prevent violence that is plaguing the city.
They are called the Violence Interrupters, and they’re tasked with stopping shootings by mediating conflicts in the community, and following up with individuals to decrease retaliatory violence.
Jamil Jackson and his group of interrupters are on the move.
“Our mantra is engage, relationships, resources,” Jackson said. “We’re teachers, we’re business owners, we’re city employees, we’re park employees, we’re just individuals who came to the call and had a desire to come out here and change.”
Their bright-orange shirts stand out, so they can walk in and use their relationships within the community to stop the shootings before they happen
The idea was that if responsible people in the neighborhood could step in on demand when they saw an event unfolding, interacting with police would be avoided entirely. Neighbors helping neighbors have the advantage of, in many cases, a clearer view of the issues at hand.
Others have written about this very thing, extolling the benefits of an active community busy engaging with each other across the sidewalks and parks of a neighborhood. Here’s what Jane Jacobs wrote in The Death and Life of Great American Cities.
The first thing to understand is that the public peace the sidewalk and street peace-of cities is not kept primarily by the police, necessary as police are. It is kept primarily by an intricate, almost unconscious, network of voluntary controls and standards among the people themselves, and enforced by the people themselves.
With good intentions, an office of violence prevention was created and funding was carved into the city budget to pay people in the neighborhood to step in and prevent an incident from escalating. So what happened? Fast-forward to this week in 2025.
Some Minneapolis City Council members say the cityโs Neighborhood Safety Department (NSD) has been too riddled with mismanagement to continue overseeing violence intervention programs. On Thursday, three council members proposed that more than $1.1 million be allocated to Hennepin County to temporarily take over two intervention programs.
For more than a year, council members have routinely flagged concerns over the department that administers violence interruption programs. Several violence interruption groups reported contracts that had lapsed or gone unpaid last year, which council members say shrunk safety services in parts of the city. A 2023 lawsuit also alleged the department arbitrarily awarded millions of dollars in contracts without adequate oversight.
Things have gotten so bad that the council people, who are most vocal against professional police, no longer want to be responsible for this new form of neighborhood quieting. But why didn’t it work? It has the right components.
It’s the money.
The eyes-on-the-street people, who help keep the peace, are many and are often never called on to intervene in any way. To meter out the job to an individual is resource misallocation as it takes a large group, a whole neighborhood, of people to monitor and, through small actions, or phone calls, or gestures, alter the course of events. There isn’t enough of a job for just one person.
When resources don’t have a direct draw against them, they become ripe for fraud. Those in charge of the money have to put it somewhere. Opportunists realize this and create a demand where none exists.
Community policing is a group thing. It does not jive with the division of labor or hourly wages. Whoever is available when the car crashes into a pole and is set on fire, whoever happens to be passing by and has the will and capacity to help, are those who step up voluntarily in times of need. For that they receive an award.
It’s kind of silly to say markets do not like uncertainty. Markets deal with new news all the time. Who thought Nvidia was going to surge last year and then precipitously drop in January? As a market participant, you can take advantage of such speculation. Bloomberg reports this activity in a newsletter today.
People don’t want to think of aid grants as having a market, but they do. They involve needs, donors and are constrained by resources. By abruptly closing down USAID, a repricing in the market for assistance will follow. Some of the needs will rise to the level of attracting a backer. But how?
Voice is used on this side of the market to advertise demand. Hereโs an interesting comment from X.
People who need help are not always in a position to voice that need loud enough to be heard. But I think Mike Benz has a point. Why isnโt the international community, or doctors and health professionals commenting on the lack of funding?
So what next? Most probably some of the projects will continue under the management of the State Department. In the meantime, a market process sifts through the various priorities of market participants. Some needs abroad may be taken over by other philanthropies. Some local organizations might have to downsize.
Whatโs important, is the ones that are no longer deemed worthy of funding will no longer find a match.
Itโs fading now, how discouraging it was decades ago when there were so few strong women in the public sphere.
Thatโs all changed. Minnesotan Lisa Demuth can claim a first as speaker of the House; Nellie Bowles with The Free Press gets extra credit for her skill with humor; Karoline Leavitt is so young to be so poised. Andโ they are all moms.
What most people want out of their homes hasn’t changed much. Most buyers are looking for a free-standing single-family dwelling with a yard in a suburban neighborhood (Slides taken from an NAR buyer report).
The most typical financing is a conservative thirty-year fixed rate mortgage.
Where do the compromises start? With money and condition, of course. Buyers will give on those and the size of the home before distancing themselves from their networks or jobs.
Planners love to come up with ideas like high density living, but in the end– the buyers are the boss.
After a challenging year, U.S. housing starts saw a 15.8% surge in December 2024, reaching an annualized rate of 1.50 million units. This growth was largely driven by a 61.5% rebound in multifamily construction, while single-family starts rose 3.4%. Despite this late-year boost, overall housing starts for 2024 fell 3.9% compared to 2023, reflecting a cooling market due to higher mortgage rates and construction costs.
A significant portion of the lumber used for home construction in the U.S. still comes from Canada, accounting for 25-30% of total softwood lumber consumption. However, the cost of lumber has fluctuated. Over the last year, lumber prices have declined from elevated levels seen in 2022-2023, as supply chains improved and housing demand adjusted. As of early 2025, lumber prices are around $538 per thousand board feet, down from previous highs but still above pre-pandemic averages.
Trade policy remains a critical factor. In August 2024, the U.S. increased tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber from 8.05% to 14.54%. Additionally, a new 25% tariff on Canadian and Mexican imports, set to take effect in February 2025, could drive costs higher. These tariffs may slow future building starts as material costs rise, impacting affordability and overall construction activity.
While Decemberโs surge in housing starts is promising, builders must navigate ongoing supply chain challenges and policy shifts that could influence construction costs in the months ahead.
I’ll be hosting a reading group on the excellent Interintellect site. We’ll tackle only a few chapters at a sitting to make for an easy reading assignment and plenty of time for everyone to get in on the conversation.
A few months ago, I wrote about an investor who bought a property with an old style of electrical wiring called knob and tube. Their post was an example of the complexity of a rehad project. The price of the building was undoubtedly part of their decision-making. But you don’t always know what you are buying. Inspections are done to determine all the variables upfront; when it comes to real estate renovations, there are bound to be some unexpected costs. The expense of rewiring a nine-unit building was a downstroke against their profit.
Homes have so many features, which leads people to make different choices depending on their skills, what they value, and their tolerance to risk. Some homeowners, for instance, will not purchase a home with a tuck-under garage. The thought of the amount of energy loss every time the twenty-foot double garage door goes up in the winter when it is below zero makes them cringe. The energy inefficiency of this floor plan makes the home unacceptable in their eyes.
Over time, particularly when mechanicals or construction processes improve, old systems like knob and tube wiring make their way out of the market. First, the market starts to reject the item, so sellers, in preparation for sale, determine they would be best off making the improvement before going on the market. Sometimes, the insurance company will influence the market by making it more expensive to insure certain features, which provides incentives for replacing those items. Eventually, the old way of doing things becomes obsolete and unacceptable to buyers.
This process may take a couple of decades or a quarter century. Old-timers grumble about replacing perfectly feasible mechanicals, wasting funds that could be spent elsewhere. A long time ago, a local electrician advised that as long as the cylindric glass fuses supported the current demand, then all was well. When one insurance company refuses coverage, other smaller companies may step in. And around it goes until the verdict changes and most homes have been converted.
Consider this method versus a regulation. Once an empowered authority draws a line and publishes a restriction, the market no longer has the ability to evaluate this change in contrast to all the dozens of other upgrades and improvements that can go into a home. The burden falls most heavily on the more dated homes, which are often owned by people who have gotten on in years and are not keeping up on things or those of lesser means who patch and plug problems as that’s the best they can do.
A decree from above creates an acute demand for that one mechanical, which, in my experience, causes opportunistic behavior and price inflation. The market system is the kinder and gentler way to transition from one set of norms to another.
The men worked fifty, sixty, even seventy or more hours a weeks the women worked all the time, with little assistance from labor-saving devices, washing laundry, ironing shirts, mending socks, turning collars, sewing on buttons, mothproofing woolens, polishing furniture, sweeping and washing floors, washing windows, cleaning sinks, tubs, toilets, and stoves, vacuuming rugs, nursing the sick, shopping for food, cooking meals, feeding relatives, tidying closets and drawers, overseeing paint jobs and household re-pairs, arranging for religious observances, paying bills and keeping the family’s books while simultaneously attending to their children’s health, clothing, cleanliness, schooling, nutrition, conduct, birthdays, discipline, and morale. A few women labore alongside their husbands in the family-owned stores on the nearby shopping streets, assisted after school and on Saturdays by the older children, who delivered orders and tended stock and did the cleaning up.
It was work that identified and distinguished our neighbors for me far more than religion.
Home Economics 