"Even today, it’s very common for people, even economists and political scientists to put forward ideas which could only work if the government were a benevolent dictator."
Depending on uninformed voters to cancel each other out while the parties court voters through branding and messaging only works if the (uninformed) voting public is split 50/50 between the parties. Otherwise they won’t cancel each other out. If the majority of the population lives in areas dominated by perspectives that predispose them to one set of messages, you should expect to see one party win more often than not, due to simple population density. That’s why we still have the electoral college. People with fishhooks on the bill of their hats (tend to) vote differently than people with nose rings.
"If you're not re-elected, you certainly don't care about the future costs." This is why the rational actor model is too limited. Presidents care very much about "securing their legacy."
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 89 | คู่เอก "ยอดไอคิว vs คิริลล์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Z3vYkHJ_5Ig/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent lecture! Well spoken and gives time to the listener to comprehend, thank you for not speaking too quick !!!
This is Civics 3.0. So good. So well explained. So important.
"Even today, it’s very common for people, even economists and political scientists to put forward ideas which could only work if the government were a benevolent dictator."
16:48 Rent-Seeking
Thank you Alex! It has made me understand the subject.
Excellent lecture!!!
"the future" for politicians is a tragedy of the commons problem.
Really cool video!
this video is really uplifting
excellent, thank you!
Depending on uninformed voters to cancel each other out while the parties court voters through branding and messaging only works if the (uninformed) voting public is split 50/50 between the parties. Otherwise they won’t cancel each other out. If the majority of the population lives in areas dominated by perspectives that predispose them to one set of messages, you should expect to see one party win more often than not, due to simple population density. That’s why we still have the electoral college. People with fishhooks on the bill of their hats (tend to) vote differently than people with nose rings.
This all seems to suggest a kind of meritocracy or weighted voting.
Imagine a Public School class devoting 30 minutes to watching this video. Nope, not going to happen.
Crazy!!
I love economics
Perfect competion monopoly marginal revolution
"If you're not re-elected, you certainly don't care about the future costs."
This is why the rational actor model is too limited. Presidents care very much about "securing their legacy."