10 August 2016

Foreign Affairs: Democratizing Europe

Instead, the EU needs to radically reconfigure its whole political structure. One much-discussed option is the creation of a two-speed EU, with the possibility of so-called core states moving toward political union without the periphery states. Yet this solution is likely to be unworkable, as few southern or eastern European states would put up with such treatment, and two supposed core states—France and the Netherlands—have some of the continent’s highest levels of popular hostility toward the EU. If the core is based on the eurozone, moreover, there will be little scope for different levels of integration, given that nearly all member states are either already in the eurozone or have signed up to join.

What the EU needs, rather, is a renaissance, challenging inherited ideas about what cooperation between nations and peoples looks like. This renaissance should move away from a focus on formal, institutional relations between states and toward a more democratic compact based on solidarity between citizens. Without the fuller participation of Europe’s citizens, no new policies will be able to address the current malaise, which is based largely on ordinary people’s distrust of the European project. To address this malaise, European leaders should adopt what I call a Compact of European Citizens, governed by four principles of cooperative decision-making. [...]

Instead of a centralized bureaucracy in Brussels, policy formation could be decentralized to a series of policy communities, which would oversee cooperation in different policy areas and which would be managed by agencies geographically distributed across Europe. National governments, then, would be free to choose which policy communities to join depending on the preferences of their citizens. This principle would give each state an active and positive role in shaping the EU’s future rather than a passive one that must accept undesirable obligations. [...]

As for the practicalities of such an arrangement, European leaders should look to legal pluralism. Legal pluralism explores how different juridical and regulatory norms might coexist within a single political system, and a rich academic literature on the subject offers resources on designing legal systems to accommodate populations with radically different preferences. For instance, there could be a more liberal legal immigration arrangement for Europe’s big multicultural cities and a stricter one for the hinterlands, or some regions of a member state might want to buy in to European cooperation initiatives that other regions of the country oppose.

Independent: Alien megastructure star’s strange behaviour can’t be understood with traditional explanations, scientists say

Scientists said last year that the star, named KIC 8462852, appeared to be getting darker with no obvious explanation. Some suggested that the flickering and dimming was the result of an alien megastructure being built around it, to harvest energy.

But others said that the behaviour might just be happening as comets or other debris passed around the front of the star and obscured it from our view.

But a new paper looks at those explanations, and concludes that all previous models can’t account for the way that the light coming from the star is behaving. “No known or proposed stellar phenomena can fully explain all aspects of the observed light curve,” the authors, Caltech’s Ben Montet and the Carnegie Institute’s Joshua Simon, write. [...]

And even if they are able to prove that the star’s behaviour isn’t evidence of alien megastructures, it does appear to suggest that something is happening that hasn’t been seen before. It’s likely that it is a combination of different things – potentially previous explanations – that have added together to create the unusual behaviour. [...]

The alien megastructures explanation was advanced last year, when scientists spotted the strange behaviour and found no easy understanding of what is going on. Some suggested that an easy way of explaining the odd behaviour might be that an alien megastructure was being built.

At the time, astronomer Jason Wright told The Independent: "I can’t figure this thing out and that’s why it’s so interesting, so cool – it just doesn’t seem to make sense."

He told The Atlantic that while aliens should always be the “very last hypothesis you consider”, what he had spotted “looked like something you would expect an alien civilisation to build”

The School of Life: How to Improve Capitalism (Jan 12, 2015)

Capitalism doesn't have to be overcome or destroyed. It could just be improved. Here's how.


The School of Life: How to Improve Capitalism (Jan 12, 2015)

Capitalism doesn't have to be overcome or destroyed. It could just be improved. Here's how.


The Atlantic: Is the U.S. Due for Radically Raising Taxes for the Rich?

This idea, that the wealthiest Americans have been helped along financially by their ability to  shortchange the tax system, is a popular view at a time when the divide between the richest and everyone else continues to grow. According to a Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans say the distribution of money and wealth is unfair, and just over half favor higher taxes on the rich. [...]

Compare, for example, taxation in the United States and Denmark in the periods 1975 to 1979 and 2004 to 2008, as Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Stantcheva did in a 2011 paper. In the United States of the 1970s, the top bracket was taxed at a rate of 70 percent, compared to 39.6 percent today. During the latter half of the 1970s, the top 1 percent of earners accounted for around 8 percent of Americans’ total income. Denmark taxed its top earnings similarly, at around 65 percent, and the top 1 percent of earners accounted for about 4 percent of total income. Fast-forward to the 2004 to 2008 period, when the tax rate of top earners in the U.S fell to 35 percent. The share of income accrued by the top 1 percent reached 18 percent. Denmark, which went through a similar period of economic activity and development, according to researchers, kept the tax rate of its highest earners at a comparatively high rate of nearly 60 percent. The result was that the top 1 percent of earners in Denmark still took in around 4 percent of total income by the year 2008. [...]

Things haven’t always been the way they are now. Wealth concentration was high in the beginning of the 20th century, but then dropped from 1929 to around 1978, according to a recent paper by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman of Berkeley. It’s risen steadily since then. [...]

The gap between the wealthiest and everyone else has grown so large that economic experts around the world have listed the issue of one of the main concerns facing the global economy. To reverse the extreme concentration of wealth that has characterized the last few decades, Saez says, changes to the top tax rates would have to be relatively large—bigger than the changes in the Clinton era, which saw the top tax rate grow from 31 percent to 39.6 percent, or those in the Obama era, which saw the top tax rate grow from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. And increases in the top tax rate would have to be accompanied by concrete changes in the tax system so that it’s not as easy for the rich to avoid paying taxes. Saez’s colleague Zucman estimates that 8 percent of the world’s financial wealth is held offshore, costing the US alone $36 billion a year.