I believe that some baseline welfare state is necessary to make people comfortable w having families despite the unavoidable volatility of a continuously evolving economy Unfortunately (-sigh-) there's not empirical support for this? But it would be SO convenient to not be wrong
-
This is the general flavor of the thing that confuses me — the U.S., for example, is drawing a lot of talent *from countries with stronger social safety nets* *for the purposes of risk-taking*. Why? I'm trying to model this.
Insofar as I have any conclusion at all, it's that safety nets tend to trade off against the long tail gains of success — and people *say* they want the safety, but as long as they're still in the running for it, they want a noticeably larger win-condition pot *more*
-
-
Ah, clearer now. We’re seeing some part of the distribution, the more riskophilic tail. Also the safet net is largely still there (move back to Finland if I fail)
-
I was way more in debt and endangered (and experiencing) of serious poverty in Europe than in the US, because the state got in the way so much. Surviving as a non-conformist in the US is way easier.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.