4 ms·

Your comment reminded me of this study. Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens https://scholar.princeton.edu/sit

• rayiner 8y ago
  That study is invoked for arguments that it cannot support. That study makes two main findings: 1) “Elites” and everyone else agree on policy the large majority of the time. 2) When there is disagreement, the policy tends to reflect the elites’ preferences. However, they define “elite” as the top 10%. Basically, a typical HN reader. The study is often used to asset that the US is oligarchic. But there are numerous reasons why, in a representative democracy, there would be a thumb in the scale in favor of policies supported by the top 10%: professionals, business owners, property owners, etc.
  • moorhosj 8y ago
    ==But there are numerous reasons why, in a representative democracy, there would be a thumb in the scale in favor of policies supported by the top 10%== Can you share some? Why doesn’t it exist to such extremes in other representative democrcies (France, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Australia, etc.)?
    • rayiner 8y ago
      The study makes no conclusions about what happens in other representative democracies, and I don’t think there is a basis to just assume that the phenomenon doesn’t exist elsewhere. Let’s use taxes as an example. France has extremely low corporate tax rates (11%) and pays for its welfare state with a very high VAT (25%) that puts most of the burden of the tax burden on the middle class. Indeed, America has the most progressive tax system out of all those countries. Put differently, the US is overall a much lower tax country than those others, but the elite bear a larger share of the overall tax burden than in those other countries. Is that indicative of the elite in the US having more or less influence compared to those other countries? As to your first question, we can use VAT as an example. Why would European countries rely so heavily on a sort of tax that falls mainly upon the lower income brackets? There is a lot of economic literature showing that VATs are more efficient than income taxes. So even if the majority might prefer an income tax borne primarily by the rich, the country adopts a VAT instead. More generally, actual voters skew wealthier than the whole population. The top 10% of people might be the top 15% of voters. Who are these people? Well, me. I’m a married professional with a house and two kids in school. If I’m unhappy, I’m going to make a hell of a lot more noise than, for example, a single college student who might not even vote in the next off-cycle election, and certainly won’t vote in the primary or any of the local elections. The top 15% is a proxy for the most engaged voters with the most skin in the game (children in school, own homes, own businesses, etc.).
      • moorhosj 8y ago
        You still haven’t provided the reasons that this would be so in representative democracies. You focus only on tax policy and France. The rich can impact plenty of other policies (minimum wage, healthcare, overtime, unionization, parental leave, etc.) which impact how much income people make which directly impacts the taxes the pay. Put differently, the rich have made sure that they collect so much of the country’s income That there isn’t much else left to tax. This is pretty clear in tables of income distribution.
        • rayiner 8y ago
          Tax policy is a major policy choice, and France is similar to all the countries you listed in putting more of the tax burden on the middle class than in the US. Most of the countries on your list have lower corporate taxes than the US combined with a high VAT. That’s an example of elite preferences winning over mainstream preferences. Incidentally, tax policy (rich should pay higher taxes) is the only category you mention where a clear majority (75%) of Americans supports the view. As to your other example, the view among voters is in fact mixed. When Obama passed ACA for example, polls found public opposition to single payer to outweigh support. (It flipped only since then.) And that’s polls—actual voters notably skew older, richer, and more conservative than the general public sampled by polling. Even today, with 53% of people supporting single payer, it’s not clear whether that would be a majority of actual voters: https://www.kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/data-note-modestly-strong-but-malleable-support-for-single-payer-health-care https://www.kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/data-note-mod.... In particular, voters skew heavily older, and older folks are already covered by Medicare. Also consider labor unions: https://news.gallup.com/poll/241679/labor-union-approval-steady-year-high.aspx?version=print https://news.gallup.com/poll/241679/labor-union-approval-ste.... Most Americans would prefer labor unions to have less influence than they do now or to maintain the status quo, by a large margin (see the second chart). Only 40% want expanded labor union influence. (See second chart.) And again, actual voters are more conservative than the general population. As to minimum wage: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwij2cP0sP_fAhXHmeAKHShEC-4QzPwBegQIARAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pewresearch.org%2Ffact-tank%2F2017%2F01%2F04%2F5-facts-about-the-minimum-wage%2F&psig=AOvVaw2AQOWHsuY1rOX8J9O_j9wz&ust=1548177541467056 https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwij.... Most polled support a minimum wage of $15, by a 52-46 margin. But it doesn’t break down along “elites” and “non-elites” but rather at the middle class. Support is very strong among those with household incomes below $30,000, but for those whose household incomes are 30,000-75,000, there is net opposition 52-46. And of course, that’s among people polled. Households with less than $30,000 in income vote at far lower rates than everyone else. So it’s likely that the majority of actual voters oppose a $15 minimum wage. Finally, addressing paid leave. People support paid leave by a large margin: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/03/23/americans-widely-support-paid-family-and-medical-leave-but-differ-over-specific-policies http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/03/23/americans-widely-s.... But the public is basically split on whether the federal government should force employers to provide paid leave. 48% oppose, 51% favor. (Again, the majority of voters probably oppose.) And if you scroll down to what models of government intervention people support, many more supported a carrot method that gives employers choice (offering tax credits to those who offer leave), than support the model European countries use (payroll taxes to pay for leave). So in the US there is only narrow public support, or outright public opposition, to many policies adopted in European countries. On top of that is the double whammy the Northwestern study completely ignored. First, as mentioned above, voters skew older, richer, and more conservative than the public. So a 51-48 majority among those polled in support of government-mandated paid parental leave is probably not a majority at all among actual voters. Second, any legislation has to be approved by the House and Senate, where some voters have much more representation than other voters. But if we want to enact government-mandated paid parental leave, we have to get through the Senate, where Wyoming has two Senators just as California or New York. So even if the policy was supported by a majority of voters, that doesn’t mean a majority of Congress supports the policy, even if each Congressman votes exactly according to voter preferences in her district or state. The study completely ignores that factor, even though it’s a dominant force in American politics. If we just went by polls, we’d never have a Republican President or Congress. But even though Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of the Republican President, Republicans just maintained control of the Senate.