> But these same democratic systems have historically not just expanded the overton window, but exploded it It seems when the rate of change is endogenously hi

> But these same democratic systems have historically not just expanded the overton window, but exploded it It seems when the rate of change is endogenously high, things have happened in the US, but now with more stagnation the many veto points strikes harder. > We can't just print money to the extent that's required for the really big policy changes. I still disagree. Free healthcare especially can save money because the current thing is so inefficient --- though in the first few years I expect the backlog of "deferred maintenance" to get in the way. Unpayed UBI is scarier, but I think we can still try it. There might an awkward adjustment period, but I wouldn't be surprised if it his a new steady state. > And the US is the most likely to be able to get away with it Yes Last thing to consider is the MMT reversal scenario, where the technocrats just worry about reaching "potential", and quantitative stuff ensuring enough spending and taxing, and the politicians decide the qualitative stuff, and also what level of inflation is acceptable -- because it is still a subjective decision somewhat. In particular, doing a UBI first might be the best way to force higher taxes: people will fight harder to keep their existing UBI than they will to get a UBI in the first place, so with inflation vs loosing it vs more taxes or JG (which is supply and demand of a sort), the latter options might have a better shot.