> Political gridlock for most of the time, and a two party system that practically guarantees a constant back and forth with the ones currently in power spending most of their time to undo what the previous ones did during their time in power.
This sounds like the definition of stable. But what I actually meant by stable is where you can reasonably expect legal decisions and regulations to be predictable and hence plan around-able. Contrasted to a place where you have to pay unknown bribes to shifting allegiances, etc.
>That's not the impression i get from the people screaming they need to carry weapons to feel safe.
I would bet 90% of Americans do not go to sleep worrying about safety, or choosing to carry guns all the time because of it. But the high trust I was talking about was for things like being able to trust the plumber you called knows his stuff, or that you will get paid on your regular payday, or the food and medicine you buy will be as advertised.
> Today's young workers in the US (but that's not in any way a US specific phenomenon) feel that many things that were normal for the previous generation (e.g. home ownership) are simply out of reach.
Prices are a function of supply and demand. The US is not lacking in supply of land, but maybe it is lacking in supply of land near desirable regions experiencing economic growth. Old people are not going to be able to develop the land into homes, nor are they going to spur economic growth. Young people raising children does that.
> Adding more young people without fixing the underlying issues causing the already existing ones to struggle hard is not going to make anything better.
Adding young people, especially qualified young people who produce things people want, especially outside the country’s borders, is exactly what would make things better. It would increase demand for products and services, without increasing debt.
This sounds like the definition of stable. But what I actually meant by stable is where you can reasonably expect legal decisions and regulations to be predictable and hence plan around-able. Contrasted to a place where you have to pay unknown bribes to shifting allegiances, etc.
>That's not the impression i get from the people screaming they need to carry weapons to feel safe.
I would bet 90% of Americans do not go to sleep worrying about safety, or choosing to carry guns all the time because of it. But the high trust I was talking about was for things like being able to trust the plumber you called knows his stuff, or that you will get paid on your regular payday, or the food and medicine you buy will be as advertised.
> Today's young workers in the US (but that's not in any way a US specific phenomenon) feel that many things that were normal for the previous generation (e.g. home ownership) are simply out of reach.
Prices are a function of supply and demand. The US is not lacking in supply of land, but maybe it is lacking in supply of land near desirable regions experiencing economic growth. Old people are not going to be able to develop the land into homes, nor are they going to spur economic growth. Young people raising children does that.
> Adding more young people without fixing the underlying issues causing the already existing ones to struggle hard is not going to make anything better.
Adding young people, especially qualified young people who produce things people want, especially outside the country’s borders, is exactly what would make things better. It would increase demand for products and services, without increasing debt.