During the 2016 presidential election, both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders argued that elites were hurting the economy.
Accessible to political news junkies while firmly rooted and rigorous, 10% Less Democracy will fuel the national conversation about what optimal government looks like..
Discerning repeated patterns, Jones draws out practical suggestions for fine-tuning, focusing on the length of political terms, the independence of government agencies, the weight that voting systems give to the more-educated, and the value of listening more closely to a group of farsighted stakeholders with real skin in the game-a nation's sovereign bondholders.
Third, his previous research on the effects of cognitive skills on political, social, and economic systems revealed many ways in which well-informed voters improve government.
The consensus of the field is that this detached, technocratic approach has worked far better than more political and democratic banking systems.
Second, as a macroeconomist, Jones knows the merits of "independent" central banks, which sit apart from the political process and are controlled by powerful insiders.
Senate, he saw how senators voted differently as elections grew closer.
First, as a former staffer in the U.
S.
To do this, Jones builds on three foundational lines of evidence in areas where he has personal experience.
In 10% Less Democracy, he makes the case that the richest, most democratic nations would be better off if they slightly reduced accountability to the voting public, turning up the dial on elite influence.
But, drawing together evidence and theory from across economics, political science, and even finance, Garett Jones says otherwise.
During the 2016 presidential election, both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders argued that elites were hurting the economy
