Goods that are for the general public, you technically aren’t paying for them but
you’re paying taxes. You’re not paying for them at the store…for ex. Clean air,
Pirate Democracy—Paradox of Power:
When you give one person a whole bunch of power and tell them to
restrain them (you have constraints on the power)… when people have
power they tend to abuse it thus the paradox of power you have constraints
Example: Merchant ship captain is given power… given restraints…
Paradox of power is created by the combination of the need for power
but worried that the person will abuse and the solution is to put constraints
Enable government to control governed
Quartermaster is a separate branch… system of checks and balances (if
you‘re talking about president in U.S., the president can veto a bill which is a check
on the legislature that they can’t make any law they want. Legislature can override
President’s ruling with 2/3rdshouse and 2/3rds of senate. His relation is that the
states have different ways of overcoming.
Solution: solve with democracy and make each other’s interests aligned.
Principle-agent problem: see notebook explanation
Causal Analysis (what can it achieve...not achieve?):
Community of understanding: SPROULE JONES READING… says all Canadians we all
understand the laws but it’s understood…
Collective action problem—Olson reading: if you rely on everyone doing well...
the free rider won’t do shit…arises when there’s a large group of people. Latin-
American who illegally cross the border and don’t pay taxes but still get the benefits
of Emergency services, public school
Ex: hunter-gather societies where so much is at stake… if you don’t share, your
neighbour could be starving and dependant on you. Pretty much says the
importance of sharing everything and having a collective action system only works
in a small group—maybe why soviet union didn’t work out.
Stationary bandit—Olson Reading: Roving Bandit---Olson reading:
Revenue-maximizing tax-rate—Olson Reading:
What stationary bandits do to get the most out of people… they don’t want to lose
too much of it… they need to maximize their profits. This vouches for any sort of
All 3 are tools of analysis; comparativists argue which one is important.
Interest is what people want, and how they organize to get it… it can be material or
public policy interest. People want what maximizes the government.
Identity: people care about their identity more than maximizing their material
Based off of religion, gender preferences
So if you argue for that there are rulers that make them most healthy. Don’t get this.
Institutions: long term rules that a country has. Democratic voting system.
Comparativists that follow this one... a countries rules and institutions are the only
thigns that … not just people’s interests.
Paths of development:
Early developers arose through long term economic development with the
powerful middle class…and once it started growing they demanded
democracy…where most liberal democracies came from
Middle developers were developed economically after the early developers so
to catch up there were more gov’t intervention (this is where fascist regimes came
from [Germany and Japan] social and military classes were important.
Experimental developers: mexico, Nigeria, EU, Iran, south Africa—each state
has own developmental issues… Iran=sharia [church and state], south Africa=race
issue, EU=diff countries don’t like each other [cultural issues]
Late developers: Russia and China..economic development even later, state
had a huge role, small group of intellectuals take advantage.. proletarian..where
Difference between nati