“Government by Party! Introduce that great and glorious element… and all will be well! No political measures will endure, because one Party will assuredly undo all that the other Party has done; and… the legislative action of the country will be at a standstill. Then there will be sickness in plenty, endless lawsuits, crowded jails, interminable confusion in the Army and Navy, and, in short, general and unexampled prosperity!”–W.S. Gilbert, Utopia, Limited. Act II. 1893. 

In his blog post today, he has a very interesting discussion of “leadership energy”, which sounds very similar to what I’ve talked about on this blog under the name “charisma”.

It’s well worth reading; and as I said in my first post on the topic, Adams has influenced my thinking on charisma a good deal.

It seems like Adams, Paul Graham, and Max Weber are the only people who have really explored this in much detail. Do you know of anyone else?

As the economic recovery takes hold, it makes sense to suppose that market equilibria will go back to where they were before the crisis hit in late Summer of 2008.

In other words; the return of high gas prices. Remember, $4.00 a gallon gasoline had dominated the headlines until mid-September of ’08.

In many ways, this is actually a worse problem then the huge recession. High gas prices lead to “stagflation”, which causes both unemployment and inflation to rise. Normally, there is thought to be a trade-off between the two.

Jane Norton lost narrowly to Ken Buck, who can be seen here not being charismatic:

Like I said when they first came to my attention, Norton did not seem terribly charismatic; but she did seem less anti-charismatic than Bennet. I still think Norton will be the nominee, though. But I do not like Bennet’s chances of beating either of them. Romanoff, however, has the charisma to knock out either Buck or Norton.

Somehow I neglected to notice this, but yesterday was the one-year anniversary of this blog. My first post can be read here if you don’t feel like using the archive.

I still wonder about that post. I think it’s true; but I can’t help feeling it seems to be more of an insult to Republicans, rather than the constructive criticism I intended. The word “empathy” has come to have a much more positive connotation than it really should, I think.