Connect with us

Economics

Why can’t politicians just admit when they’re wrong?

Published

on

The debate this week was short on exposition of policy but so rich in moments revelatory of the styles and characters of the two candidates that I struggled in the wee hours on Wednesday, while writing this week’s Lexington column, with what to leave out. One moment I’ve been thinking about since was when Vice-President Kamala Harris, in a litany about how Donald Trump has “attempted to use race to divide the American people”, referred to how he treated the so-called Central Park Five. 

Do you recall the case? In 1989, after a white woman out jogging in Central Park was raped and brutally beaten, five teenaged black and Latino boys, arrested and questioned for hours by police, confessed. The matter drew national attention. 

Almost two weeks after the attack, Mr Trump took out full-page advertisements in the four major New York newspapers calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty. Addressing the mayor, Ed Koch, who had urged New Yorkers not to carry “hate and rancour” in their hearts, Mr Trump wrote, “I want to hate these murderers and I always will. I am not looking to psychoanalyse or understand them, I am looking to punish them.” The Central Park Five served years in prison before being exonerated in 2002 by the confession, supported by DNA evidence, of a convicted rapist and murderer. 

After Ms Harris raised the incident, Mr Trump gave one of his jumbled rebuttals. The gist viewers might have taken away was that, as he put it, Ms Harris had to “stretch back years, 40, 50 years ago, because there’s nothing now.” Here’s why the story remains relevant: Mr Trump has never recanted, let alone apologised, and he has continued to imply the five men may have been responsible for the attack. He did so once again Tuesday night.“They pled guilty. And I said, well, if they pled guilty they badly hurt a person, killed a person ultimately,” he said. “Then they pled we’re not guilty.” (The victim is alive).

Why can’t Mr Trump acknowledge that the Central Park Five were innocent? Many of the convicted January 6th rioters also pleaded guilty, and though they have not been exonerated Mr Trump calls them patriots and hostages. He has said he himself is the victim of prosecutorial overreach and claimed “a lot of people said that that’s why the black people like me because they have been hurt so badly and discriminated against.” He seems unwilling to return such empathy. 

The Harris campaign brought a member of the Central Park Five—Yusef Salaam, now a member of the New York City council—to the debate. In the “spin room” afterwards, he called Mr Trump from a scrum of reporters, identifying himself as a member of the “exonerated five”. “That’s very good,” Mr Trump said, grinning, though possibly not realising whom he was dealing with. “You’re on my side!” Mr Salaam responded, “No, no, I’m not on your side.”

I think this is a particularly egregious case of a politician refusing to admit error because it does exacerbate racial division, and it falsely spreads suspicion of criminality. Mr Trump, of course, is extreme in his refusal to admit any shortcoming, such as losing an election, or even any facts that don’t fit his view of reality, as when he insisted during the debate that the FBI’s crime numbers are fraudulent because they do not show the crime wave he insists is engulfing America. But I should note that Ms Harris also seems resistant to simply saying she got something wrong, or even evolved in her thinking. Why can’t she explain why she changed her mind about fracking? I think voters would actually have more confidence in a politician who would forthrightly say that, confronted with new facts or arguments or experience, their view changed. A society in which people can’t own up to their mistakes—and forgive one another for them—seems doomed to make many more of them than it otherwise would. 

Thank you for the wonderful responses to my request for great political ads. I now suspect Australia’s political culture is considerably more creative than America’s, given the suggestions from down under, some of which I had to use Google to decode (eg, “Point Percy at the Parliament”, suggested by Saul Eslake). Roger Karess wrote from Paris to recall a bumper sticker from the Nixon era: “The majority isn’t silent, the government is deaf!” Cheryl Rivers of Stockbridge, Vermont, nominated a more recent example, Rafael Warnock’s puppy ad (not actually his beagle, I discovered while reporting a Lexington about his campaign). I was delighted to be reminded by Thellen Levy of a fictional ad, a sign described in the Raymond Chandler novel “The Lady in the Lake”: “Keep Jim Patton Constable. He is too old to go to work.” ■

Continue Reading

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending