Blog on Metaeconomics 

(Post updated July 2025) Instead of looking for an alternative to replace it (microeconomics), we should try to imagine an economic...

Preface: The Detailed review of Sandel (2020) in the book by this title (and the later 2021 version Can We Find the Common Good) is done in “academic prose” akin to a journal paper. The Brief review here was done with help from ChatGPT-5.6 Sol. A Substack version is also available. So, in that AI is quite capable at integration, not thinking, the following is a review by ThinkingMe&IntegratorChat. Also, this essay is not just a Review of Sandel (2020). It is also about

Sandel (2020) in Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? (and the 2021 paperback/Kindle version Finding the Common Good, the page numbers herein from that Kindle version) is looking for what makes for a just society, looking at aristocracy and meritocracy, and other alternatives like free market liberalism and egalitarian (welfare state) liberalism, and especially looking at how a system addresses inequality. It is implicitly understood that meritocracy is a ma

Through the DIT lens used here to review and make sense of Sandel, both meritocracy and aristocracy --- as well as free-market liberalism and to some extent even egalitarian liberalism --- are all systems putting inordinate attention to the self-interest of the few and not enough attention to the other (shared with the other)-interest of the many who do not make it to the top. DIT points to the key role of empathy, in both cognitive and affective forms, in tempering the more

Sandel claims we live in dangerous times for democracy, as autocratic demagogues find fertile ground for stepping in and promising to fix the resentment of people at the bottom of the meritocratic ladder. Why? Well, it is not just being left behind in the realm of pay and compensation … as the meritocratic at the top reaped the financial rewards with little if the gains making way down the ladder --- but also losing a sense of feeling part of something. Workers have experi

Sandel points to how hiring someone to do a task like fixing the plumbing or repair a broken tooth puts attention to good side meritocracy, as in “… hiring based on merit is a good and sensible practice, what possibly could be wrong with a meritocracy? How can so benign a principle as merit fuel a torrent of resentment so potent as to transform the politics of democratic societies around the world? When exactly did merit turn toxic, and how? (p. 33).” WHY MERIT MATTERS Good

Success is something we earn. Freedom and deservingness go hand in hand. Success a sign of virtue. Empowering. Responsible for your own destiny. Dark side is less likely to have empathy-with people who “failed.” Makes meritocracy destructive of commonality. Hard to see ourselves in the shoes of the other. Responsible for our own fate. Deserve what we get. People on top and those on the bottom landed where they belong. So, have focused on equality of opportunity, not equa

The last acceptable prejudice. Speaks to politicians pointing to academic credentials. Like Trump threatened to sue the colleges he had attended if they released his grades and SAT score, claiming to be a “very stable genius” with a high IQ. Like Biden claiming he was in the top range of his law school class which was an exaggeration. Credentialism plays in politics. WEAPONIZING COLLEGE CREDENTIALS High IQ claims of politicians suggest the need for said credentials, as a

Sandel suggest we consider two societies that are both extremely unequal in income and wealth. Might say both are unjust. MERITOCRACY VERSUS ARISTOCRACY The extreme inequality of an aristocracy comes from the luck of birth, passed down from one generation to the next. Poor stay poor. Nobility stays rich. The extreme inequality in an meritocracy comes from exercising talent and ingenuity. So, is it somehow more just? Some argue it is more just. Yet, the luck of being born w

So, what do about it? Sandel speaks to the SAT and the notion of higher education being the sorting machine for who will be acknowledged at the top, and the subject of disdain. That idea that education will solve the problem, especially an educational system based on talent and effort, well, so far it has failed, exacerbating the reliance on merit. INTIMATIONS OF THE TYRANNY OF MERIT Sandel points to what happened at Harvard, under Conant, who was the president for several

ERODING THE DIGNITY OF WORK Sandel notes the deterioration in the dignity of work --- feeling part of something while earning enough to support a family --- for ordinary people, as indicated by: “In the late 1970s, CEOs of major American companies made 30 times more than the average worker; by 2014, they made 300 times more. The median income of American males has been stagnant, in real terms, for half a century. Although per capita income has increased 85 percent since 1979

Tells the story of Jackie Robinson, who went on to hit more home runs than Babe Ruth, and how the bat of meritocracy played for Robinson’s success, at the top. So, the claim is that opportunity is everything. Sandel denies that claim, and says we need to go beyond opportunity. Through a DIT lens, focusing only on the meritocratic pursuit of self-interest on path 0G, with the opportunity to pursue that self-interest, is not enough. Sandel points to the need to also see

So, DIT (Dual Interest Theory in Metaeconomics) is an economic theory. DIT works well in solving many if not all economic puzzles and paradoxes left without explanation by SIT (Single Interest Theory in Mainstream Microeconomics). That power comes from the reality that the Human brain has evolved with two interests, two tendencies, two motives as described in self&other-interest. It is about the two parts of the brain, each specialized, as in one focused on ego and the oth

Preface: This brief review distills a more Detailed review of the Celume et al. (2026) paper (see (Details) Shift in the Chilean Water Code: Re-balancing the Profane&Sacred, 1981-2022 ) prepared as part of my work on a book tentatively titled Water Economy: Balancing the Profane&Sacred. The exercise also speaks to the present, ongoing assault on American public property in environmental and natural resources, of the kind the current Administration is pursuing under the

Preface: This review is of a paper titled "Reform of the Chilean Water Code in 2022: Shift from a Neoliberal Model to a More Public Interest Model” is included here as part of my effort to write a new book tentatively titled Water Economy: Balancing the Profane&Sacred. It also picks where the Bauer (2004) book leaves off (see my Review of Bauer at (Brief) Water Markets Are Not All That Free Market Environmentalism Claims ) looking to happenings in Chile in the last 20 ye

Celume et al (2026) point to the questions being addressed as: “(a) What specific issues does the 2022 reform tackle that were absent or insufficiently regulated under the original CA81 (i.e,, 1981 Water Code)? (b) How does the new legal framework rebalance water allocation by strengthening water security, environmental protection, and equitable access, while redefining the role of markets and private rights in Chile’s water governance? Furthermore, (c) What challenges persi

Celume et al did a massive --- wide and deep --- literature search using all the modern modes researchers use these days to find relevant research on the effects of the 1981 Water Code and subsequent changes to it: “Excluded studies included those that: (1) described conflicts, scarcity, or environmental impacts without connecting them to specific provisions, principles, or institutions of the Code such as tradability of rights, perpetual rights, limited regulatory powers,

Again, the critiques point to problems in the exclusive focus on path 0G, as a neoliberal with a libertarian economics theory and framework suggests. Neoliberal, market-driven regime The 1981 Water Code had shifted the focus in Chile from path 0M reflecting “… a reformist and interventionist approach to a system based on private, perpetual rights and free exchange… (p. 397)” with the latter represented on path 0G. Also, increases in inequality were assured as larger land owne

Celume et al point to how the 2022 legislation “… enhances public interest by expanding the authority (of an Other Forum) … to regulate the exercise of water with the “… transitions from being indefinite to temporary, specifically concerning the newly assigned water rights … (and the Other Forum given more) authority to restrict the exercise of the water rights (including being) terminated due to nonuse or may expire if not registered (p. 402).” The Other Forum here is the

Celume et al close out the paper with an evaluation of “… the extent to which CA22 (i.e., legal reform in 2022) responds to the longstanding critiques of the CA81 (i.e., the 1981 Water Code) by systematically comparing the provisions of the 2022 reform … with the main criticisms identified in the academic and policy literature (p. 404).” The close also provides a “complementary subsection (which) examines (the 2022 legislation) … from the reform perspective… to clarify … re