The Supreme Court ruled Friday that the government's cuts to welfare benefits between 2013 and 2015 were unlawful, marking a significant victory for welfare recipients. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/06/27/japan/crime-legal/welfare-benefits-cuts-ruled-unlawful/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=mastodon #japan #crimelegal #socialwelfare #japanesecourts #poverty

"... this is actually going to cost the government more money. Because, you take away the [equal pay protections], this will lead to higher welfare payment. It will lead to more accommodation supplement. It will lead to higher Working For Families payments. It will lead to a lower tax take, which will cost the Crown money."

#CraigRennie, 2025

https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/pat-brittenden/episodes/BHN-Brooke-Van-Velden-cancels-Equal-Pay-Act--Chris-Hipkins-on-Erica-Stanfords-emails--Luxon-ban-on-under-16s-on-social-media-e32evtg

(1/?)

#NZPolitics#EqualPay#PublicFinances#SocialWelfare

My half-baked deep thought of the weekend:

Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem should be renamed Arrow's Context-Sensitivity Theorem, and re-interpreted as saying a social choice function that neglects context leads to dictators.

I say this because the axiom of independence from irrelevant alternatives--one of the assumptions behind the theorem--states that a social choice function should be such that the relationship between A and B is not changed once a new alternative C is introduced. Unpacked, this means the choice function should be insensitive to any context C might bring with it.

Arrow's theorem essentially says that a social choice function satisfying this and a couple other axioms leads to dictators (meaning, one individual's preferences dictate the social choice function's preferences, overruling everyone else involved in the choice who might disagree). Hence the re-interpretation: neglecting context in social choice leads to dictators.

#economics #SocialWelfare #SocialChoice #WelfareEconomics #DecisionTheory #ArrowsTheorem