This morning Roe v Wade was overturned. From what I understand, the legality is now pushed to the state level. A few days ago, on the back of the snake oil book I read and in currently reading a book largely centered around the 1800s and early 1900s, I wondered whether the current lack of a center in the US can result in each side resolving to move farther away from one another.
Tangibly the worst case scenario is a separation of the nation into two parts. But I think practically people care more about not being in a wholesale multi-decade depression than the reasons to separate. More likely, in my own mind, was the idea that the federal government’s authority is reduced by some way, allowing states to make their own decisions. Perhaps it’s shaded by the lines of today’s abortion ruling:
With today’s decision, perhaps that is a taste of how the future decades may play out. Perhaps one group of states has a certain social and economic regime, while another group of states has an “opposite” regime. Over time some migration to preferred states based on values occurs. In this, I assume that there is no good resolution between the divide that exists today. It’s unclear to me how trust is restored in federal lawmakers, not that state or local lawmakers are any better – they are in some cases probably far worse.
Ultimately, for the interests of investing, corporations like stability, it gives them confidence to invest in long term projects. Today’s growing divide may be a contributor to one of the many geopolitical de-stabilizing factors that make the future economic outlook less dependable than it has been in past decades.