22 The Economist December 4th 2021
Letters
Letthejuriesdecide
Yourpreverdictarticleonthe
trialofKyleRittenhouse
suggestedthattheoverarching
questionofgunlawsinAmer
ica,andparticularly“when
shootinga personisaccept
able”,isoneforthepolitical
systemandnota jury(“Provok
ingquestions”,November
20th).Lookingtopoliticians
fora clearanswerastowhat
constitutesreasonableself
defenceisimpractical.These
arethesamepoliticianswho,
dependingonwhetherthey
appearedonmsnbcorFox
News,describedthetroublein
Kenoshaaseithera peaceful
demonstrationorriotous
looting.TothesepoliticiansMr
Rittenhouseiseithera vigilan
techaostouristwhowantedto
killinnocentpeople,ora
wellmeaningyoungmanwho
lookedtoprotecthiscommu
nityandwasambushedby
mentallyderangedcriminals.
Thesearethesame
politicians,includingour
president,whopubliclycom
municatetheiropinionabout
a defendantbeforethejury’s
conclusions.Theypromote
narrativesthatviewshootings
throughthelensofeither
systemicracismorwoke
fascism,pushingtheirfollow
erstotaketothestreetsif the
verdictdoesn’tmatchtheirs.
Canwereallyexpectpoli
ticianstograpplewithcom
plexlegalissuescoveringthe
combinationofcircumstanc
es,protagonistsandweapons
thatleadtoa lethalconflict?
Thesearequestionsthatonlya
jurycananswer,afterevaluat
ingtheevidenceofthespecific
conflictinquestion.
tonyvenezia
ParkCity,Utah
Mining in Kyrgyzstan
We agree that the Kumtor gold
mine is vital to Kyrgyzstan
(Banyan, November 6th). We
take issue, however, with the
assumption that Centerra, the
mine’s owner, did not engage
with the Kyrgyz government
about how it could best benefit
the country and its people. For
nearly 30 years Centerra and its
predecessor have operated the
Kumtorconcessioninclose
cooperationwithmany
Kyrgyzgovernments.Asthe
largestprivateemployerin
Kyrgyzstan(morethan99%of
employeesareKyrgyznation
als),Kumtorcontributed
almost$4.5bntotheeconomy
between 1994 and2020.
Wehavealwaysresolved
disputeswithsuccessive
Kyrgyzadministrations
throughnegotiationand
compromise,yetthecurrent
governmenthasshownno
willingnesstoengageinmean
ingfuldialoguesincesending
secretpolicetoseizethemine
onMay15th.Thegovernment’s
illegalconductthreatensnot
justCenterra’sinterestsbutthe
futureofforeigndirect
investmentinKyrgyzstan.
scottperry
Chiefexecutiveofficer
CenterraGoldInc.
Toronto
Investment and rents
Governments are wrong, you
say, to think that allowing
privateequity firms into hous
ing markets will drive up rents
(“Barbarians at the garden
gates”, November 20th). Your
reasoning implies that more
investment in housing should
be welcomed because it would
bring down house and rental
prices. This is not the case. In
many countries, private equity
has invested primarily, and
sometimes exclusively, in
existing housing stock. This
was certainly the experience in
the two largest European
markets for privateequity
investment, Germany and
Spain. Landlords increased
rents and often failed to main
tain properties.
Even when investment
takes place in new construc
tion rather than existing hous
ing, we cannot assume that
more supply automatically
lowers prices. This has
definitely not been the case in
Spain and Ireland. Both
countries heavily oversupplied
housing in the runup to the
2008 crisis. Did prices fall? No.
They rose well above the
European average.
House prices are no longer
simply driven by housing
supplyanddemand,butrather
bythesupplyoffinanceto
housing.Expandingmortgage
creditdrivesupprices,asdoes
thearrivalofnewlandlords
whothinktheycanmakemore
moneythancurrentlandlords.
Andinvestmentsrequire
returns.Ifinvestorspaya
higherpriceso,inevitably,will
theirtenants.
professormanuelaalbers
UniversityofLeuven
Leuven,Belgium
Allowingprivateequityin
housingshouldnotcomeat
theexpenseofthepushfor
equitablehousing,especially
mandatoryrequirementsfor
affordablehousing.These
requirethata certainpercent
ageofnewlybuilthomeshave
cheaprentsforpeopleonlow
incomes.Thehomesina
developmentthataresoldat
marketratesubsidisethe
affordableones,makingthe
ventureprofitable.Affordable
housingpoliciesallowbig
fundstomakea returnwhile
providinginexpensivehomes
toa city’sworkingclass.
anthonyhascheff
NewYork
Struggling to get ahead
The case for investing in social
mobility in America is
stronger than your briefing
suggests, because it rests on
political as well as economic
grounds (“Stuck in place”,
November 6th). In a recent
paper Philip McCann, who
coined the term “geography of
discontent”, wrote that “Social
mobility is the crucial
indicator of populist voting.”
Contrary to popular percep
tions, populist voters are not
uniformly deplorable, stupid
and racist; they are deeply
motivated by perceptions of a
rigged, socially immobile
economy. Whether a citizen
has an unlucky start in life or is
knocked down by an economic
crisis, too many Americans
cannot get ahead on their own
merits. Given the Democrats’
recent drubbing in Virginia,
the party would do well to
pivot away from condescend
ing culture wars and towards a
fairer economy where
opportunity is more equal and
reward is allocated in line with
contribution.
It is important that the
message of social mobility is
not confused with income and
wealth inequality. We have
shown that the latter are poor
predictors of populism. People
generally prefer fair economic
outcomes regardless of wheth
er they are equal or unequal.
eric protzer
Research fellow
Growth Lab
John F. Kennedy School of
Government
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Spanning the ages
“London’s bridges are falling
down” (November 13th).
Indeed. In 1282 a royal charter
was granted establishing the
Bridge House Estates as a
charity to maintain London
Bridge and subsequently other
bridges leading into the City of
London. Today it stewards a
fund of around £1.6bn ($2.1bn).
A simple solution to London’s
bridge woes would be to place
them in the charity’s
ownership, and for the local
council authorities to pay an
annual fee in exchange for
ongoing maintenance.
calum galleitch
Gordon, Scottish Borders
Business phraseology
Thank you to Bartleby for his
short guides to business speak
(November 20th). He nailed it
on the head with most of them,
though I would amend this:
“Do you have five minutes?”
Ostensible meaning: This
question will take five minutes
to answer.
Actual meaning: This question
will take 45 minutes of
discussion and two days of
analysis to answer.
ivan grabowski
Westwood, Massachusetts
Letters are welcome and should be
addressed to the Editor at
The Economist, The Adelphi Building,
1-11 John Adam Street, London wc 2 n 6 ht
Email: [email protected]
More letters are available at:
Economist.com/letters