Every government 'nudges' an economy and a social but, we must understand how they differ and in what way they are the same. Obviously, in a democracy, the government governs the people democratically and the economy attempts to stabilize itself by allowing for a healthy competition among individuals. Of course, to facilitate competition, a medium of exchange becomes necessary. Money is that medium of exchange. Without money we could not have exchange of goods and labor. Hence, in a healthy economy, money must circulate among the people at the Bottom, not at the top 1%. We know this, but there is no way to compete against the corporate structure. Hence, we are left at the mercy of corporate competition. But now, lets look at the conditions in the social. The social is also undergoing many changes. Great changes have been brought about by the information revolution and by computers. There appears to be a similarity in the attempt to control the circulation of money in the economy, to wit; the 1%; and the attempt to control the circulation of information; to wit; the recent prosecutorial zeal and subsequent suicide caused by 'info-leaks'. Could it be that the 1% want all the money at the Top and the government ( maybe we should say the Justice Department) wants to keep all the new information for itself. It seems that the same principle applies to both situations, viz. money must circulate in the economy at the bottom and information must also circulate in the social. I can understand real secret info being published but I understand that, in one case,what was leaked was not even "1% of the 92 million items the government classified last year". Wow, thats a lot of secrets. Maybe we should take another look at classification and the zeal with which we persue these matters. Democracy is about real individuals at the Bottom; the economy is about the circulation of money at the Bottom; the social is about the circulation of information among the individuals at the Bottom. Sure, the people need some form of government, but government needs people to even exist. People are never dependent on government, but government is entirely dependent on people. People are just trying to live their daily lives, its the government that places arbitrary limitations on the 'condition of togetherness' of the social. Democracy can work if its practiced.