Talk about [the economy] like what it is: not an existential crisis, not some battle between two fundamentally different religious views, but a math problem, a really solvable math problem.

Davidson urges a shift in how public debate frames “the economy.” Instead of treating economic questions as apocalyptic emergencies or as culture-war proxies (“two fundamentally different religious views”), he argues they should be approached as technical, evidence-driven problems. Calling it a “math problem” emphasizes measurability—budgets, incentives, tradeoffs, and distributional effects—and implies that policy disputes can be clarified by models, data, and transparent assumptions. The phrase “really solvable” signals pragmatic optimism: while economics is complex and value-laden at the margins, many disputes are made intractable by rhetoric and identity politics rather than by genuine analytical impossibility.