Not because of ideology but because of incentives. People are not intrinsically good or bad, in the long run they behave according to their actual incentives.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
True but why do we have to rule people’s lives with a top-down approach? What has convinced us that top-down incentive design by a select few is preferable to localized decision making?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PanPatterson
A government is an agent that imposes an offset on your local payoff matrix to make your personal Nash equilibrium compatible with the common good. For this to work, all control must be exerted at exactly the right level, including control of the government itself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @PanPatterson
After 40 years of ruling itself, the working class in my own country (Eastern Germany) voted to be exploited by the bourgeoisie again, because the results were better: higher productivity, better living conditions, shorter working hours. What do you make of that?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
The theoretical notion that Gov could create improved payoffs to increase net societal utility is nice, but how often has that been brutally wrong? The power needed to redesign incentives in such a thorough manner is the *same* power that can wreak havoc by poor rulers.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PanPatterson @Plinz
Judging by the fact that Eastern Germany is substantially better off here than back behind the iron curtain, I'd say it was a great move. The real victory, though, is government moving away from despotism and allowing people to make choices.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PanPatterson @Plinz
Would you say the working class is less free now versus before? Freely engaging in labor with a business owner isn't just good for its improved standard of living. It allows individuals to arrange their own affairs according to massive information not available to the few.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PanPatterson @Plinz
Individuals can't be summarized accurately into a basket of statistics because they are individuals. Top-down leaders cannot attend to the needs of individual variation properly. No human or group of humans could possibly comprehend the logistics and needs of the system.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PanPatterson
Sorry, that's bs. The comprehensive system of transportation infrastructure, education, healthcare, policing etc that you find around yourself is the result of that, not just some random emergence over grassroots movements.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Not saying that there aren't cases where collective organization isn't worthwhile. Some are. Infrastructure includes some great examples. I'm saying these success cases don't justify any and all top-down rulership. Going from road-building to food supply is a giant leap.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You don't think that your food supply is the result of a careful and complex government controlled negotiation of many stakeholders that maintains a system of long term models, subsidies, regulations, public investments, tariffs, fines, etc.?
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
No question that government is involved from a top-down approach, but does that explain our ability to put food on the table? The success of the food supply is primarily because we have farmers and suppliers willing to exchange labor & crops for compensation. Gov is secondary.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.