Jump to content
toonkee

Big or Small, the State has to be Smart

Recommended Posts

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, toonkee said:

 

I like his show.

I also watch Smerconish.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, toonkee said:

 

That’s a good piece. Smart guy

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

  • Cheers 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

That’s a pretty cynical way to look at government and it’s abilities. It’s not at all true. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Posturedoc said:

That’s a pretty cynical way to look at government and it’s abilities. It’s not at all true. 

It's absolutely true. Think about what the state actually does. How it functions. It simplifies. It does not scale to complexity.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches.

I agree with the simplification theory, but a smarter simplification is still better than a dumb one.

We need government in some capacity and it needs to be better. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair the state here is the same as any other modern bureaucracy... including a corporation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, toonkee said:

I agree with the simplification theory, but a smarter simplification is still better than a dumb one.

We need government in some capacity and it needs to be better. 

 

Fair enough. Putting a nitwit in charge of the state doesn't make it better at dealing with anything. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

Always seems a little absolute

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

This is a fine, albeit cynical, theory, but isn’t really a theoretical discussion. He’s arguing that mindlessly cutting bureaucracy for the sake of small government isn’t any better approach than expanding government mindlessly. Just as an example, cutting auditors out of the IRS maybe costs the government more money than it saves.

Obviously, he’s applying this specifically to Covid. I don’t know how one can argue that a government can’t help with that problem when us and Sweden are pretty much alone in the free world in having governments that haven’t really been effective in managing this so far. A public health crisis is literally why we have to have an effective government, and he’s saying we clearly don’t because we’ve hollowed many of the mechanisms that make government work. It’s a compelling argument.

(Also frankly, I’m tired of hearing Americans pretend that somehow we love freedom more, and that’s the difference. There are lots of free countries, and we are lagging all of them. We’re just dumber and more selfish. But that’s another topic.)

Back to your theory, what is a complex problem? is managing a public health crisis complex? Building a space program? Building an atomic bomb? Pushing back fascism? Creating a financial system from nothing that would turn a largely agrarian outpost into the richest civilization in human history?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, happycamper said:

Always seems a little absolute

Which brings us to what Zakaria was saying. That the absolutist ideal of small government has really just given us an ineffective government. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

privatize all government services

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NVGiant said:

This is a fine, albeit cynical, theory, but isn’t really a theoretical discussion. He’s arguing that mindlessly cutting bureaucracy for the sake of small government isn’t any better approach than expanding government mindlessly. Just as an example, cutting auditors out of the IRS maybe costs the government more money than it saves.

Obviously, he’s applying this specifically to Covid. I don’t know how you can argue that a government can’t help with that problem when us and Sweden are pretty much alone in the free world in having governments that haven’t really been effective in managing this so far. A public health crisis is literally why we have to have an effective government, and he’s saying we clearly don’t because we’ve hollowed many of the mechanisms that make government work. It’s a compelling argument.

(Also frankly, I’m tired of hearing Americans pretend that somehow we love freedom more, and that’s the difference. There are lots of free countries, and we are lagging all of them. We’re just dumber and more selfish. But that’s another topic.)

Back to your theory, what is a complex problem? is managing a public health crisis complex? Building a space program? Building an atomic bomb? Pushing back fascism? Creating a financial system from nothing that would turn a largely agrarian outpost into the richest civilization in human history?

Thank you for making the detailed argument—and a far better one at that—that I was too busy (gardening—Ha!) and lazy to mount. Still, compared to your endless screed, my argument should punch at the same weight in your editorial eye given its pithy brevity. I’m declaring victory here given the far greater cost in time your response required. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll respond in more detail when I have the time, hopefully later today. But I'll say this now- I find it rather impressive to have the chutzpah to spend weeks pounding the refrain that when people say "defund the police" they actually mean "prioritize spending in a way that makes sense," and then to turn around and say that when people say "limit government spending and power" they actually mean "we don't want any pandemic response." 

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, smltwnrckr said:

I'll respond in more detail when I have the time, hopefully later today. But I'll say this now- I find it rather impressive to have the chutzpah to spend weeks pounding the refrain that when people say "defund the police" they actually mean "prioritize spending in a way that makes sense," and then to turn around and say that when people say "limit government spending and power" they actually mean "we don't want any pandemic response." 

Is the defund the police argument at odds with arguing that we need a more effective government? and nobody said wanting to limit government spending and power is the same as we don’t want any pandemic response. He wasn’t even arguing against small government. He’s saying that our shit response is because we go about those things in a haphazard way by confusing small government with efficiency. They are not the same thing. Honestly, I have no idea how you would argue against that. 

Edit:And weeks arguing something? Me? No chance. I usually stop arguing any point one the booze wears off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China is a big ass state. Isn’t that who we consume ourselves with these days? While Trump is off playing tiddlywinks and talking about coal, China continues to position itself as the world leader in just about everything.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Posturedoc said:

Thank you for making the detailed argument—and a far better one at that—that I was too busy (gardening—Ha!) and lazy to mount. Still, compared to your endless screed, my argument should punch at the same weight in your editorial eye given its pithy brevity. I’m declaring victory here given the far greater cost in time your response required. 

I think you are right to claim the win. I blame my long-yet-hasty response on the weighty IPAs I enjoyed last evening. I'm ashamed. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NevadaFan said:

China is a big ass state. Isn’t that who we consume ourselves with these days? While Trump is off playing tiddlywinks and talking about coal, China continues to position itself as the world leader in just about everything.

Including sending their people to the gulag that disagree with with the leadership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NVGiant said:

Is the defund the police argument at odds with arguing that we need a more effective government? and nobody said wanting to limit government spending and power is the same as we don’t want any pandemic response. He wasn’t even arguing against small government. He’s saying that our shit response is because we go about those things in a haphazard way by confusing small government with efficiency. They are not the same thing. Honestly, I have no idea how you would argue against that. 

Edit:And weeks arguing something? Me? No chance. I usually stop arguing any point one the booze wears off.

He's arguing that the problem is related to the conservative movement's relationship with government spending and he tracks it back to Reagan. He's explicit about it. So while I agree with his assessment that we bought the government time and the government (definitely federal, but other levels as well) cocked it up, I disagree strongly with his assertion that this is solely the fault of people who give the stink eye to the state. 

Look, I have a longer response (That you're gonna LOOOOVE, btw) that I'm going to try to post tomorrow morning when I have a few moments. Because I think we're closer than you think on this, and I think that you guys are either misunderstanding or misconstruing what I'm saying about the state which is not cynical and is not some right-wing rejection of the gubmint. And it's probably because I didn't take the time and words (the words, oh the words) necessary to explain it properly.

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×