One good question for anyone who is proposing to overhaul a current social or political system: "In what ways would this work less well than the status quo?"
If they can't thoughtfully acknowledge the tradeoffs of their proposal, they aren't serious. Life is tradeoffs.
If they can't thoughtfully acknowledge the tradeoffs of their proposal, they aren't serious. Life is tradeoffs.
For example, I support drug legalization, even though I think this will mean drug use goes up, including some people developing substance abuse problems they would not have had under prohibition.
I favor deincarceration while knowing that on the margin, at least some criminals will thereby be freed to reoffend; I also favor increasing police presence while knowing that on the margin, this creates the opportunity for more negative interactions with the community.
I opposed Obamacare while acknowledging that it would make at least some people better off. I took this positions because I thought that on net they were the least costly options, not because they were all upside, not a drawback in sight.
Too many policy advocates--and analysts!--seem to be living in a fantasy world, or a political ad.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
