Basically, a lot of ideas sound good at a surface level, but the actually administrative infrastructure to deliver them might completely change how they are actually delivered.
Work requirements and low means testing thresholds don't work if we don't have the ability to actually know if people are working or what their means are in real time. Need to make policy with attention to these constraints!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I think these conversations can often benefit from specific examples.
Here's one: an @ideas42 blog post from my former colleague Nuha Saho about how his experience as a NYCHA resident gave him a lot of knowledge that aided the design of our RCT: ideas42.org/blog/street-sm…
This is just a nice example of the tensions that are often in play here. When we were designing the posters, we initially just did a mail merge with the administrative data to get the name for each house.
But no one actually uses the "official" name for those complexes.
I know we are all all upset about the Child Allowance Website, but I want to register a Formal Complaint to Administrative Burdens twitter about Massachusett's vaxmillionsgiveaway.com
1.) Why the heck is this opt in? Use a state database that covers 90% of the population (for example, driver's licenses), then confirm vaccination upon being drawn.
2.) You need to respond to winning with TWENTY FOUR HOURS to be eligible
The reasons Democrats have "abandoned" work requirements as a guiding principle is that they do not actually perform their intended function - imposing work requirements does not increase labor force participation.'
When policies do not work, we should move on from them.
I though this was a really interesting point. A lot of the jobs (ie, servers) that are trying to hire right now are *especially* unpleasant when they are short staffed.