2 ms·
Well, after arguing that it's impractical to run RCTs I guess it's time for a bit of a 'climb-down', because this is a really great idea. I could definitely see
by spangry 10y ago
Well, after arguing that it's impractical to run RCTs I guess it's time for a bit of a 'climb-down', because this is a really great idea. I could definitely see this working in a place like the USA, where you have lots of big States with diverging political views.
I wonder what would be the best way to implement something like this? Just spitballing, but what about Federal grants to partially fund the 'treatment' States (with non-participating States acting as controls), with the policy issue and various 'treatments' negotiated between the Fed and State level? And then after that, States sign on using a mechanism similar to California proposition voting during State elections maybe?
Or maybe even push it down to a local government level? I seem to remember somewhere in the US conducting trials of basic income around the 50s or 60s. Maybe there's a model there...
- webmaven 10y ago> lots of big States with diverging political views. The thing is, political views don't diverge quite as much as it is being made to seem. Gerrymandering scrambles the signal[0] quite a bit and the Electoral College then magnifies[1] the apparent differences. [0] http://theweek.com/speedreads/541955/howgerrymandering-works-graphic http://theweek.com/speedreads/541955/howgerrymandering-works... [1] http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2016/ http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2016/