3 ms·
It is a shame that we can't seem to take a more iterative approach to public policy. E.g., try a program somewhere, and if it achieves the desired results, sca
by donw 8y ago
It is a shame that we can't seem to take a more iterative approach to public policy.
E.g., try a program somewhere, and if it achieves the desired results, scale it up. If not, iterate until the end of a pre-agreed timebox, and if things still fail to deliver, that's how learning happens.
Sadly, I doubt that the public at large would be okay with this approach. :/
- safgasCVS 8y agoI like the interative approach - especially if its the local community that has decided to adopt it. But this arrangement undercuts the power of a central authority (especially if its effective)
- AstralStorm 8y agoAnd central authority needs this power because they're actually rebranded aristocracy, right? Generally central action ought to be taken to harmonize local development and fit to super national level norms, not just because - and only when necessary. Anything else is dangerously authoritarian.
- denzil_correa 8y agoThe key question is "What happens to the people who don't benefit from the iteration?" People are not software.