3 ms·

Scandanavian countries are small, more like a big city/metropolis in America. Governments don't scale up/down like zooming on a phone... they behave differently

Scandanavian countries are small, more like a big city/metropolis in America. Governments don't scale up/down like zooming on a phone... they behave differently. See: https://irl.cs.ucla.edu/papers/right-size.html https://irl.cs.ucla.edu/papers/right-size.html

mikeash 8y ago
That’s a great discussion of how scale affects physical systems, but the bit at the end where it’s applied to governments makes no sense. It just declares that it must be the same. Are there actual analyses out there of how scale affects governments, the way one might find quantitative discussion of the square-cubes law in physics?
- jeffdavis 8y ago
  The essay is brilliant because it expands your mind by talking about biology first (a neutral topic) -- delaying natural resistance to ideas that might conflict with poliical views. Then, in this new expanded space in your mind, it challenges an assumption prevalent in politics that policies are "good" or "bad" independent of who (and how many people) they are applied to. In my opinion, there should be a lot more discussion about this. Maybe what we really need is something resembling the Democratic platform at the local level, and something closer to Libertarianism at the national level. The fact that these ideas aren't even discussed should make you worried -- how many other ideas are just not even thought about in public discourse?
  - mikeash 8y ago
    Isn’t there already a lot of discussion about this? In the US, there’s constant debate about whether particular issues are best handled at the federal, state, or local level. We even fought a bloody civil war over the question of whether the legality of owning humans should be decided by the states or by the federal government.
    - jeffdavis 8y ago
      I don't hear the constant debate you refer to -- what are your sources for political news and analysis? The Civil war is a valid example of our historical struggle with the issue of state vs federal policies, but that was a long time ago.
      - mikeash 8y ago
        I get my news all over. Most prominently, NPR, BBC, Reuters, and France Info. But I don’t think it’s hard to find, you just have to look for it. Lots of contemporary debates have a strong element of this. For example, the fight over “sanctuary cities” is all about this. Gun control and abortion often involve questions of whether those things are better set at the state or federal level. A huge amount of education policy debate is about how much the feds should dictate. A big part of health care reform is whether it should be done at the state or federal level. Net neutrality is turning into this now that the feds have given it up. I have a hard time thinking of anything domestic where central versus local control isn’t a big part of the debate.
        jeffdavis 8y ago
        On reflection, you are right that these issues come up. But I don't ever feel like the debate is sincere. It always just feels like the person always argues to move the law to the level where they think they can win (or not lose as badly), not where they legitimately feel is the right place for it.
candiodari 8y ago
Here's how child care works in Norway: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/norways_hidden_scandal https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/norways_hidden_s... http://www.freedommag.org/issue/201501-religion/world/her-name-was-silje-mental-health-abuse-norway.html http://www.freedommag.org/issue/201501-religion/world/her-na... Still think medical monopolies are such a great idea ?

mikeash 8y ago

That’s a great discussion of how scale affects physical systems, but the bit at the end where it’s applied to governments makes no sense. It just declares that it must be the same. Are there actual analyses out there of how scale affects governments, the way one might find quantitative discussion of the square-cubes law in physics?

jeffdavis 8y ago
The essay is brilliant because it expands your mind by talking about biology first (a neutral topic) -- delaying natural resistance to ideas that might conflict with poliical views. Then, in this new expanded space in your mind, it challenges an assumption prevalent in politics that policies are "good" or "bad" independent of who (and how many people) they are applied to. In my opinion, there should be a lot more discussion about this. Maybe what we really need is something resembling the Democratic platform at the local level, and something closer to Libertarianism at the national level. The fact that these ideas aren't even discussed should make you worried -- how many other ideas are just not even thought about in public discourse?
- mikeash 8y ago
  Isn’t there already a lot of discussion about this? In the US, there’s constant debate about whether particular issues are best handled at the federal, state, or local level. We even fought a bloody civil war over the question of whether the legality of owning humans should be decided by the states or by the federal government.
  - jeffdavis 8y ago
    I don't hear the constant debate you refer to -- what are your sources for political news and analysis? The Civil war is a valid example of our historical struggle with the issue of state vs federal policies, but that was a long time ago.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      I get my news all over. Most prominently, NPR, BBC, Reuters, and France Info. But I don’t think it’s hard to find, you just have to look for it. Lots of contemporary debates have a strong element of this. For example, the fight over “sanctuary cities” is all about this. Gun control and abortion often involve questions of whether those things are better set at the state or federal level. A huge amount of education policy debate is about how much the feds should dictate. A big part of health care reform is whether it should be done at the state or federal level. Net neutrality is turning into this now that the feds have given it up. I have a hard time thinking of anything domestic where central versus local control isn’t a big part of the debate.
      - jeffdavis 8y ago
        On reflection, you are right that these issues come up. But I don't ever feel like the debate is sincere. It always just feels like the person always argues to move the law to the level where they think they can win (or not lose as badly), not where they legitimately feel is the right place for it.

candiodari 8y ago

Here's how child care works in Norway: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/norways_hidden_scandal https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/norways_hidden_s... http://www.freedommag.org/issue/201501-religion/world/her-name-was-silje-mental-health-abuse-norway.html http://www.freedommag.org/issue/201501-religion/world/her-na... Still think medical monopolies are such a great idea ?