4 ms·

A good clue is to look into the systems (i.e. cybernetic) interpretation of the word "governor" or "government". Within a system, the "governor" is meant to ens

A good clue is to look into the systems (i.e. cybernetic) interpretation of the word "governor" or "government". Within a system, the "governor" is meant to ensure that the timing & operation of the other components is in order for the system to operate as designed. The "governor" should minimize intrusion into other components, or it will tax (a pun naturally formed here) the efficiency of the overall system. Which begs the question, what is this system, that we call civilization or society, designed for? If it's for the well-being & growth of all people, then it's the government's role to minimize intrusion into peoples' lives & to be be non-permanent; meaning the government should shrink after it grows to respond to a crisis. This is why early government did not have "professional" politicians or bureaucrats. Once it becomes somebody's livelihood to govern others, the teleology will always be a relationship of ever-increasing extraction until collapse. This is also why early government did not have "professional" armies. The "governor" (or political class) becomes the monarchy/aristocracy in a neo-feudalism state. One can see the state of American politics with it's two-tiered justice system as a proto-aristocracy which will eventually lead to a monarchy. Perhaps we should think twice before our celebration of giving James Bond a "license to kill". If there is a crisis of some type, the government may be useful in theory, though in practicality it's function is restricted by the autopoetic traits of people that run the government not being able to avoid being self-interested and self-selecting to form cartels. See the Stanford Prison Experiment & Milgram Obedience Experiment as references. Persistently high taxes are a good indicator of the breakdown of feedback loops re: the performance/utility/effectiveness vs the cost of the government.

bumby 6y ago
>A good clue is to look into the systems (i.e. cybernetic) interpretation of the word "governor" A small pedantic nit but I think the word "governor" in systems engineering predates cybernetic systems. I think the centrifugal ball governor on steam systems was one of the first implementations. As a literal pressure regulating valve, the term "governor" can be derived from literally regulating a system for a desired outcome. >meant to ensure that the timing & operation So from this vantage point, the primary role of government is to facilitate coordination between constituent parts of society? I.e., you don't feel they have a role in terms of a service component? Can you give more concrete examples of exactly how this facilitation would be employed? (e.g., it reads to me that creating and maintaining a coherent monetary policy would fit this definition, but your previous comments lead me to believe you may be against that idea). Going way back to my original post, I'm trying to get an understanding of how this view moves from the theoretical to the practical. >This is also why early government did not have "professional" armies. Can you elaborate on which governments you are specifically referencing? Because my understanding of many "early" governments is that they were predicated on standing armies, particularly those governments that used them to protect commerce and/or expand their territory. >If it's for the well-being & growth of all people This is probably the biggest area where we diverge in opinion. I don't think the overall utility function is increased by getting rid of programs like Medicaid/Medicare, SNAP, etc. and other quality-of-life programs that are largely funded by the income tax you want to abolish. Is your aim to return back to resorting to charity to solve these problems? If everyone acted ethically, I agree that may work better than the current paradigm but I think we've already agreed we can't count upon everyone to act rationally or morally (leaving out the mental bandwidth necessary to understand the problem effectively to best allocate resources). It would be more useful if you could speak in pragmatic terms; this is the point where I (non-derisively) tried to avoid the "hand-wavy" free-market arguments about how the market will solve it. One area you haven't touched upon that I would be curious about your opinion is the role of government in fostering the growth of nascent industries, particularly those that have such a high-risk/low-reward that the market's individual players generally aren't willing to fund although the potential to benefit society as a whole is large (I'm thinking of industries like early aircraft or, more recently, the space industry). Do you think the government has a role in tragedy of the commons scenarios? (E.g., is it the governments role to price in externalities, to fund research in problems that are a large societal risk but small individual risk etc.?) I do agree that a real problem in government is the "self-licking ice cream cone" phenomenon. Although, I think my preference is that citizens correct this at the voting booth. How do you think about the ability of people to make rational decisions in that regard? (I.e., if government isn't working to the people's liking and they have the power to change it, why isn't either a) the change happening or b) the citizenry leaving? c) are we failing because of our individual cognitive biases?)
- briantakita 6y ago
  > A small pedantic nit but I think the word "governor" in systems engineering predates cybernetic systems. Cybernetics & systems design is the distillation of patterns common across various engineering & science domains. It still applies as an apt description. > So from this vantage point, the primary role of government is to facilitate coordination between constituent parts of society? I.e., you don't feel they have a role in terms of a service component? The government has become insanely bloated, full of grifters & opportunists, pseudoscience, revolving door lobbyists, misinformation, & other self-serving interests that have had a detrimental effect on society. Any "service" or "cure" that the government provides is caused by the government in the first place. > Can you give more concrete examples of exactly how this facilitation would be employed? Yes, let humans coordinate their own activities without the income tax & reduce intervention and watch many societal ill including poverty, violence, drug use, & disease decrease. > Because my understanding of many "early" governments is that they were predicated on standing armies, particularly those governments that used them to protect commerce and/or expand their territory. The USA did not have a professional army. Most governments, before conscription & the draft, had a small, if any, professional army. > Medicaid/Medicare, SNAP, etc. and other quality-of-life programs If these programs worked, why are there so many people who depend on these programs in poor health? Why are unhealthy practices, such as the food pyramid, foisted on the public, encouraging obesity? No, large government programs completely miss the mark & merely act as vehicles to create profit for large pharmaceutical, insurance, & tech companies, at the expense to the public. Just because somebody is insured does not mean they are following an optimal lifestyle of health. There are many doctors who dislike the paperwork caused by Obamacare, because paperwork distracts from caring for their patient. The "voting booth", or now mail in voting without ids, is probably the sickest joke. The notion of Democracy, where 51% have tyranny over the losing 49% does not represent most people in the county, as most people do not even vote & the choices are between bad & worse. The only way to escape the madness of this growing government intrusion is to escape to less governed states & nations (currently occurring) & watch the bloated governments collapse under their own weight & greed, while creating systems that work for us, not the top-heavy self-serving technocracy/bureaucracy. The government is going down it's typical autopoetic path & will have a major collapse of some type, probably within this decade. Good luck!

bumby 6y ago

>A good clue is to look into the systems (i.e. cybernetic) interpretation of the word "governor" A small pedantic nit but I think the word "governor" in systems engineering predates cybernetic systems. I think the centrifugal ball governor on steam systems was one of the first implementations. As a literal pressure regulating valve, the term "governor" can be derived from literally regulating a system for a desired outcome. >meant to ensure that the timing & operation So from this vantage point, the primary role of government is to facilitate coordination between constituent parts of society? I.e., you don't feel they have a role in terms of a service component? Can you give more concrete examples of exactly how this facilitation would be employed? (e.g., it reads to me that creating and maintaining a coherent monetary policy would fit this definition, but your previous comments lead me to believe you may be against that idea). Going way back to my original post, I'm trying to get an understanding of how this view moves from the theoretical to the practical. >This is also why early government did not have "professional" armies. Can you elaborate on which governments you are specifically referencing? Because my understanding of many "early" governments is that they were predicated on standing armies, particularly those governments that used them to protect commerce and/or expand their territory. >If it's for the well-being & growth of all people This is probably the biggest area where we diverge in opinion. I don't think the overall utility function is increased by getting rid of programs like Medicaid/Medicare, SNAP, etc. and other quality-of-life programs that are largely funded by the income tax you want to abolish. Is your aim to return back to resorting to charity to solve these problems? If everyone acted ethically, I agree that may work better than the current paradigm but I think we've already agreed we can't count upon everyone to act rationally or morally (leaving out the mental bandwidth necessary to understand the problem effectively to best allocate resources). It would be more useful if you could speak in pragmatic terms; this is the point where I (non-derisively) tried to avoid the "hand-wavy" free-market arguments about how the market will solve it. One area you haven't touched upon that I would be curious about your opinion is the role of government in fostering the growth of nascent industries, particularly those that have such a high-risk/low-reward that the market's individual players generally aren't willing to fund although the potential to benefit society as a whole is large (I'm thinking of industries like early aircraft or, more recently, the space industry). Do you think the government has a role in tragedy of the commons scenarios? (E.g., is it the governments role to price in externalities, to fund research in problems that are a large societal risk but small individual risk etc.?) I do agree that a real problem in government is the "self-licking ice cream cone" phenomenon. Although, I think my preference is that citizens correct this at the voting booth. How do you think about the ability of people to make rational decisions in that regard? (I.e., if government isn't working to the people's liking and they have the power to change it, why isn't either a) the change happening or b) the citizenry leaving? c) are we failing because of our individual cognitive biases?)

briantakita 6y ago
> A small pedantic nit but I think the word "governor" in systems engineering predates cybernetic systems. Cybernetics & systems design is the distillation of patterns common across various engineering & science domains. It still applies as an apt description. > So from this vantage point, the primary role of government is to facilitate coordination between constituent parts of society? I.e., you don't feel they have a role in terms of a service component? The government has become insanely bloated, full of grifters & opportunists, pseudoscience, revolving door lobbyists, misinformation, & other self-serving interests that have had a detrimental effect on society. Any "service" or "cure" that the government provides is caused by the government in the first place. > Can you give more concrete examples of exactly how this facilitation would be employed? Yes, let humans coordinate their own activities without the income tax & reduce intervention and watch many societal ill including poverty, violence, drug use, & disease decrease. > Because my understanding of many "early" governments is that they were predicated on standing armies, particularly those governments that used them to protect commerce and/or expand their territory. The USA did not have a professional army. Most governments, before conscription & the draft, had a small, if any, professional army. > Medicaid/Medicare, SNAP, etc. and other quality-of-life programs If these programs worked, why are there so many people who depend on these programs in poor health? Why are unhealthy practices, such as the food pyramid, foisted on the public, encouraging obesity? No, large government programs completely miss the mark & merely act as vehicles to create profit for large pharmaceutical, insurance, & tech companies, at the expense to the public. Just because somebody is insured does not mean they are following an optimal lifestyle of health. There are many doctors who dislike the paperwork caused by Obamacare, because paperwork distracts from caring for their patient. The "voting booth", or now mail in voting without ids, is probably the sickest joke. The notion of Democracy, where 51% have tyranny over the losing 49% does not represent most people in the county, as most people do not even vote & the choices are between bad & worse. The only way to escape the madness of this growing government intrusion is to escape to less governed states & nations (currently occurring) & watch the bloated governments collapse under their own weight & greed, while creating systems that work for us, not the top-heavy self-serving technocracy/bureaucracy. The government is going down it's typical autopoetic path & will have a major collapse of some type, probably within this decade. Good luck!