4 ms·

After trying to read the podcast transcript (which was difficult to read, since it appears to be a direct automated transcript), then reading this Q&A, I have t

After trying to read the podcast transcript (which was difficult to read, since it appears to be a direct automated transcript), then reading this Q&A, I have to thoroughly discount the 'Harvard Business School Professor of Management Practice' analysis of 'the problem'. Here's an excerpt: >Could you pinpoint any reason as to why we’ve perhaps strayed from possibility government? >Weiss: In part, it’s just by virtue of our age. Ageing organisations and ageing bureaucracies have a harder time being innovative. A second reason is [...] it’s a problem of overlearning. Alright, so take a material problem like "filing taxes is needlessly complicated" and ask why? The issue certainly isn't 'aging', but a lobbying arm and capitalist interests that has forced people to pay the likes of Intuit $70+ per year just to do the thing. I struggle to understand how 'aging' and 'overlearning' is the culprit here.

ethbr0 4y ago
The difference between academia and practice is that academia is only satisfied with a perfectly coherent theory and practice is perfectly satisfied with an incoherent but working solution. Sometimes, it's more productive to use words, ideas, and objects that already exist to solve problems. Even if they're not ideally suited. To answer the "filing taxes is needlessly complicated" actual problem, the "overlearning" (by which they seem to mean "over-optimizing for risk reduction") explanation would be that the individuals in government responsible for writing the tax code have all optimized for actions which will further/protect their careers. And those actions inevitably lead to a more complicated tax code, because {adding tax code} generally makes important entities happy (exclusions! or more heavily targeting not-you!) and {removing tax code} only makes the people happy (in an abstract way, albeit often angry in a specific way). An example of government policies that could help fight this are the "1-in-2-out" style regulatory reduction mandates. Where in order to implement a new regulation, previously standing ones have to be culled, which effectively incentivizes pruning useless or less important regulation.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  The point raised by the parent wasn't "why is the tax code complicated", but "why is filing taxes so complicated". These are not the same question, and the answers, while related, are not the same either.
Kye 4y ago
It's almost as if there were a decades-long campaign to make government ineffective so people would support dismantling and selling it off to private interests.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
roenxi 4y ago
The bureaucracy is its own organism. The lobbying arm and capitalist interests are a bit like social gardeners, taking the growing bureaucracy and making sure it grows in ways that favour the entrenched interests (with the alternative, cynically, being destroying the market for everyone). If the lobbying ceased, the bureaucracy wouldn't really change. It would ossify in its current form and keep working towards its current goals.

ethbr0 4y ago

The difference between academia and practice is that academia is only satisfied with a perfectly coherent theory and practice is perfectly satisfied with an incoherent but working solution. Sometimes, it's more productive to use words, ideas, and objects that already exist to solve problems. Even if they're not ideally suited. To answer the "filing taxes is needlessly complicated" actual problem, the "overlearning" (by which they seem to mean "over-optimizing for risk reduction") explanation would be that the individuals in government responsible for writing the tax code have all optimized for actions which will further/protect their careers. And those actions inevitably lead to a more complicated tax code, because {adding tax code} generally makes important entities happy (exclusions! or more heavily targeting not-you!) and {removing tax code} only makes the people happy (in an abstract way, albeit often angry in a specific way). An example of government policies that could help fight this are the "1-in-2-out" style regulatory reduction mandates. Where in order to implement a new regulation, previously standing ones have to be culled, which effectively incentivizes pruning useless or less important regulation.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
The point raised by the parent wasn't "why is the tax code complicated", but "why is filing taxes so complicated". These are not the same question, and the answers, while related, are not the same either.

Kye 4y ago

It's almost as if there were a decades-long campaign to make government ineffective so people would support dismantling and selling it off to private interests.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

roenxi 4y ago

The bureaucracy is its own organism. The lobbying arm and capitalist interests are a bit like social gardeners, taking the growing bureaucracy and making sure it grows in ways that favour the entrenched interests (with the alternative, cynically, being destroying the market for everyone). If the lobbying ceased, the bureaucracy wouldn't really change. It would ossify in its current form and keep working towards its current goals.