5 ms·

It takes homeostasis, a biological mechanism, and tries to suggest that it applies to politics and economy, too. What a strange ideea... Yes, the decisions to i

by M95D 4y ago

It takes homeostasis, a biological mechanism, and tries to suggest that it applies to politics and economy, too. What a strange ideea... Yes, the decisions to intervene should be taken more carefully, but I don't think that interventions "often leads to worse outcomes". In fact, where I live, indecision and lack of interventions are a very big problem.

readthenotes1 4y ago
There is a fairly famous story in management of a guy in the 1960s who fought against building housing projects for the poor by tearing down neighborhoods and building big high rises. The idea was to give more people a better place to live. What the opponent said was you're going to concentrate a bunch of poor people in a building that neither we nor they will maintain, it will be far away from any jobs, and it will lead to more crime and more poverty. I don't think it takes much to say that people are short-sighted and some are only interested in their own personal short-term gain, certainly no metaphor or analogy is needed to state the obvious.
- zamfi 4y ago
  This is a very interesting story, but I feel like I'm missing something -- any chance you could dig up a reference to this for us? Housing projects and private high rises seem like they would have similar problems...I'm not finding this easily, but confess I have no academic background in management!
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    > any chance you could dig up a reference to this for us? you could search for Robert Taylor Homes in Chicago (torn down) or Pruitt-Igoe towers in St. Louis (torn down), for starters. Or the Cabrini–Green Homes in Chicago.
    - zamfi 4y ago
      Ah, thanks, yes I'm familiar with the legacies of torn-down public housing projects. It was the private ones and the implied comparison that I was after -- but now that I'm re-reading the parent post maybe there was no comparison, just a long sentence describing public housing projects as torn-down neighborhoods with high-rises...
  - readthenotes1 4y ago
    It was, if I recall correctly, discussed in the book called _The Fifth Discipline_ by Senge. The entire book is about systems and how we typically ignore them to our disadvantage. There is some overlap between this and Weinberg's Quality books. And, of course, _Systematics_ explains it all clearly.
HPsquared 4y ago
See also, Le Chatelier's principle. It kind of makes sense, if a complex system has found some kind of steady state there must be some "restoring forces" at work to hold it there.
- kryogen1c 4y ago
  > if a complex system has found some kind of steady state there must be some "restoring forces" I think this is one of those things that is True with a capital T. If you start with the premise that life is valuable, it is eventually derivable. Life tries to exist, and since existence is path-dependent making a change is likelier to be wrong than right.
  - empthought 4y ago
    I think you and the parent commenter are talking about the anthropic principle. It might be "derivable" but only in the particular situation in which we have found ourselves—and then it becomes less remarkable.
    - kryogen1c 4y ago
      > the anthropic principle How interesting. Can't exactly run a placebo controlled double blind experiment against the full state of the universe, hm? I've never thought about the universal preconditions that must be true for me to be thinking about them. This is shifting my whole worldview, thanks!
      - empthought 4y ago
        Glad to have spurred some thought... thanks for telling me!
  - voldacar 4y ago
    It is strictly true, in the sense that a stable equilibrium state is a potential well in a system's phase space.
  - 4y ago
manmal 4y ago
Isn’t that what Adam Smith was all about? It’s not a new idea at least.

by M95D 4y ago

readthenotes1 4y ago

There is a fairly famous story in management of a guy in the 1960s who fought against building housing projects for the poor by tearing down neighborhoods and building big high rises. The idea was to give more people a better place to live. What the opponent said was you're going to concentrate a bunch of poor people in a building that neither we nor they will maintain, it will be far away from any jobs, and it will lead to more crime and more poverty. I don't think it takes much to say that people are short-sighted and some are only interested in their own personal short-term gain, certainly no metaphor or analogy is needed to state the obvious.

zamfi 4y ago
This is a very interesting story, but I feel like I'm missing something -- any chance you could dig up a reference to this for us? Housing projects and private high rises seem like they would have similar problems...I'm not finding this easily, but confess I have no academic background in management!
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  > any chance you could dig up a reference to this for us? you could search for Robert Taylor Homes in Chicago (torn down) or Pruitt-Igoe towers in St. Louis (torn down), for starters. Or the Cabrini–Green Homes in Chicago.
  - zamfi 4y ago
    Ah, thanks, yes I'm familiar with the legacies of torn-down public housing projects. It was the private ones and the implied comparison that I was after -- but now that I'm re-reading the parent post maybe there was no comparison, just a long sentence describing public housing projects as torn-down neighborhoods with high-rises...
- readthenotes1 4y ago
  It was, if I recall correctly, discussed in the book called _The Fifth Discipline_ by Senge. The entire book is about systems and how we typically ignore them to our disadvantage. There is some overlap between this and Weinberg's Quality books. And, of course, _Systematics_ explains it all clearly.

HPsquared 4y ago

See also, Le Chatelier's principle. It kind of makes sense, if a complex system has found some kind of steady state there must be some "restoring forces" at work to hold it there.

kryogen1c 4y ago
> if a complex system has found some kind of steady state there must be some "restoring forces" I think this is one of those things that is True with a capital T. If you start with the premise that life is valuable, it is eventually derivable. Life tries to exist, and since existence is path-dependent making a change is likelier to be wrong than right.
- empthought 4y ago
  I think you and the parent commenter are talking about the anthropic principle. It might be "derivable" but only in the particular situation in which we have found ourselves—and then it becomes less remarkable.
  - kryogen1c 4y ago
    > the anthropic principle How interesting. Can't exactly run a placebo controlled double blind experiment against the full state of the universe, hm? I've never thought about the universal preconditions that must be true for me to be thinking about them. This is shifting my whole worldview, thanks!
    - empthought 4y ago
      Glad to have spurred some thought... thanks for telling me!
- voldacar 4y ago
  It is strictly true, in the sense that a stable equilibrium state is a potential well in a system's phase space.
- 4y ago

manmal 4y ago

Isn’t that what Adam Smith was all about? It’s not a new idea at least.