3 ms·
Explicit quotas would probably be preferable to the current state of affairs. The fact that they're implicit means that, as soon as you bring them up, someone c
by scarmig 3y ago
Explicit quotas would probably be preferable to the current state of affairs. The fact that they're implicit means that, as soon as you bring them up, someone can play dumb and claim that they don't exist. It precludes having an honest discussion or even knowledge of how distorting the quotas are.
- roenxi 3y agoImplicit quotas are preferable; if it really matters someone can ignore them. People try strategies of "we'll force the situation to be broken and then they'll have to fix it!" every so often in politics. It often doesn't work with terrible consequences. People lack the imagination to look at a bad situation and easily come to a consensus about how to improve it. It is much better to enforce things by social expectation. Then enforcement measures can be changed piecemeal.
- SenAnder 3y ago> Implicit quotas are preferable; Until you make enemies with a public prosecutor or someone politically well-connected. Then all the legal ambiguity is turned against you.