3 ms·
This is a very extreme stance. It also is a false dichtomy. A government bureaucracy (a needlessly pejorative term, btw....) can do things and individuals also
by cjfd 2y ago
This is a very extreme stance. It also is a false dichtomy. A government bureaucracy (a needlessly pejorative term, btw....) can do things and individuals also can do things. One does not exclude the other. It gets interesting when asking what things are best done by government and what things by individuals. The non-respecting of complexity is happening when one thinks that it is one or the other. And the government is involved in any contract anyway because if one side does not do what it obligates, the judicial system can be used to enforce it.
- robertlagrant 2y ago> This is a very extreme stance It doesn't seem extreme at all. If you've ever worked on a technical project and been given a deadline by someone not in the project who also isn't technical, you'll know the problem with central planning. > The non-respecting of complexity is happening when one thinks that it is one or the other This isn't to do with complexity, except that generally the government (or any centrally managed thing) is worse at managing complexity than the government. The government managing something isn't because it's too complex for the private sector. It's because the private sector would have adverse incentives with society-level bad outcomes if it attempted it. E.g. private prisons without sufficient enforced regulation.