What is the cause of bad policy?

[cwjerome]

Is it simply bad ideas? People with bad political beliefs?

Or does it have more to do with a "system" or social arrangement that encourages bad ideas and allows more bad policies to take hold? Think about it.

I have a theory. I would argue that it's not bad ideas we should fear and blame, it's a flawed society that propels and hoists bad ideas into our lives. Ideas come and go, some bad some good, some change over time... the marketplace of ideas should be open, honest, and respectable. Bad ideas may happen -it's natural- but with such a dynamic marketplace with honorable people they can be smaller, fixes can be made and we continue on our way. But what if the marketplace itself is skewed and the people corrupt? Suddenly bad ideas are more common, gain more strength, and are harder to remedy. Is this what we have today?

Aristotle believed politics was essentially debate and deliberation on what is just. Citizens who could do this well were virtuous, and this is the foundation of a healthy, moral, and prosperous society. Debate and deliberation does not mean picking a side and justifying/rationalizing everything about it (and tearing down any opposition) because it's psychologically easy and protective. It means knowing you thoughts, why you have them, and who you are. It means thinking independently and originally, having an inquiry spirit and impartially accepting knowledge and reasoning. Honesty, sincerity, and integrity are the basis of understanding.

Bad government is the biggest cause of the word's problems and good government is the most powerful solution. Good government cannot happen when the character of the people is poisoned and the civic discourse is perverted. Attacking bad ideas isn't enough, it won't work when the mechanism of discourse and action is damaged. We must begin to fix the system and that will allow us to properly address issues and make real change for the better. Politics should not be just about winning, selfish interests, or the competition of interest/political groups that don’t really listen to each other, or care about anything other than one-upping the other guys and winning elections. We are exhibiting the most devolved, immature, and petty traits of republican democracy.

People and groups have bad ideas, there's no avoiding it, we've all had them (I've had plenty, and I'm sure I'll have more), and we can't change that. There's no way to get rid of them and there's no reason getting agitated about it. But by having a system where people can engage in calm conversation, sincerely listen, seek self improvement and honest introspection, be willing to have strong convictions yet allow the same in others, and not be wedded to phony groupthink, we can mitigate this reality.

Bad character&Civic atmosphere = worse ideas = worse policies
Good character&Civic atmosphere =better ideas = better policies

We have to start at the beginning. That's my theory.

Is it possible?

 

[Texashiker]

What is the cause of bad policy?

Who decides if a policy is bad?

Moving jobs to china to exploit cheap labor might be bad for someone working here in the states, but its good for the companies profits.

Not regulating BPA - bad for consumers health, good for companies.

Not regulating lead - bad for consumers health, good for companies.

Not regulating coal power plant emissions - bad for consumers health, good for companies.

not regulating tobacco - bad for consumers health, good for companies.

 

[Craig234]

One kind of politics is the type where 'citizens' are determing who is elected. Not just being useless stampers of names sold to them by expensive marketing. That's the type you are referring to. Another type is when the concentration of wealth and power is high, and interests largely at odds with the public are choosing who is elected, to serve them.

Your post has no relevancy to that second type, which partly describes the Republicans and corporatist Democrats.

You may as well try to talk about having the Mafia have nice democratic debate in its ranks about its activities, and maybe they'll talk their way into not doing crime.

It's about institutions, money, inertia. The public needs to 'fight' against those powers.

When the country was founded, there was no society with incredibly large, powerful, rich corporations dominating it the way there is now. There was just 'the people'. They had some vague idea of excessive concentrated wealth and power, but that was 'the Monarchy', which starting with Queen Elizabeth I had invented 'the corporation' to let the nobility have more freedom to go around the world taking things for them without personal liability, resulting in the world's first and biggest corporation, the India Tea Company (you might remember them from something called 'the tea party', which was about that nobility using their political power to give their company advantage over the colonists).

To the founding fathers it was about limiting 'the nobility' - all that mess with people having fancy titles that stayed in their families, owning and running everything, versus 'the people', small businesses and workers, who should not have those crooks over them politically or financially.

They didn't pass laws about 'the corporation' because there was no such thing, really, without 'a nobility' there was no 'East India Company'.

But society changed and this new corrupt powerful concentration of wealth and power came to great power after the Industrial revolution. I could quote you presidents and others warning of their danger to society but you get the point.

Our politics has not kept up - it has been defeated, taken over, by this new institution. Corporations corrupt and twist our political system and make a mockery and lies of the ideas in it, making the words of our founding fathers hollow and irrelevant to what happens.

Now we're in a war, which like many wars, most ignore, between 'democrats' - not the party but those who support 'the public' - versus this corrupt machine, 'the corporatocracy'. Things are going the corporatocracy's way.

This is where we've seen the people ignored in matters of war, foreign policy, and now in terms of the institutions of our wealth becoming crooks taking all the new wealth our society creates for themselves, which they use a tiny bit of to control our politics more and more.

This concentration of wealth is incompatible with democracy. The people can accept the 'economic royals' and giving away their money - one of the key lies being that it's the government taking their money they should worry about - or they can support democracy.

With the think tanks, the media, the business interests who pay the people, and more all pushing one answer, the people have a tough situation. It's easier to accept the effective - and perhaps later the actual - loss of democracy.

Save234

 

[Rainsford]

I think you're searching for complexity where it doesn't exists and attempting to find profound insight where there's none to be found. The world is full of bad solutions to problems and bad solutions where problems don't even exist. Government is simply a larger and more visible stage for that brand of terrible problem solving. But it's still composed of basically the same people as the rest of society, and mostly supported by the rest of society as well.

In other words, we don't have government budget problems because of some mystical government only issue. We have government budget problems because we have individual budget problems and government represents the people. We don't have illogical and unscientific solutions to problems because government doesn't understand logic and science, we have those kind of solutions because PEOPLE by and large don't apply logic and science correctly. And we don't have hasty and reactionary government action because government just can't help itself, we have those things because that's how individuals more often than not react to problems in their own lives.

 

[charrison]

Bad policy comes from valuing ideas over results.

 

[Moonbeam]

No political system should exist that isn't run 51% or better by women. Another name for bad ideas is ideas thought up by men.

 

[Moonbeam]

Bad policy comes from valuing ideas over results.

A belief in a bad policy always leads to positive results.

 

[Jhhnn]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010726030451/http://www.indymedia.org/print.php3?article_id=3159

Bad policy is the result of simulated rationality. That's when bullshit is made to seem reasonable, even desirable.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Bad policy arises from trying to control, regulate or, limit a "bad" result rather than developing policies to encourage good results.

 

[sandorski]

Excessive Lobbying and Money is what's mucking up the US Political system. It's painfully obvious.

 

[DrPizza]

One cause of bad policy is when our representatives vote based on their gut instincts & feelings, rather than based on solid evidence. i.e. decisions to teach abstinence only sex education. Every study known has demonstrated that even among the religious (in fact, moreso) abstinence only education leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy, higher rates of STDs, etc. Yet, "I know it's immoral, so I'm going to vote for abstinence only sex ed." What's immoral is subjecting all these teens to STDs & out of wedlock births because of a denial of reality.

The same type of decision making happens all over economic issues and other political issues.

 

[Ausm]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

[Genx87]

This thread is a microcosm of the cause of bad policy.

 

[monovillage]

Excessive Lobbying and Money is what's mucking up the US Political system. It's painfully obvious.

Grats on the great job you all did in Sask !

 

[Macamus Prime]

Bad policy comes from those who have the $$$. They use their existing wealth to make more and it usually harms others.

Look at hedge funds. Look at manufacturing being moved over seas. Look at health care.

Greed is the source of bad policy.

 

[Genx87]

Bad policy comes from those who have the $$$. They use their existing wealth to make more and it usually harms others.

Look at hedge funds. Look at manufacturing being moved over seas. Look at health care.

Greed is the source of bad policy.

I get it now. Manufacturing enacted regulation and environmental laws so it would be financially required to move production off shore. Healthcare enacted overburdensome regulation so they could make the costs of healthcare rise faster than inflation for 40 years at the risk of being taken over by govt.

The source of bad policy is not something one can pinpoint. It's source is from the lowest of the low to the highest of the high.

 

[woolfe9999]

One cause of bad policy is when our representatives vote based on their gut instincts & feelings, rather than based on solid evidence. i.e. decisions to teach abstinence only sex education. Every study known has demonstrated that even among the religious (in fact, moreso) abstinence only education leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy, higher rates of STDs, etc. Yet, "I know it's immoral, so I'm going to vote for abstinence only sex ed." What's immoral is subjecting all these teens to STDs & out of wedlock births because of a denial of reality.

The same type of decision making happens all over economic issues and other political issues.

It isn't only our "representatives" who vote based on emotion. Our citizens do as well, in elections.

Rainsford pretty much nailed this - we get exactly the leaders and policies we deserve. Their failings are our failings.

 

[blackangst1]

I think you're searching for complexity where it doesn't exists and attempting to find profound insight where there's none to be found. The world is full of bad solutions to problems and bad solutions where problems don't even exist. Government is simply a larger and more visible stage for that brand of terrible problem solving. But it's still composed of basically the same people as the rest of society, and mostly supported by the rest of society as well.

In other words, we don't have government budget problems because of some mystical government only issue. We have government budget problems because we have individual budget problems and government represents the people. We don't have illogical and unscientific solutions to problems because government doesn't understand logic and science, we have those kind of solutions because PEOPLE by and large don't apply logic and science correctly. And we don't have hasty and reactionary government action because government just can't help itself, we have those things because that's how individuals more often than not react to problems in their own lives.

I think this is pretty accurate. I also think Texashiker made good points also. Many times, in the case of an extremely diverse population, its impossible to make a policy that benefits everyone, let alone equally.

I also think many times its a case of beware unintended consequences. Like the Dodd-Frank Act as an example. The intention may be good, but the consequences arent well thought out. Reminds me of the captioned dos XXX pic....I dont always test my code, but when I do I do it in production.

 

[Perknose]

Every study known has demonstrated that even among the religious (in fact, moreso) abstinence only education leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy, higher rates of STDs, etc. Yet, "I know it's immoral, so I'm going to vote for abstinence only sex ed." What's immoral is subjecting all these teens to STDs & out of wedlock births because of a denial of reality.

^^^ This is an example of this:

Bad policy comes from valuing ideas over results.

Reagan's voodoo trickle down economics, the Defense of Marriage Act, no tax hike pledges in the face of critical deficits, forcing the teaching of "Intelligent Design", Bush's Iraqi invasion and war . . . ALL are prime recent examples of valuing ideological ideas over results, rationality, and even reality.

And they ALL have come from the right. :hmm:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Reagan's voodoo trickle down economics, the Defense of Marriage Act, no tax hike pledges in the face of critical deficits, forcing the teaching of "Intelligent Design", Bush's Iraqi invasion and war . . . ALL are prime recent examples of valuing ideological ideas over results, rationality, and even reality.

And they ALL have come from the right. :hmm:

And the left has always come out with pristine ideas?

 

[Macamus Prime]

And the left has always come out with pristine ideas?

I know right!! Look at them, always fighting for a woman's right to choose what she does with her body! The nerve of these women and their supporters! Always thinking they can decide what to do with their bodies!!

And, look at how the left has FORCED the right to LIE to women!!

http://www.prochoicenc.org/assets/files/cpcdocument.pdf

Damn left!! You made the right lie!!!

 

[SpatiallyAware]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

This ends the entire thread.

 

[cwjerome]

I think you're searching for complexity where it doesn't exists and attempting to find profound insight where there's none to be found. The world is full of bad solutions to problems and bad solutions where problems don't even exist. Government is simply a larger and more visible stage for that brand of terrible problem solving. But it's still composed of basically the same people as the rest of society, and mostly supported by the rest of society as well.

I'm not sure how profound it is, but my idea is paradoxical: It's both simple yet complex. Some people in this thread have stated the common themes... bad policy is the result of greed, power, money, etc. To me, that's the easy way out, it's incomplete. The perspective I'm attempting to share is that bad policies are not so much the result of bad ideas, but in a more fundamental sense, bad policy is the result of two things: people (the body politic, the masses) generally having low character, and, a society (civic atmosphere) that is corrupted. In other words, if more people demonstrated higher character traits and political discourse was honest and sincere, there would be less bad policy. I am not sure how to say it well... I'm talking more about civic method or process than the actual bad ideas themselves.

Attacking each others' ideas as bad and such really doesn't mean a lot when the overall social-political climate is highly defective. Most people are generally committed, one way or another... they find answers and seek evidence to defend it. They are not honest with themselves or others. They are cynical, seek to damage or destroy, and generally take an infantile view of politics. True inquiry and self improvement is rare. Objective sincerity is even more rare. People lurk at the tip of the iceberg with superficial slogans and talking points without true deeper understanding or a coherent philosophy. I do not see how this current way we "do business" is useful, I don't see how anyone will change their mind about anything, and it seems entirely unproductive.

The focus should be on people. Being better people and better citizens. We can attack bad ideas and bad policy all we want in the current, deeply flawed manner we do, yet nothing will change until we re-learn what it means to be decent people who can engage in deliberative, reasonable conversation.

In other words, we don't have government budget problems because of some mystical government only issue. We have government budget problems because we have individual budget problems and government represents the people. We don't have illogical and unscientific solutions to problems because government doesn't understand logic and science, we have those kind of solutions because PEOPLE by and large don't apply logic and science correctly. And we don't have hasty and reactionary government action because government just can't help itself, we have those things because that's how individuals more often than not react to problems in their own lives.

That's another way of saying what I thought I was trying to say.


I really don't want this to come off as some fruity "can't we all just get along" nonsense. I do believe we have lost sight of the big picture in the daily political grind, the political sport it has become, and could use a good classical refresher on civic duty and virtue. Not promoting interests, but promoting real understanding.

 

[woolfe9999]

I really don't want this to come off as some fruity "can't we all just get along" nonsense. I do believe we have lost sight of the big picture in the daily political grind, the political sport it has become, and could use a good classical refresher on civic duty and virtue. Not promoting interests, but promoting real understanding.

Yes, you're correct to focus on context and process over the arguments themselves. Bad ideas do not arise from a vacuum. However, when you're talking about people being of "low character," that is kind of a meaningless statement. "Low" relative to what? Are you saying it's more of a problem in the U.S. than elsewhere? Or is it universal? If so, is there any real chance for it to be significantly better?

The ability of people to be objective and to think critically varies by degree. Everyone falls short of a theoretical ideal; most fall massively short. Some live in their own hermetically sealed worlds, and are impervious to any evidence that contradicts their core assumptions. If we posit that at least some of these tendencies are learned, then theoretically that can change, for better or worse. How to do go about doing it, I do not know. Currently the best you can do is set an example in the way you conduct yourself. I also suggest that in any sort of political debate/discussion, to focus first on facts, and last on opinions. Do your best to ensure that everyone is operating on a reasonably accurate set of facts, and the quality of opinions/decisions should generally improve. It's an uphill battle though, which is why democracy is, at best, the least terrible system there is.

- wolf

 

[sandorski]

Yes, you're correct to focus on context and process over the arguments themselves. Bad ideas do not arise from a vacuum. However, when you're talking about people being of "low character," that is kind of a meaningless statement. "Low" relative to what? Are you saying it's more of a problem in the U.S. than elsewhere? Or is it universal? If so, is there any real chance for it to be significantly better?

The ability of people to be objective and to think critically varies by degree. Everyone falls short of a theoretical ideal; most fall massively short. Some live in their own hermetically sealed worlds, and are impervious to any evidence that contradicts their core assumptions. If we posit that at least some of these tendencies are learned, then theoretically that can change, for better or worse. How to do go about doing it, I do not know. Currently the best you can do is set an example in the way you conduct yourself. I also suggest that in any sort of political debate/discussion, to focus first on facts, and last on opinions. Do your best to ensure that everyone is operating on a reasonably accurate set of facts, and the quality of opinions/decisions should generally improve. It's an uphill battle though, which is why democracy is, at best, the least terrible system there is.

- wolf

Indeed. Humans are flawed, always have been, always will be. That's why various Systems exist, to mitigate those flaws. If Corruption is increasing or very high, it is not "Character" that is the problem, it is the System(s), which is supposed to mitigate, that is the problem.