Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site csd2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!cmcl2!csd2!sykora
From: sykora@csd2.UUCP (Michael Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Newsflash! [JoSH on Socialis
Message-ID: <4340032@csd2.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-Jan-86 07:43:00 EST
Article-I.D.: csd2.4340032
Posted: Thu Jan  2 07:43:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Jan-86 02:44:55 EST
References: <266@meccts.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 27

>/* franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) /  7:50 am  Dec 27, 1985 */

>Your last sentence is nearly devoid of content.  The way you find optimal
>solutions is to propose possible solutions (as many as you can think of),
>and choose the best one.

Right.  It includes both the proposing and deciding.  The output of the
political process is determined by inputs to the system  --  voting,
lobbying, etc.  --  as well as the mechanism that operates on these inputs.
I am not recommending changing that mechanism, but rather some of the inputs.
The political process most definitely is a feedback system.

>One can compare it to the hypothesized results of doing nothing; it is clear
>to me that we are a lot better off than we would be if the government had
>done nothing.  In this sense, the policy has clearly been successful, without
>regard to how close to optimal it is.

The success of the system must be measured against the criteria of what it
was supposed to achieve.  This criteria includes both explicitly stated
goals as well as those negative goals, i.e., appropriate limits on the
costs imposed by the system, that would have been explicit had the
advocates of the system had the foresight or honesty to openly address
them.

>Frank Adams                           ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka

Mike Sykora