06-26-2018, 04:56 PM
(06-26-2018, 04:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I had a little back and forth with a conservative person I follow on Twitter that works at RSI. She was discussing how amazed she was at how little policy (including laws) are made based on evidence. Instead, it is based almost exclusively on special interests, "gut" feelings, things of that nature. Evidence based policy is the goal for people like me, and this includes many think tanks out there as well as most public servants, but it just doesn't happen.
I was talking about how true this was and how even though this person and I would likely disagree on many things, we would be able to provide evidence for our positions. Evidence can point you in different directions, but the data helps to provide a (nearly) objective starting point at which to compromise and come to an agreement. We haven't been able to collect data to the degree we are able to today until very recently, but in the past 30-40 years there has been an attack on the wonks. The people whose job it used to be to craft policy have been pushed out of Congressional offices and replaced with lobbyists that are writing the legislation. The wonks that are left in the government are not consulted as they once were, officials preferring to give deference to special interests that will then cut them checks come campaign time.
This, of course, ties into my theme these past couple of days. We have a government that is being run by corporations and the wealthy elite, and not in our best interests. But working to rely on more evidence based policy decisions would also allow for more compromise in government because at least there could be a degree of good faith about the other side of the debate. Right now there is none.
You realize you've not left me any way to respond, right? You've said nothing outrageous nor have you really made an argument of any kind I can agree or disagree with. You suck, Matt.