Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Valmy]

Obviously the Great Depression, and its political impacts, is a good example.

Of a rebellion?  Are you talking about Hitler's takeover?

Yeah. Democratic states rarely have outright rebellions, rather rising support for extremist elements. Obviously Germany is a worst case scenario but they were hardly alone.

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah. Democratic states rarely have outright rebellions, rather rising support for extremist elements. Obviously Germany is a worst case scenario but they were hardly alone.

Most historical analysis of Hitler's rise have focused on things like hyperinflation, unemployment and political street violence.  Not the amount of nice things provided to nice lower income people by the state, which is what I and others have been talking about.

[grumbler]

Obviously the Great Depression, and its political impacts, is a good example.

Of a rebellion?  Are you talking about Hitler's takeover?

The rise of Trump was a rebellion.  That hasn't gone so well, even for you.

[Josquius]

But you recognise that we live in a complex world right?
That rarely is there such a neat situation of change one factor = instant short term results. Most serious change comes through longer term policies and combinations of policies. With crime for instance improvements there tend to be a secondary effect of improvements basically anywhere.
Is something just disregarded when it enters into such a domain?

Great.  Run your longer term combination of policies and come back to me when you have results.

Good that you're open to trying it.
But... That's just the thing. The world is the ultimate multi variate test. And very often the policies being talked about aren't those where things will work the same way with small scale trials.
Having definitive proof one way or the other will be tough. It'll always come down to making a call based on weak evidence that something might be true.

[frunk]

To me every part of the government should be a form of welfare, because the point of the government is to serve the people.  The extent to which governments aren't prioritizing that function are bad governments.

The military is about protecting the interests and lives of its citizens
The courts are about adjudicating and resolving disputes peacefully
Infrastructure is about improving the general welfare of its citizens and enabling easier travel and communication
Services such as hospitals, schools and firefighting stations protect the health and educate citizens in order to improve their lives

In practice these benefits are used very unevenly.  I have only been to court once, but many others use it regularly.  I don't consider it a tax on me or that I would have the right to say the frequent users shouldn't have access to/pay significantly extra to support it.  The same with infrastructure, we should support roads/utilities/hospitals in rural/isolated areas despite it costing more per person served or because I might not use the development.  Education is obviously only utilized for a portion of a person's life, but it's a terrible idea to make only the students (or their family) pay for it.  Hospitals and firefighting are typically only used in limited circumstances, yet it shouldn't be the users who have to bear all of the costs.

Social welfare to me just seems like another class of these functions, rather than being distinct.  The only criteria would be how effective/efficient they are compared to another course of action rather than being considered less valuable because they are called "welfare". 

I wouldn't want to live in a society where the government's function is just "prevent rebellion".  None of this stuff is necessary for that.

[Admiral Yi]

Good that you're open to trying it.
But... That's just the thing. The world is the ultimate multi variate test. And very often the policies being talked about aren't those where things will work the same way with small scale trials.
Having definitive proof one way or the other will be tough. It'll always come down to making a call based on weak evidence that something might be true.

I said I was open to you trying it.   

I'm also open to pilot projects, i.e. small scale trials.  I heard some town in Florida is trying to give a go to replacing cops with social workers.  That's awesome.  They bear the cost, and I get to learn if it works or not.

When you claim there are some policies which only work at large scale, and can only be proven or disproved at large scale, that sounds like you're asking me to take a leap of faith.  I was raised Christian, my dad is an ordained Methodist minister.  The entire arc of my intellectual development is rejection of faith as a useful decision making tool.  History is littered with failed leaps of faith.  Destructive leaps of faith.  All of Marxism, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, Johnson's Great Society.  Fascism.  I don't like the odds of leaps of faith.

[Admiral Yi]

To me every part of the government should be a form of welfare, because the point of the government is to serve the people.  The extent to which governments aren't prioritizing that function are bad governments.

I would like subsidized porn please.

[Josquius]

Good that you're open to trying it.
But... That's just the thing. The world is the ultimate multi variate test. And very often the policies being talked about aren't those where things will work the same way with small scale trials.
Having definitive proof one way or the other will be tough. It'll always come down to making a call based on weak evidence that something might be true.

I said I was open to you trying it.   

I'm also open to pilot projects, i.e. small scale trials.  I heard some town in Florida is trying to give a go to replacing cops with social workers.  That's awesome.  They bear the cost, and I get to learn if it works or not.

When you claim there are some policies which only work at large scale, and can only be proven or disproved at large scale, that sounds like you're asking me to take a leap of faith.  I was raised Christian, my dad is an ordained Methodist minister.  The entire arc of my intellectual development is rejection of faith as a useful decision making tool.  History is littered with failed leaps of faith.  Destructive leaps of faith.  All of Marxism, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, Johnson's Great Society.  Fascism.  I don't like the odds of leaps of faith.

Myriad decisions during the renaissance, American revolution, abolition of slavery, votes for catholics, d day....
Plenty of positive leaps of faith in history too.

I don't see how this relates to the statement of fact that some things can only really be properly examined on a full national (or even international) scale rather than in small scale isolated trials.
See for instance the way some point to American cities having tighter gun control and worse crime as somehow proof gun control is wrong.

[Admiral Yi]

Myriad decisions during the renaissance, American revolution, abolition of slavery, votes for catholics, d day....
Plenty of positive leaps of faith in history too.

I don't see how this relates to the statement of fact that some things can only really be properly examined on a full national (or even international) scale rather than in small scale isolated trials.
See for instance the way some point to American cities having tighter gun control and worse crime as somehow proof gun control is wrong.

What about the renaissance? The American revolution was not a leap of faith.  Other countries had fought wars of independence.  Other countries had adopted democracy.  D-day was not a leap of faith.  Plenty of amphibious landings had been conducted in the Pacific.  A pilot project was conducted at Dieppe, from which we learned what not to do.  Calculated risk taking is not the same as a leap of faith.

I don't understand how your last two sentences relate to each other.  Please elaborate.

[Oexmelin]

The leap of faith is not the operational element. The leap of faith is that, ultimately, these were things worth fighting for, and thus, to expend considerable amount of resources based on political ideas, understandings of what the good life is, etc. Reading the Founders is a healthy reminder of just how much of a "leap of faith" that was.

[Admiral Yi]

The leap of faith is not the operational element. The leap of faith is that, ultimately, these were things worth fighting for, and thus, to expend considerable amount of resources based on political ideas, understandings of what the good life is, etc. Reading the Founders is a healthy reminder of just how much of a "leap of faith" that was.

It doesn't require any leap of faith to think lower crime is better than higher crime.  The leap of faith comes in when a political idea claims it will lower crime without any proof that it will.

[Sheilbh]

Fair enough.  You as a third world dictator have my blessing to keep handing out free pita bread.  As long as I don't have to pick up the tab.

Sure - but more to your historical point. Basically as long as there have been cities and countryside there has been a form of welfare - typically explicitly for reasons of stability, including of social order and hierarchy. It was always and everywhere (until recently and in the West) framed as important against rebellion (of various types) and disorder.

[viper37]

Myriad decisions during the renaissance, American revolution, abolition of slavery, votes for catholics, d day....
Plenty of positive leaps of faith in history too.

I don't see how this relates to the statement of fact that some things can only really be properly examined on a full national (or even international) scale rather than in small scale isolated trials.
See for instance the way some point to American cities having tighter gun control and worse crime as somehow proof gun control is wrong.

What about the renaissance? The American revolution was not a leap of faith.  Other countries had fought wars of independence.  Other countries had adopted democracy.  D-day was not a leap of faith.  Plenty of amphibious landings had been conducted in the Pacific.  A pilot project was conducted at Dieppe, from which we learned what not to do.  Calculated risk taking is not the same as a leap of faith.

I don't understand how your last two sentences relate to each other.  Please elaborate.

WWII was a leap of faith.  On both sides.

All of Germany's actions were leap of faith, banking on the Allies non-reaction.  It worked until Poland.

Then Germany turned West and the continental countries of Western Europe fell one by one.

Great Britain was left alone.  The pressure was high on Churchill to cave in, to make peace with Hitler.  Resisting was a leap of faith.  He could have stopped the war in 1940, before the Battle of Britain.  Thrown the towel.  Negotiate a separate peace that let the UK keep its empire.

How could he know he would receive US help?  That they would eventually join the war?  That Hitler would attack Russia and wage a war on two fronts?

He gambled. And it paid off.  He made a leap of faith.

[viper37]

The leap of faith is not the operational element. The leap of faith is that, ultimately, these were things worth fighting for, and thus, to expend considerable amount of resources based on political ideas, understandings of what the good life is, etc. Reading the Founders is a healthy reminder of just how much of a "leap of faith" that was.

It doesn't require any leap of faith to think lower crime is better than higher crime.  The leap of faith comes in when a political idea claims it will lower crime without any proof that it will.

What was the reason Romans distributed grain to the populace, and bread at the circus?  What was the reason the State (or the provincial cities) did sometimes organize circus and gladiatorial games?

[Admiral Yi]

Sure - but more to your historical point. Basically as long as there have been cities and countryside there has been a form of welfare - typically explicitly for reasons of stability, including of social order and hierarchy. It was always and everywhere (until recently and in the West) framed as important against rebellion (of various types) and disorder.

There has been countryside before the evolution of homo sapiens so that is silly.  Rome was a town long before bread and circus were provided.  What was the form of welfare under Henry VIII?  Classical Athens?  I can think of a few cases that fit your description.  Ancient Egypt with its storage of grain for times of famine.  The first Bengal famine (the one under the Company) was not criticized as bad rebellion management but on purely humanitarian grounds.  And a rebellion did not break out incidentally.