In general, to determine the effectiveness of a course of behavior you have to measure results.
The results are the measure of effectiveness although of course to get a true measure you have to make sure there are no other variables.
This is fairly easy in a laboratory setting but not so much in the real world.
Still, if you introduce a specific action and a related result changes, you can treat the result as a likely result of that action.
Take immigration. We have seen a lot of rhetoric and bluster about it yet the result is a significant increase in people coming for asylum.
It seems counterintuitive, but there is most likely a relationship between the two. Sometimes just drawing attention to an issue, makes it more popular.
Of course the causes could be related to deteriorating conditions in their home countries.
Still our anti-immigration administration has managed to increase the number of undocumented immigrants significantly.
Maybe time to try something different.
Showing posts with label consequences. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consequences. Show all posts
Thursday, April 11, 2019
Friday, June 29, 2018
Long Range Consequences
There shouldn't be a lot of politics in the Supreme Court, its simply supposed to interpret the constitution and determine if it is being followed.
Clearly however it has approached that task differently over time and some of that is because of necessity.
The world of the founders was a very different place than America of today and a lot of issues are different in scope and impact.
Certainly if you consider something like the right to bear arms, its impossible to know how they would have felt about guns available today. What was an essential item for someone on the frontier and almost everyone was on or near the frontier, is now a modern weapon with significant killing potential. Further the need to hunt or protect against potential attacks is certainly different than it was in the 18th century.
The real problem is that over the years we have not updated the constitution often enough to keep it current.
Take the electoral college. The need for that is doubtful and as constituted it serves to create an undemocratic outcome.
However because it has tended to allow for results like we saw in 2016, it is defended by certain interests who are more interested in power than democracy.
It is unlikely that we would have a rewrite which would require majorities that are simply not going to happen and even amending it is a slow and painful process, as intended since the founders did not want it to be subjected to mobs and whims.
So the Supreme Court has to some extent filled in the gaps that should be the job of the people of this country and we can see from the decisions and dissents that many of these issues are simply not clear.
We now see another opening which could lead to a change in many of our current positions, or it might not.
For many it is a lesson in how voting and participating in elections is so very important.
It can have consequences for a long time.
Clearly however it has approached that task differently over time and some of that is because of necessity.
The world of the founders was a very different place than America of today and a lot of issues are different in scope and impact.
Certainly if you consider something like the right to bear arms, its impossible to know how they would have felt about guns available today. What was an essential item for someone on the frontier and almost everyone was on or near the frontier, is now a modern weapon with significant killing potential. Further the need to hunt or protect against potential attacks is certainly different than it was in the 18th century.
The real problem is that over the years we have not updated the constitution often enough to keep it current.
Take the electoral college. The need for that is doubtful and as constituted it serves to create an undemocratic outcome.
However because it has tended to allow for results like we saw in 2016, it is defended by certain interests who are more interested in power than democracy.
It is unlikely that we would have a rewrite which would require majorities that are simply not going to happen and even amending it is a slow and painful process, as intended since the founders did not want it to be subjected to mobs and whims.
So the Supreme Court has to some extent filled in the gaps that should be the job of the people of this country and we can see from the decisions and dissents that many of these issues are simply not clear.
We now see another opening which could lead to a change in many of our current positions, or it might not.
For many it is a lesson in how voting and participating in elections is so very important.
It can have consequences for a long time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)