Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Governmental rule, not personalities

  1. #1
    Elite Member JamieElizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Jose, California, United States
    Posts
    2,895

    Default Governmental rule, not personalities


    Governmental Rules, Not Personalities

    Opinion Editorial by Walter Williams - Jan 3, 2007
    Not that many complimentary things are said about politicians. When a problem arises, people say, “Government ought to do something.” They seem to have forgotten that it’s the politicians who are running the government.
    Many think things can be changed by electing different politicians, but I ask: Given the incentives politicians face, why should we expect one politician to differ significantly from another? We should focus less on personalities and more on rules.
    The kind of rules we should have are the kind that we’d make if our worst enemy were in charge. My mother created a mini-version of such a rule. Sometimes she would ask either me or my sister to evenly divide the last piece of cake or pie to share between us. More times than not, an argument ensued about the fairness of the division.
    Those arguments ended with Mom’s rule: Whoever cuts the cake lets the other take the first piece. As if by magic or divine intervention, fairness emerged and arguments ended. No matter who did the cutting, there was an even division.
    By creating and enforcing neutral rules, we minimize conflict. Consider one area of ruthless competition — sports. In Super Bowl XL, the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Seattle Seahawks had a lot on the line.
    Specifically, there’s the $73,000 payment per man, contract enrichment, and other benefits to the winners. Despite a bitterly fought contest and all that was at stake, the game ended peacefully and winners and losers were civil to one another.
    How is it that players with conflicting interests and reasons for winning can play a game, agree with the outcome and walk away as good sports? It’s a minor miracle of sorts. That “miracle” is that it is far easier to reach agreement about the game’s rules than the game’s outcome.
    The rules are known and durable, and the referee’s only job is their evenhanded enforcement. Even football teams with losing records would find their long-run interests lie in known, durable, and evenhandedly applied rules. They can more adequately devise a winning strategy because predictability is enhanced.
    Suppose the game rules were flexible and referees played a role in determining the game’s outcome. In other words, imagine the referees were more interested in what they saw as justice than enforcement of neutral rules.
    What might one predict about team behavior? Instead of trying to raise team productivity, owners would allocate resources to influence-peddling in the form of lobbying or bribing the referees.
    In the case of last year’s Super Bowl, the referees might have argued that since the Pittsburgh Steelers won four previous Super Bowl championships, justice demands that the game be rigged in favor of the Seattle Seahawks, who have never won a Super Bowl.
    It’s easy to imagine all the conflict that would arise — team owners bringing lawsuits for what they see as biased referee decisions, and games ending in rancor and fights.
    There would be a reduction in the skill and fitness of all players and a lower overall quality of the sport. After all, if the outcome is determined by how well the team influences the referees, why spend resources recruiting and training superior players? It’s better to use those resources for lobbying and bribes.
    We have a set of rules that are known, neutral, and intended to be durable. Those rules were created by our founders and embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Those rules have been weakened by a Congress of both parties that picks winners and losers in the game of life.
    The U.S. Supreme Court, which was intended to be a neutral referee, has forsaken that role and become a participant. All of this means we can expect a future of bitterly fought elections and enhanced conflict.
    Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. He has authored more than 150 publications, including many in scholarly journals, and has frequently given expert testimony before Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor policy to taxation and spending.

  2. #2
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    .... ok, how can this guy be such a retard in every other article and then say something so simple and obvious?
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #3
    Hit By Ban Bus! pacific breeze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    in the wild blue yonder
    Posts
    15,479

    Default

    Let's hear what you think about all this stuff, Jamie, instead of some overpaid hack.

  4. #4
    Elite Member JamieElizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Jose, California, United States
    Posts
    2,895

    Default

    lol. I'm just reading and posting to catch up on stuff.
    DO you know that I live in the bible belt? And I don't even understand half of the politics that takes place in this town of only 30,000 ppl. I was laughing out loud tonite, I had dinner at a local church. And basically everything that Grimm explained in his about the masks that they wear is really true. Yet, I have never taken a political stance or even thought about this stuff, until this past year.

  5. #5
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Yay!!! I reached someone!!
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  6. #6
    Elite Member JamieElizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Jose, California, United States
    Posts
    2,895

    Default

    lol, I already knew that the people were mostly sour. I find you Canadians interesting because you take pride in your social programs and society. When I grew up, I wasn't at all involved in anything except the baptist church, which I still to this day wonder why I have bad memories and people with negative moods.

  7. #7
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    We're quietly proud of it, we don't like to make a fuss.

    About anything.

    Ever.

    it's so gauche
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Seal's 2 O Clock Rule
    By SVZ in forum Weight
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: January 20th, 2006, 11:55 PM
  2. Jeb doesn't rule out run for White House.
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 15th, 2005, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •