Public Policy Debate for the Day

I apologize for not citing where this idea stemmed from, but it was a day or two ago and I can’t for the life of me remember.  If anyone knows, please post it in the comments.

There is so much conflict between different groups (Occupy v Tea Party, GOP v Dem, religious v secular, austerity v stimulus).  Perhaps part of this stems from the fact that we have forgotten the following symmetries:

Wherever you see “free” replace it with “equal.”  And vice versa.

Wherever you see “freedom” replace it with “equality.”  And vice versa.

America was founded on the idea that one leads to the other.  If we create an environment for individual freedom, we should get equality.  And that should be seen as a GOOD thing, not a threat.

Similarly, think of the phrase “the will of the people.” America was also founded on the principle that the will of the people should guide government.  But that doesn’t mean it becomes the exclusive objective for every aspect of civil society.  For example:

“Will” implies the people’s conscious desires and wants.  Sorry, but our brain just doesn’t work in a way that makes this a good thing.  I am not a big fan of government paternalism.  But there is a huge repository of behavioral science research that demonstrates the fallibility of our consciousness to figure out what we want, let alone what we need. 

“The People” implies we all speak with one voice.  We have common motivations and objectives.  Not even close.  So how do we resolve conflicts?  Majority rule? Ultimate libertarianism?  Free market and buyer beware?  We can’t have it all, as much as our politicians pretend we can.

The source that stirred up these thoughts didn’t propose solutions and I am not going to either.  At least not today.  Just some thoughts for the day.

Get Rid of Commuting!!

The interview guest on Living on Earth this weekend made a comment that I think is true on many levels.  He said something to the effect of that the thing we could do that would have the greatest impact on improving the world is to focus urban planning/development to get rid of commuting.  He was talking about creating more work/live/play neighborhoods.  Similar effects could be achieved by enhancing telecommuting.  But think about all of the benefits this would give us:

• Better for the environment by reducing gas used and smog created.
• Save money by using less gas, less maintenance needed on your car, less tax revenue needed for road building and maintenance.
• Save time that used to be spent commuting.
• Reduce stress by eliminating road rage and the other stresses of commuting in traffic.
• Reduce accidents from people trying to be productive by texting, reading, eating, etc on the way to work.

 It seems to me that this would have more of an impact on our lives than world peace, balancing the deficit, and all the other things that take up the news headlines.  The happiness research shows that what really makes us happy are the day to day details.  I suspect that combining all of these day to day benefits would be huge.