The Theory of the Second Best

i am sure that if you keep repeating this to yourself matt.... (0.00 / 0)

you will eventually convince yourself that you are on the right track.... good luck with all that.

it is not working on anyone else though.  

---

by: problembear @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 00:51:17 AM UTC

Chill a little, pbear (0.00 / 0)

Matt was asking for a critique of theory, not a critique of his mental state.

I would posit that the theory of second best is likely what lead the compromises which got us through our first 80 years as a nation without a civil war.  The problem with that, of course, is that lives eventually aren't negotiable.  Many people see the current health care debate in the same light, and anything which does not protect life is not even second best.  On the one hand are the advocates of the perfect who think that anything less than single payer leaves lives at risk.  On the other hand are those who think that more universal coverage, an end to dropped coverage (either for pre-existing conditions or outlay of coverage) saves lives and moves in the right direction.  On the third hand of course, are those who couldn't give a shit about the value of lives other than their own.  (Don't give me shit.  I have 3 hands and if you deride me than you aren't being tolerant of difference ;-)

It strikes me that those who deny the theory of second best are never going to be satisfied.  They've staked a claim on the impossible, that life will always be protected and somebody must do this.  Fine, except ... If you can't do this, how can someone else?  (And to those who want to go all Ad Hominem here, I suggest spending some time with Kant's Critique of Practical Reason and The Metaphysics of Morals.)  There is simply no method to ensure the achievement of unrealistic (impossible) goal.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 02:20:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

the only impossible goals (0.00 / 0)

are those goals one is unwilling to undertake.

i have seen a poor librarian walk the path of a wilderness area she and her husband helped to protect in 1978. she simply smiled at senator mark hatfield's aide who told her in 1972 that it would be impossible to protect that area... he told her that politically there was no way she could save it.  

i walked that trail with her.

i feel sorry for those who cannot.  

---

by: problembear @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 02:43:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Unfortunately, (0.00 / 0)

That's not true, problembear.  There are things that are quite truly outside the realm of possibility, temporally, physically or procedurally.  Single payer is not an impossible goal.  Many dictators have implemented that very thing. Many Republics have as well.  In America, right now, it can't happen.

Working towards a goal is just that, progress.  Expecting what won't or can't happen right now is pretending that the impossible, isn't.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 02:54:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

it's all a journey wulfgar (0.00 / 0)

---

by: problembear @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 02:58:16 AM UTC

We hold these truths to be self-evident (0.00 / 0)

P-Bear, it should be obvious by now that neither Matt nor Wulfgar have ever actually passed, funded, implemented and fine-tuned ANY legislation.  So, for them this is all a theoretical discussion.  Hence, we get Wulfie's "game theory" to explain the crushing failure of the Democrats to move their agenda while they had the chance.  Instead, Dem apologists, like Matt, provide endless excuses for why guys like Max Baucus were doing the right thing for most of the last year by ignoring the fact that Dems controlled both houses of Congress and the White House and instead spent his time and energy courting Republican votes he never got. In the meantime, such foolishness completely lost any momentum (or mandate for change) the electorate bestowed upon the Democrats in the last election.  But of course, we get "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" from these naive jokers.

7 of 10 voters polled this week believe Congress and the government is dysfunctional.  Plug that into this discussion and it should become apparent that what the Dems (and Wulfie and Matt) believe is "impossible" is not what the people believe.  They wanted change.  They wanted hope.  That's what they were promised.  And they got a steaming pile, escalated wars, runaway military budgets and a coming plan to trash Soc Security and Medicare under the rubric of "budget reform."

It's a sick joke on us.  But come next election, there'll be a lot fewer progressives out there supporting these clowns, sending them donations, or voting for them.  That ain't "game theory" -- that's the coming reality.  

---

by: ochenski @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 15:18:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Inaccurate as it is ridiculous (0.00 / 0)

7 of 10 voters polled this week believe Congress and the government is dysfunctional.  Plug that into this discussion and it should become apparent that what the Dems (and Wulfie and Matt) believe is "impossible" is not what the people believe.

You've been sucking on Mark's crack pipe too much, Georgey.  Otherwise you'd see the obvious.  Single payer right now is impossible precisely because we have a dysfunctional government.  If the people got to vote on Single Payer, then maybe we'd get it.  But you appear massively confused about who writes and passes legislation, otherwise you'd know that it makes not a lick of difference whether or not Matt or I have done it, or whether people are unhappy with government right now.  

And for the record, you're reading a ridiculous amount into a poll that shows very little.  What Rasmussen asked was whether or not people were "angry" with the current policies of the Government, but never defines or focuses on those policies.  Perhaps you can interpret that into a specific, but I'd sure as hell like to see your methodology for doing so, other than wishful thinking.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 17:21:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Poseurs (0.00 / 0)

Wulfie -

Maybe, as you wrote, it "makes not a lick of difference whether or not Matt or I have done it [write, lobby, fund, and implement legislation)" -- or maybe it does.  

You remind me of the gawkers in the Tetons, looking up at the steep North Face of the Grand Teton and exclaiming, as if knowledgeable, "that's impossible to climb."  In fact, for many, many years people DID believe the Grand was impossible to get up by any route, let alone the vertical North Face.  But having climbed it twice now by the North Face, I can assure you, it's not "impossible."  Very difficult?  Yes.  Potentially deadly?  Absolutely.  Impossible?  No.  That's what the gawkers say because they don't know any better, because they've never strapped on crampons, picked up an ice axe and roped into a 3,000 vertical foot face and kept going up till they reached the summit.

In so many ways, you're just like that Wulfie -- and Matt, for sure.  You've never done legislation, but you proclaim, with great certainty, that something is "impossible" because YOU think it is.  But until you actually get some air under your heels, dude, or maybe write and pass a bill or two, expecting the rest of us to believe your blow-hard proclamations about what is or isn't possible ain't gonna happen.  

---

by: ochenski @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 17:43:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thoughts about Second Best (0.00 / 0)

I think the "Theory of second best" is better applied in some circumstances than others.

For example, if I'm at bar and want to save a few bucks by drinking their "second best" wine, this might not only be a good idea, but it's also fairly easy to measure.  So too, one could look at the past baseball season and make a case that the Phillies were the "second best" team in baseball.

However, when one tries to apply the theory of "second best" to public policy I believe you run into some problems and the theory falls apart, much like the tired old theory "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

For example, if Single Payer represents the best heath care reform the US could make (as most progressives below), does it really stand to reason that the current Senate version of a health care reform bill is really "second best?"  

I mean, if that's the case, then I guess you'd have to say the "second best" team in the NFL is the Detroit Lions.

---

by: Matthew Koehler @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 18:04:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

arguing over "strategy" and "nuance" (0.00 / 0)

among us mushrooms is what enables the aristocratic power structure" of big banks, corporate ceos and politicians to stay in power and it's what keeps us well fed with no need of sunglasses....

deciding what is undoable by so called experts regarding new orleans  overmatched and injured defensive line has left the mafia holding the bag in las vegas.

thanks for the lift george. i never listen to "experts" either. prefer to find out for myself. surprising how perception of what is possible can change when you come at it with a fresh approach.  

---

by: problembear @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 19:26:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

just a thought for everyone here (0.00 / 0)

i think everyone has good intentions here regarding health care. just different approaches. i think there is more in common among us all here than most of us think.

we are all extremely frustrated with what has gone on this year. so we lash out unnecessarily and start shooting squirrels with cannons....thus causing a lot of collateral damage.

single payer is actually what i beleive to be the only real answer to our health care crisis in this country.  it is what a lot of people believe. including our dissenters. they just don't think it is possible. ok. but just because the clumsy approach failed this year thanks to max and barry's poor decisions doesn't mean we can't rethink this and support a new appoach.  

speaking as a defensive tackle- when you are accross the line from a player who is more athletic and bigger than you are, you don't keep hitting him the same way....you figure out which way he doesn't like to go and fake him out.

there are many ways to success. we shall prevail over the insurance maggots some day.  

---

by: problembear @ Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 19:41:56 PM UTC