|
|
|
|
|
by totony
1742 days ago
|
|
The way to help poor people is the put the least roadblocks in their way. Government policies that assume that they work only aggravate the issue for the people for whom it doesn't work (creating outcasts). EDIT: E.g. give everyone 500$ but hike up the price, what about the people that weren't eligible for some bureaucratic dumb reason? A logical argument does not depend on the person that makes it (which is why its logical). Heuristically you can use the locutor to save you the trouble of analyzing it but you have to realize it's a heuristic and the argument might still be right. |
|
That's little more than ideology.
> Government policies that assume that they work only aggravate the issue for the people for whom it doesn't work (creating outcasts).
> EDIT: E.g. give everyone 500$ but hike up the price, what about the people that weren't eligible for some bureaucratic dumb reason?
You're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, perhaps as an excuse for an ideology that advocates inaction.
> A logical argument does not depend on the person that makes it (which is why its logical). Heuristically you can use the locutor to save you the trouble of analyzing it but you have to realize it's a heuristic and the argument might still be right.
Yes, in an ivory tower that's sufficient, but in the real world it isn't. For instance, you will never have all the information. If you try to act like a logical robot, you can be tricked by with a logical argument that passes all your checks but is contradicted by facts you don't know or aren't attending to.