Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The True Lesson of the Brown Win: the voters want a KISS

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Mugsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 07:37 AM
Original message
The True Lesson of the Brown Win: the voters want a KISS
Via Mugsy's Rap Sheet:

The True Lesson of the Brown Win: the voters want a KISS


E=MC2: Energy equals Mass times the Speed of Light squared; the mathematical equation at the heart of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. One of the most complex mathematical theorems ever devised, reduced to an equation so simple that even Sarah Palin's probably heard of it. And it is BECAUSE it is so simple that it's lauded to this day. It's the formula that explains both how the atomic bomb works, and how all matter is based on nothing but particles of energy.

"Keep It Simple, Stupid." Wiser words were probably never spoken. People don't like complexity. Republicans REALLY don't like complexity. That's why they voted for George W. Bush, Sarah Palin... and lest we forget the father of Republican Stupidity, former VPDan Quayle (1989-1993). If you're smart, they call you "anelitist". And Democrats know oh so well that the more complicated things get, the less popular they become (see: Obama's poll numbers).

There's a word for government over-complication. We call it "bureaucracy". When we think of "bureaucracy", we think of filing our taxes, waiting in line at the DMV, or filling out hours of tedious government paperwork. We DON'T want "health care" to join that mental list. No one likes bureaucracy. And when government programs get complicated, they become "bureaucracies".

The OPPOSITE of "bureaucracy" is "simplicity".

The health care debate is one of those ideas that started out simple... cheap health insurance from the government... and was allowed to be edited, "tweaked", patched and mangled into a bureaucratic nightmare that even many Democrats don't support... and they said so with 19% of them voting for Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election last week.

<...>

I've mentioned before on here that I attended one of those Republican "Town Halls" last August... held in a funeral home... where the crowd was rabidly anti-government involvement in health care (yet equally protective of Medicare). Yet to my surprise, the guy calling me a "Commie" and accusing the president of "wanting to turn the country into Cuba" advocated (on his own, with no prompting from me) "simply opening up the existing Medicare system to everyone, rather than create a new government bureaucracy." Simple. Easy to understand. People are already familiar with it, and Republicans have actually run ads and mailed (me) fliers vowing to protect it.

<...>

Another example of bureaucracy getting in the way of simple solutions: using the Stimulus to create Green jobs. The money isn't being spent and much of which is being spent is being wasted. Instead, people hear about "bailing out Wall Street" while "Goldman/Sachs hands out $16.2 Billion in bonuses". And they're getting angry. Angry voters don't re-elect incumbents.

Here's a KISS idea: spend part of the Stimulus to "green-ify" millions of Federal office buildings across the United States. Solicit a contract for 5 million hybrid postal delivery vehicles that only (the struggling) U.S. automakers can bid on. Create tens of thousands of new "Green jobs" literally overnight...

<...>

(And if you're one of those people concerned with the abuse of "budget reconciliation" by its over use, I direct you to THIS GRAPH.)

<...>

Read the complete Op/Ed on Mugsy's Rap Sheet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. Someone once told me that if legislation is very complicated it is written by lobbyists.
If it is simple, it is written by the legislative branch.

Corporations like complicated, elaborately written laws. It allows corporations to find loop holes and leaves the average citizen confused and easily manipulated. Ever wonder why your credit card has such an elaborate contract? It's so you wont understand what you are getting into. It's the same with laws. The more complicated, the more a corporation can confuse you and make you pay big bucks.

It's not going to change unless the people start mass demonstrations. President Obama is NOT going to help you, the Democratic party is not going to help you, voting in RepubliCONS is not going to help you. You have to do MORE Than VOTE to win your democracy back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. That is a great way to look at it
If the bill was limited to 5 pages, what would stay and what would go?

Legislators need to write bills. It's a job requirement. It is a basic competency for the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. e=mc^2 is not "one of the most complex mathematical theorems ever devised"
i realize this is not really the point of the article, but e=mc^2 is neither complex nor a mathematical theorem.

first, it is a theory of physics, not of mathematics.

second, the theory of relativity behind that fomula was a very powerful, paradigm-shifting advance in physics thought. any paradigm-shifting involves a certain amount of cognitive dissonance, which is easily confused with complexity. the theory of relativity, in fact, is not particularly complex at all. it's just very different from the previously prevailing understandings of time, space, motion, and gravity, which (still) line up better with our everyday, practical experience.

thus, even 100 years later, everyone who learns about relativity experiences the same paradigm-shifting cognitive dissonance and thinks of relativity as "complex" when it's really not, from an objective standpoint. if you want complex, try maxwell's equations of electromagnetism.

finally, e=mc^2 is but one conclusion of relativity. it's not the whole of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuckinthebush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Damn physicists make everything complicated!
;)

Look, I don't care how it works. I just want my flying car that I was promised in the 60s.

Is that too much to ask?

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Me too. I want mine with a button to press that makes it fold into a briefcase n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mugsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Look! (pointing overhead), The Point!
Dude, if I were writing an article discussing Relativity, I certainly would of been more precise.

A little story...

When Leonardo DaVinci finished painting The Last Supper on a church wall, he asked an observer what he thought of his master work. The man went on and on about the elaborate detail of the table cloth, how beautiful it was and how long it must have taken to paint.

To his astonishment, DaVinci then picked up his paint brush and painted over the image of the tablecloth, wiping it out.

The stunned man cried out, "Why did you do that???" DaVinci replied because the focus of the painting... the first thing the viewer should notice... is the image of Jesus at the center, not how fancy the tablecloth is.


Not sure if the story is true or not, but I think it's an apt story in this context. (and no, I'm not comparing myself to DaVinci.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caraher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I get the point. But the example is wrong
From the OP: "And it is BECAUSE it is so simple that it's lauded to this day."

Not true. It's because it was a great insight and because it is correct that it's lauded.

What is true is that it's widely-known because it's simple. This is an important distinction. E=2mc^2 is also simple. E=mc^3 is also simple. Neither is lauded because both expressions, as pieces of physics, are at best wrong.

In terms of the larger message... a quote attributed to Einstein is, "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." I agree that an overly-complex "message" communicates nothing, and that the error over the past year has been on the side of counterproductive complication. "Medicare for all" would have been genius; what we have instead are mockably-voluminous incremental insurance reform bills referred to in brief most often as HCR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mugsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Clueless
Wow. I just wrote an entire Op/Ed about "Keeping it simple", only to be criticized for not being more precise in my description of E=mc2.

Perhaps it never occurred to you that, having completed college physics, I KNOW that, andeven thought about it when I was writing, but decided not to worry about such details?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. as i said, "i realize this is not really the point of the article"
in other words, i understood full well the point of your article, and you've apparently completely missed the point of my reply.

just because you're the o.p. doesn't mean you're the only one allowed to make points.

why not, as da vinci apocryphally did, accept the feedback and edit the article?

perhaps you've missed the point of your own da vinci story as well.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wizard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-25-10 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
10. If it can't be explained to a 14 year old
some one is stealing money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC