Arnold Kling says that it's the nature of politicians.

We have to expect mediocrity from political leaders. They are selected by a very unreliable process. In general, I try to avoid contact with narcissists who spend their time pleading for money. Those are hardly the intellectual and emotional characteristics that make someone admirable, yet they are the traits of people who go into politics.

...The libertarian view is that private institutions, both for-profit and non-profit, are better at problem-solving than government institutions. Regardless of whether political leadership is wise or mediocre, our goal should be to limit the damage that public officials can do. Do not demand that they "solve" health care, "fix" education, or launch a "Manhattan project" for energy independence. Even for experts, those are impossible tasks. The harder we press our existing leaders to address these issues, the more trouble they are going to cause.

I was thinking about this earlier today - particularly asking myself why NASA has such problems. What I came up with is that governments (and government institutions) are absolutely terrible at exploring design spaces. They are relatively good at executing a plan, or performing repetitive tasks - but not at optimization. The problem is that people get too attached to ideas and things - there is too much inertia in the system. John has switched base technologies at a rate that would make Congress scream about waste...

With that in mind, the way to get the government to be effective is not to go to them with a problem you would like solved - but rather go to them with a solution you would like implemented.

What do you think?

With that in mind, the way to get the government to be effective is not to go to them with a problem you would like solved - but rather go to them with a solution you would like implemented.

Excellent point. If you treat the government the same way you would treat a hardworking but stupid worker, you'll get better results and minimize the damage they can cause.

David says: With that in mind, the way to get the government to be effective is not to go to them with a problem you would like solved - but rather go to them with a solution you would like implemented.

How many times have good managers told their workers..."Don't come to me with complaints, come to me with solutions for those complaints" Solution-first workers help their companies succeed

If they federal government put a small pigovian tax on low efficiency coal plants, foreign crude, cars with an mileage of less than 25MPG, and non-electrified rail, and then streamlined the regulatory approvals process for both nuclear and wind plants, I'm fairly sure both the energy security problem and the kyoto reductions would fix themselves in a decade or two.

Or you could try the whineocrat solution. Throw $20B of taxpayer money on developing useless hydrogen fuel cell technology, claim 'mission accomplished', and leave it to the next guy.

"I'm fairly sure both the energy security problem and the kyoto reductions would fix themselves in a decade or two."

Maybe they would. But how many politicians care what's going to happen in 10 or 20 years? At least half of them won't be in office anymore. For that matter, how many voters are able to think 10 or 20 years ahead? Much easier to demand action NOW!

If they federal government put a small pigovian tax on low efficiency coal plants, foreign crude, cars...

Yes, then we would be as great an economy as France!