I have never rated a post dislike/disagree on TMC, and don't plan to start, but this one brought me as close as I've ever come. You suggest with these words that basing policy on the best available data is pointless because outcomes may not be as expected. That misses the point entirely and demonstrates a complete disregard for statistics and science. Using data to drive policy means better outcomes over time, despite the occasional gut instinct policy that would have been a better choice. It also means that you have a basis upon which to make future policy, and the ability to measure the effectiveness.
I hope you just poorly stated your position, because this kind of wishy-washiness that you seem to embrace is a point of view that weakens the entire fabric upon which human advances are built.
Partly you miss my point. Partly I was wishy-washy intentionally.
I'll address the latter first: I have no desire to engage in policy debate on TMC beyond EVs and other topics relevant to this forum. (And it is my understanding such debate would not be welcome here anyway.) I was thus describing how I view policies, politics etc. in general, not discussing particular policies or politics. So I was intentionally not weighing the different options or outcomes, I was not suggesting them equal, I was making no commentary on their merits or lack thereof, just listing the various points of view and scenarios that can be relevant when trying to understand the big picture of a topic like this.
The part you missed in my point is: in the current climate even data is partisan. I am completely sincere about that view and that is a particular political opinion I am willing to discuss here, because I feel it applies to the EV as well as Elon Musk topics as well. So much of the studies, schools of higher learning, sources of funding, those who engage in the studying and those who report on it are... partisan. And that is why it is so hard to know when facts are facts. It is very hard to find impartially reported data, because the data gets filtered through various partisan lenses that affect the hypothesis and cause self-censoring in the reporting.
Ask yourself sincerely, just as a mental exercise: What if data did show that a temporary ban from certain countries works. Would such a study ever get a fair hearing or would it (and the people behind) be run over by opposition? For ideological reasons, the opposition towards such data would be immense.
Facts are not partisan. But getting to those facts is hard, because there is so much partisan noise between us and the facts - on all sides of the aisle. I genuinely feel it is hard to trust anyone. So, much of the time, I don't. I try to learn widely and make up my own mind. Be it Eds or Clinton or Elon or Trump.
What is does result in for myself, quite often, is avoidance of extreme like or dislike towards anyone or anyone's point of view. I notice myself living constantly in a much more shades of grey world than it seems many others do. Even people whom I respect greatly and whom I consider very intelligent can seen almost blindly fanatical to me on some issues, even though to me it all looks like a spectrum so obviously.
Or maybe I'm just crazy.
