Evidence Based Practices

[donttread]

Many government grants are held to the standard of following Evidence Based Practices. For example the Tobacco Control Program which , among other duties, trains healthcare providers and assist them to install systems to help them treat tobacco dependence more effectively and consistenly . However, they are required to follow a work plan based upon what is proven to work. Mainly the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Tobacco Dependence Treatment. A research , scientific based approach. when the research reveals new effective methods the workplan changes. I believe that for the most part CDC grants follow similar patterns.
Yet the government itself, even in 2015, would appear in many cases to flatly ignore research, science and evaluation of the success/ failure of their owm programs. In other words our foreign and domestic policy is driven by partisan rhetoric, emotion and corporate influence vs science and real world evidence of what works and what doesn't
Examples include our prohibition policy which has turned us into the most incarcerated society on earth, funded gangs and cartels, cost money and lives while drugs have become more available to more people in more places. All this despite the fact that ALL, not most but ALL, modern real world evidence clearly shows that decriminalization and properly funded addiction treatment save money and lives . Or the fact that most of our interventions in the ME, especially the heavy interventions lead to post intervention governments that are less stable, more oppressive ( especially towards women and non muslims ) , more violent and more American hating than the pre-intervention government was.
Then there is the war on poverty , which appears to have had the effect of massive upwards transfers of wealth and we now have more poor people than ever. How about a meta analysis of world wide " hand up " programs that have worked and a directed change in failed policy.
While you may or may not agree with my specific examples, do you agree that our government should periodically evaluate programs based upon science, research, evaluation of specific program criteria and goals?

[Captain Obvious]

No, I don't agree that we are an incarcerated society because of drug laws, I believe we are an incarcerated society for a number of reasons. Failing opportunity is one, the ability to survive and not produce is another. The drug rant is bush league.

Our government has an agenda and if the data presented is accurate or not, that agenda will still be supported.

[donttread]

No, I don't agree that we are an incarcerated society because of drug laws, I believe we are an incarcerated society for a number of reasons. Failing opportunity is one, the ability to survive and not produce is another. The drug rant is bush league.

Our government has an agenda and if the data presented is accurate or not, that agenda will still be supported.


Perfect example of ignoring the scientific fact that the "war on drugs" has caused a massive increase in the prison industrial complex" You'd be perfect in government. Don't like the facts? Ignore them and continue your failed policy in order to serve your corporate overlords

[Captain Obvious]

Perfect example of ignoring the scientific fact that the "war on drugs" has caused a massive increase in the prison industrial complex" You'd be perfect in government. Don't like the facts? Ignore them and continue your failed policy in order to serve your corporate overlords

So we should make murder and rape legal too in order to free up some prison space?

I already know you're ok with the rape suggestion.

[donttread]

So we should make murder and rape legal too in order to free up some prison space?

I already know you're ok with the rape suggestion.

Let me break it down for you because it's apparently not obvious enough to you, captain. Rape and murder are crimes with victims and require incarceration as punishment ,as a deterant and to protect the public. Drug use , consensual sex between teens who's ages are two or three years apart and prostitution are victimless forms of relatively normal human behavior and not really crimes at all. In addition many weapons charges are victimless and in direct violation of the Second amendment.
Got it?

[Captain Obvious]

Let me break it down for you because it's apparently not obvious enough to you, captain. Rape and murder are crimes with victims and require incarceration as punishment ,as a deterant and to protect the public. Drug use , consensual sex between teens who's ages are two or three years apart and prostitution are victimless forms of relatively normal human behavior and not really crimes at all. In addition many weapons charges are victimless and in direct violation of the Second amendment.
Got it?

You forgot date rape.

[PattyHill]

"While you may or may not agree with my specific examples, do you agree that our government should periodically evaluate programs based upon science, research, evaluation of specific program criteria and goals?"

Yes. But it's hard - once you have people getting money from a program, or a district benefiting from it, it's very hard to get rid of a program, even with the data showing it isn't effective. Ethanol from corn jumps to mind here.

[Chris]

Anyone who studies economics at all knows that it's a descriptive science but not good at political policy. One reason is because you cannot experiment with people, use one policy on one group, another on another, and see which works better, to test predictions. As Hayek put it "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." Thus is we followed "Evidence Based Practices" government would have to leave the economy alone.

[donttread]

You forgot date rape.

Date rape is rape. If he forces himself upon her that's how he should be charged. you see the difference? She said no and raped her which makes her a victim. VS. if the two of them were out snorting coke .... no victim. Keep trying you'll get it

[donttread]

Anyone who studies economics at all knows that it's a descriptive science but not good at political policy. One reason is because you cannot experiment with people, use one policy on one group, another on another, and see which works better, to test predictions. As Hayek put it "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." Thus is we followed "Evidence Based Practices" government would have to leave the economy alone.


Sure you can, it's called state's rights. study up to 50 possible solutions and copy cat the best ones

[donttread]

"While you may or may not agree with my specific examples, do you agree that our government should periodically evaluate programs based upon science, research, evaluation of specific program criteria and goals?"

Yes. But it's hard - once you have people getting money from a program, or a district benefiting from it, it's very hard to get rid of a program, even with the data showing it isn't effective. Ethanol from corn jumps to mind here.

Exactly, science clearly shows it requires more energy to produce ethonol than it's worth. But God forbid anyone would heed that lesson

[Chris]

Sure you can, it's called state's rights. study up to 50 possible solutions and copy cat the best ones

States don't know anymore than the federal government about economics. Though I agree that would allow for some experimentation.

[donttread]

States don't know anymore than the federal government about economics. Though I agree that would allow for some experimentation.

And I agree that government economist are clueless

[donttread]

Many government grants are held to the standard of following Evidence Based Practices. For example the Tobacco Control Program which , among other duties, trains healthcare providers and assist them to install systems to help them treat tobacco dependence more effectively and consistenly . However, they are required to follow a work plan based upon what is proven to work. Mainly the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Tobacco Dependence Treatment. A research , scientific based approach. when the research reveals new effective methods the workplan changes. I believe that for the most part CDC grants follow similar patterns.
Yet the government itself, even in 2015, would appear in many cases to flatly ignore research, science and evaluation of the success/ failure of their owm programs. In other words our foreign and domestic policy is driven by partisan rhetoric, emotion and corporate influence vs science and real world evidence of what works and what doesn't
Examples include our prohibition policy which has turned us into the most incarcerated society on earth, funded gangs and cartels, cost money and lives while drugs have become more available to more people in more places. All this despite the fact that ALL, not most but ALL, modern real world evidence clearly shows that decriminalization and properly funded addiction treatment save money and lives . Or the fact that most of our interventions in the ME, especially the heavy interventions lead to post intervention governments that are less stable, more oppressive ( especially towards women and non muslims ) , more violent and more American hating than the pre-intervention government was.
Then there is the war on poverty , which appears to have had the effect of massive upwards transfers of wealth and we now have more poor people than ever. How about a meta analysis of world wide " hand up " programs that have worked and a directed change in failed policy.
While you may or may not agree with my specific examples, do you agree that our government should periodically evaluate programs based upon science, research, evaluation of specific program criteria and goals?

Simliar yes, duplicate no