The second point becomes obvious when one realizes that our modern economy is complex. Millions of things can be changed in it but random changes are likely to do more harm than good. Those who are not experts, and who are not able to understand experts, should not be allowed to control our economy. Economists and political scientists are social engineers; their qualifications are as important as qualifications of those who design and maintain cars, bridges and nuclear power plants.
Economic regulations are essential in critical situations, such as we now have. They are also important in normal situations. Societies are far from perfect and constant improvements are needed. Someone has to protect us from greedy people and selfish organizations. Government should be in charge of reducing injustice and poverty. New ideas in social engineering should be discussed by experts. Then the ideas should be tested on a small scale, for example only in New York City, or in New York State. Modern airplanes resulted from slow evolution started in 1903. The same is true for our radios, computers, and TV sets. Each innovation was checked and double-checked before becoming part of our lives. Evolutionary progress, by small reversible changes, is better than a sudden change--as in 1917, when too many untested proposals were implemented by Bolsheviks at the same time. Why should social engineering be different from other kinds of engineering, such as electrical, mechanical, chemical or nuclear?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
