And then there's Brooks...

Still pushing the "merit? meh! " meme. It's all about networking, baby!

It seems that as long as there is a budget crisis, I’ll never be lonely. But I have to say, many of these great people are suffering under a misimpression. They assume that if they can only persuade enough people that their programs are producing tremendous results then they will be spared from the budget ax.

They are wrong about that. The coming budget cuts have nothing to do with merit. They have to do with the inexorable logic of mathematics.
...
Since most of the budget is untouchable*, the budget ax will fall on every section of the discretionary budget. It will fall on the just and unjust alike, regardless of merit.

The implication is this: If people who care about this or that domestic program fight alone, hoping that their own program will be spared, then they will all perish alone. If they have any chance of continuing their work, they will have to band together and fight their common enemy, the inexorable growth of entitlement spending.

The foreign aid people, the scientific research people, the education people, the antipoverty people and many others have to form a humane alliance. They have to go on offense. They have to embrace plans to slow the growth of Medicare, to reform Social Security and to reform the tax code to foster growth and produce more revenue.

No, no, no. That sounds like a large union, actually -- based solely on numbers, and the passion of professional "activists" (prick up your ears when you hear that word -- somebody's taking public money for such work, and the results are usually minimal at best.)

Budget cuts and which programs remain viable SHOULD be performance-based, measured by bang for the buck. (When did Merit become such a dirty word anyway?) Half of the economic problems we've got now, in fact, are due to people looking politically at the numbers, assuming "untouchable" programs, and operating not on whether a program is worthy and delivering, but what it's bundled with: "Go along with this, and we'll give you that."

So we've got artificially valued stuff getting paid for, while our real needs go unmet. Who is helped by this, and more importantly: who is hurt? It's a shame to see the meritorious programs die for lack of popular support, it's even more a shame to see our wise men advocate for futher continuation of the type of thinking that got us into this mess in the first place...




* Sez who about these alleged untouchables, anyway?