Occam in Action

The simplest solution is best.

In my previous post I advanced the idea of community response as the primary method of prevention and cure for homelessness. I know this goes against the grain of our contemporary mindset which dictates, all problems are solved with government by fully funding (insert program here).

I understand this is a generally accepted truism among both Republicrats and Demopulicans who vehemently argue over whether (insert program here) or (insert program here) is the correct solution to fully fund. The most impassioned arguments take place between two factions who are both wrong. The right answer is thinking small. So, just do that. Problem solved.

You need a bigger answer? Alright, but you're already screwing up the principle. The reason I provided a small answer is because small is comprehensible, memorable, affordable, personal, practical, responsible, manageable, applicable and a whole bunch of positive stuff that the alternative to small isn't. The inverse is also true. Small lacks all the negative stuff that big is. While Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber are vehemently arguing over whether (insert program here) or (insert program here) is the correct solution to fully fund, I will go and do what needs to be done. That is thinking small. It's not a panacea because nothing is. Magic wands are perennially in short supply and never perform as expected. So, rather than waiting for someone to reinvent the guy who invented the wheel to roll in some colossal, magical problem panacea from wherever they are manufactured, I'll just go chip away at it with a small idea and a modest action. Just me. Maybe you can come too. Bring a friend. Hey look at that! We have 50% more people applying a solution than wrongly arguing over if (insert program here) or (insert program here) should be fully funded. Viola and Bob's your uncle!

Capeesh? Comprende? Verstehen?

Still a little unclear? Okay it's a little, and we can fix a little, unclear. Big unclear is incomprehensible, unmemorable, unaffordable, impersonal, impractical, irresponsible, unmanageable, and a whole bunch of other stuff that we can't possibly fix. We'd be back to two wrong headed people arguing over which program should be fully funded again. People being who they are take sides in heated arguments because that's human nature. We enter the fray and the only thing which becomes clear is nothing got done.

We have big egos, big ideas, big plans with big dividends, and we will make (and leave) a big stink about them or there will be big trouble!

Big is Bad.

Small is sufficient.

Clear?

Apply this small solution. It doesn't take much. Just a little bit, but do it often and early.

Oh, what's the "solution"? Well, I only have a little bit of that because you have the rest. That's "you" in the third person.

Where do you want to start?

I'll bring a little help.


An Afterthought:

Occam's Razor is depicted above as a double-sided* blade, which led me to think about the other side if the issue, and I came up to more benefits...

Community action promotes relationships and relationships, not programs, are how people help other people. Programs are what machines, like bureaucracies, use to operate. People aren't machines. Strong relationships in turn build strong communities. That's called a positive feedback loop.

In relationships people get to know each other, their strengths and weaknesses, their dreams and delusions, their talents and their not so goods. These allow us the ability to help when, where, and how they individually need the help. That's called efficiency.

I'm sure there are more benefits, but I've done enough overstating the obvious on this topic. On to the next...


* - Actually, there are way more, just like a two-sided sheet of paper has six sides. This reveals the inherent flaw in a "two-party" system. Think about it.