Do these sound familiar?

If A then B is the rule of cause and effect. You believe that B should follow A. You do A, but when B doesn't happen, how can you justify continuing to do A and not admitting that your initial assumption/belief was a fallacy?

Time and Resource Argument

• We just have not given it enough time.
• We have helped, but have just not done enough or spent enough yet.
• The concept is based on a belief that the occurrence of B in relation to A is not linear, but on an S shaped curve (little to show for A early on until a critical threshold is reached, then B starts and accelerates to a maximum effect).
• The relationship between A and B as an S curve both should be known in advance and accounted for at the beginning. In medicine we occasionally see S curves (oxygen saturation in the blood, some medication and enzyme activity). In the world, we can see it as a population curve.

If you find someone who is in misery and A would help that person achieve B, then A is good. This is the so-called misery argument. Lets assume that B is a desirable goal.

• Mrs. Jones cannot afford her medications. If we have free medications for everyone who cannot afford them, Mrs. Jones will be able to afford her medications. How can you be against free medications for the poor?
• The hypothesis is that if A then B does not preclude if C then B, so it does not prove that A is the only way to achieve B, nor does it prove that A is the most efficient, effective, ethical or least onerous way.
• Mrs. Jones has mild hypertension and adult onset diabetes. Mrs. Jones is 100 lbs overweight. If Mrs. Jones went on a diet and exercised and lost 50 lbs, she would self-correct and not need medications. The food required for her diet is actually less expensive than the foods she now eats. She lives near a park and can exercise for free. Mrs. Jones hates pills and will not be adherent to therapy. However, Mrs. Jones believes that she should never disappoint anyone, so she faithfully refills her meds and throws them in the toilet. Now, does the first bullet still make as much sense?

Watch for these arguments as justifications for controlling you and staying stuck on stupid.

Note: when you take the S curve and open it up, you get a Laffer curve. For an interesting take on the welfare state from the statistical perspective, follow the link below.

www.holisticpolitics.org/WelfareThatWorks/