More interesting reading ...

"No one starting from scratch would design a local government system like New York has
now, with its overlapping governments and rigid structure. This structure makes it
difficult – but not impossible – to define efficient service areas and to levy taxes or
assessments on those who are served. It creates some duplication of services and
functions. It creates opportunity for miscommunication and lack of coordination in
30
economic development and other policy areas.
Although it is not the system we would design today, it is the system we have.
Unfortunately, changing the system structurally is extraordinarily difficult: The political
hurdles in front of eliminating a village layer or merging a city and county are
extraordinarily high. City-county mergers in upstate New York would require merging
governments whose citizens are dramatically different in terms of race, poverty,
urbanicity, educational attainment, political inclination, and preferences for government
services. That doesn’t mean it cannot or should not be done, but clearly it will not easily
be done.
The quantifiable benefits of eliminating a layer or merging a city and county appear to be
low, often because of leveling up between collective bargaining agreements. Potential
cost savings, while certainly meaningful in dollar terms, can be small relative to
government budgets – on the order of 1 to 2 percent of spending, judging by available
dissolution and merger studies. While taxpayers certainly would welcome tax reductions
of this magnitude, historically they have rarely been willing to accept the intangible costs
of dissolution or consolidation for this level of tax reduction.
Each merger and dissolution situation must stand alone. New York’s local governments
vary enormously as do their service delivery and financing arrangements. Whether a
specific merger or dissolution will make sense from fiscal or other perspectives will
depend on its facts – there is no one size fits all solution. However, even if a merger or
dissolution appears sensible on its face, how it is implemented will matter. Careless
implementation can lead to inefficiency and waste.
Consolidations and dissolutions also involve a redistribution of service benefits and tax
costs. In a positive vein, one could say they involve equity issues, but another
characterization is that they produce winners and losers."

Bottom line. If you don't build trust based upon verifiable information and analysis and give citizens a sense of common purpose and inclusion, change is almost impossible.

Good article ...

"The central process driving this is not globalization. It’s the skills revolution. We’re moving into a more demanding cognitive age. In order to thrive, people are compelled to become better at absorbing, processing and combining information. This is happening in localized and globalized sectors, and it would be happening even if you tore up every free trade deal ever inked."

Life Imitates Mathematics

I viewed this program last evening on the Mandelbrot set and was struck by the "common sense" implications a mathematical theorem has on life, social organization, and in general, how all things are created and are "self-organized" from simple beginnings.

Which led me to think that if we on Long Island can create the right set of circumstances for positive change, positive change will not only occur but remain "self organized" and "self renewing."

Not that we are remotely in the same league as Benoit Mandelbrot but what we are proposing with Long Island 3.o, the Long Island Congress, the Long Island Constitution and Long Island Meta-democracy is similar to this concept.

"A body in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted on by an outside force"

If we can construct a set of circumstances on Long Island for positive change, then the positive change should continue unless interrupted by something highly unusual since, if done properly, Long Island 3.o should be pretty well protected from the run-of-the-mill "outside forces."

A different view of change

"Although Mr. Keen's objections to the publishing and distribution tools the Web provides to aspiring artists and writers sound churlish and elitist he calls publish-on-demand services a just cheaper, more accessible versions of vanity presses where the untalented go to purchase the veneer of publications he is eloquent on the fallout that free, user-generated materials is having on traditional media."

Very thought provoking article. I'll most likely read his book before commenting in depth, although I think he is stuck on Web 2.0 and has not looked at the possibilities of a Web 3.0 approach, unless that is in his book somewhere.

Anyway, the genie is out of the bottle and although his observations have a lot of merit, the process which has started will not be reversed.

Perhaps he should look into how how to "professionalize" the "amateurs," since this era of organizational and, perhaps, media Darwinism will not always reward and respect tradition, but will reward instead those who adapt best to their environment.

Viral Organization Building?

"One of the driving forces behind any successful discipline, institution, business, and any organizational structure for that matter, is the constant application of innovative ideas. Without innovation, things stagnate and can never realize their full potential. Advertising, as a creative social science, continually searches for innovative ways to capture audiences'€™ attention in order to communicate a particular message."

Good article on viral marketing. 

What we are attempting to do with  Long Island Congress and Long Island 3.0 is, in part, to create a form of sophisticated "viral" information sharing containing the "constant application of innovative ideas" for public policy development.

The Long Island Congress/Long Island 3.0 is then, in part, an "organic structure" constantly changing and adapting to meet any challenges that may occur and allowing Long Island to prosper as a region in this era of "Organizational Darwinism."