In the end, Lincoln was proved right again: "With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed."
The current debate on the economy has illustrated perhaps the key issue in moving forward on substantive change on Long Island and an issue the One Long Island program seeks to address.
Without the public trust nothing is possible.
We can see the overwhelming reaction to the public perception that a "solution" is being foisted upon them by those who "know better."
We can see many parallels to this attitude on Long Island. There are plenty of folks who claim to have the answer. Maybe they do, maybe they don't.
It does not make the proposers "evil" or not interested acting in the public interest. In fact, ultimately they may have the correct solution.
It won't matter. The public distrust of government, large organizations and powerful individuals is so ingrained that to fight it is a fool's errand.
Lincoln was correct. Without a public buy in, change is virtually impossible. One Long Island is an attempt to re-organize how we approach problem solving on Long Island so that public sentiment may be achieved and that big issues may be addressed and solved in a civil and productive manner.
Why wait for a crisis?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
Friday, September 12, 2008
Building a New Long Island Economy: Part One
Some more inter-related topics:
One on cutting "red tape."
One on regional planning.
One on the Long Island economy.
As we've posted previously it seems a fairly obvious observation that the above issues among many others, are inter-related. Often times we can not change one thing without causing change in one or more other areas.
We've also spoken about the "diversity" of organizations (some might say duplication or redundancy of organizations) on Long Island, not only in government but across many different disciplines. Never-the-less, this is the current state of affairs and changing it by reduction may take more time and effort than its worth. Many organizations exist because of something, not in spite of it and have the constituencies to prove it.
As previously stated, organizations, of all types, that are no longer necessary will become extinct naturally if there is a dynamic philosophy on Long Island, which concentrates on innovation and self-renewal.
So, what to do?
There seems to be a general consensus on the big issues. The problem is that the consensus has been reached using the only data available to organizations and that data has not been standardized or normalized (the term my friend Mark Fasciano uses and which the correct one, he's the PhD not me), also an issue we've spoke about previously with among other posts the Long Island Dublin Core Initiative idea among other concepts. Additionally the methodology utilized to reach these various conclusions is similarly not uniform, has not been vetted and is generally in a static format rather than a dynamic format making it only semi-useful.
Therefore, conclusions reached using these various data will never be "bullet proof" and as such are subject to attack, justified or unjustified.
Once the information leaves the area of verifiable fact and enters the world of opinion, then, constructive action is virtually impossible as the various competing interests jostle over who is correct.
We are not suggesting that informed opinion should not be solicited, but it can not be the sole basis for or a major component in building a new Long Island economic model or creating a Long Island Philosophy.
Without a flexible, dynamic structure in place we will continue to make only sporadic progress and remain stuck in the "cycle of stagnation" we've spoken about previously.
More in Part II.
One on cutting "red tape."
One on regional planning.
One on the Long Island economy.
As we've posted previously it seems a fairly obvious observation that the above issues among many others, are inter-related. Often times we can not change one thing without causing change in one or more other areas.
We've also spoken about the "diversity" of organizations (some might say duplication or redundancy of organizations) on Long Island, not only in government but across many different disciplines. Never-the-less, this is the current state of affairs and changing it by reduction may take more time and effort than its worth. Many organizations exist because of something, not in spite of it and have the constituencies to prove it.
As previously stated, organizations, of all types, that are no longer necessary will become extinct naturally if there is a dynamic philosophy on Long Island, which concentrates on innovation and self-renewal.
So, what to do?
There seems to be a general consensus on the big issues. The problem is that the consensus has been reached using the only data available to organizations and that data has not been standardized or normalized (the term my friend Mark Fasciano uses and which the correct one, he's the PhD not me), also an issue we've spoke about previously with among other posts the Long Island Dublin Core Initiative idea among other concepts. Additionally the methodology utilized to reach these various conclusions is similarly not uniform, has not been vetted and is generally in a static format rather than a dynamic format making it only semi-useful.
Therefore, conclusions reached using these various data will never be "bullet proof" and as such are subject to attack, justified or unjustified.
Once the information leaves the area of verifiable fact and enters the world of opinion, then, constructive action is virtually impossible as the various competing interests jostle over who is correct.
We are not suggesting that informed opinion should not be solicited, but it can not be the sole basis for or a major component in building a new Long Island economic model or creating a Long Island Philosophy.
Without a flexible, dynamic structure in place we will continue to make only sporadic progress and remain stuck in the "cycle of stagnation" we've spoken about previously.
More in Part II.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Some updates ...
Sorry about the lack of posts lately.
It isn't that I've run out of ideas (although some might say that would be a good thing), I've just been busy on a number of other fronts.
1. Making some good progress on the "Green Accelerator" concept.
2. Even more promising developments on the whole One Long Island project and how it relates to "Meta- Planning" on Long Island.
3. My music CD project nearing completion. Not coming out too bad as far as I can tell from early reaction. Although people may just be acting politely so as not to crush my enthusiasm.
It isn't that I've run out of ideas (although some might say that would be a good thing), I've just been busy on a number of other fronts.
1. Making some good progress on the "Green Accelerator" concept.
2. Even more promising developments on the whole One Long Island project and how it relates to "Meta- Planning" on Long Island.
3. My music CD project nearing completion. Not coming out too bad as far as I can tell from early reaction. Although people may just be acting politely so as not to crush my enthusiasm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)