I thought this reading was especially interesting considering the current challenges that the US government is facing. As I was reading the example of Greenvale in the study, it occurred to me that our government may make some of the same mistakes that the “bad mayors” make in the example. For one, I think that the government may be asking what questions instead of why questions. For example, it took the Senate days to agree upon a plan to stimulate the economy. Now of course I cannot know for sure, but I would guess that some senators were looking for an easy solution to bring money back into the US economy, without having a specific plan, that considered not only how the money should be distributed, but WHY.
Another point from the Greenvale example that I think that our government may be grappling with right now is the tendency to get fixated on one thing at a time. In this time, it is so easy to get overly focused on one issue- getting the economy back on track, producing more tests, finding a vaccine, washing your hands, etc.. Whatever it is, we cannot stay focused on just one of these things. It is crucial to address all of the issues at the same time, as well as continue on as best we can with the regular upkeep of the country. This is, of course, extremely challenging at a time like this, and, as the reading says, against the nature of some people. However, I think it is increasingly important that the government does not get fixated on just one of the issues at hand.
I think another thing to consider in our current situation is the role that media plays for the public. Specifically in the case of the government focusing on a single issue, the media has a large role in portraying the government to be hyper-focused on this one issue, which may not necessarily be true. Döver’s concern for a group of leaders to be fixated on a single issue is that they fail to consider the consequences of their actions. So, I think the question is not whether passing a stimulus bill was good or bad, but whether its properly covers those with less-stable finances and what kind of plan government will put forward to address income loss for this upcoming year.
I believe everyone is currently overwhelmed with the situation because it has basically affected everything: the economy, medical aid, unemployment, etc. I agree it is challenging to try to focus on more than one issue as everyday, the weight of these issues changes as they affect more and more people. I feel that to better ensure that these issues are being addressed is to allow those in these fields to work together to determine if there is a decision that affect the population well now and not be detrimental later.
I agree that policymakers should consider issues on a macro basis instead of a micro one. I think this is a particularly challenging time for lawmakers, as the issues the world currently faces are unprecedented, and traditional measures of providing aid are not effective. While the economy has gone through recession periods, there are so many more factors that need to be accounted for now. I think a clear example of a decision made that has deemed to be ineffective is the Fed lowering the interest rates to 0. The Fed typically lowers rates in an attempt to foster investment during recessionary periods, however, rates were already low, and now that it is set between 0 and 0.25%, they cannot go lower, so once the recession is in full swing, the Fed will not be able to lower rates anymore. I think this decision did not take into consideration larger issues in the long term and prevent the economy from recovering faster.