timbeiko.eth
@tim
Are there are governance/legal systems who systematically keep track of the costs/externalities of their rulesets and default to removing/changing rules if they are proven to be a net negative? Not “we realized that this is bad and campaign to change it”, but built in proactively.
5 replies
4 recasts
60 reactions
shazow
@shazow.eth
Had the same thought in this thread: https://warpcast.com/shazow.eth/0x3811851e
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
kenny 🎩
@kenny
not that I know of I think the problem is the human error potential in keeping track of costs/externalities perfectly who tracks the trackers to ensure that their process isn't overly cautious and harming the legal system by falsely labeling things net negative?
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
BrixBountyFarm 🎩
@brixbounty
Closest i can think of is some taxation schemes > https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/massachusetts-tax-refund-2022-heres-how-it-will-work/2864886/ Surplus over X has to return to tax payers
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
GIGAMΞSH
@gigamesh
This is a good conversation I listened to today about this exact thing. Highlights how difficult it is because externalities are often subjective and not evenly distributed, and reviews are expensive. https://pca.st/episode/232380c6-4edf-434b-9861-f24c7b1e2f1f
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Thomas
@aviationdoctor.eth
None comes to mind that does it perfectly, especially in the public sphere (easier to do within a smaller for-profit scope where impacts are more obvious). Most governance bodies try to do that to some degree with regulatory impact analysis, public sounding, regulatory reviews / sunset, etc but some externalities…
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
