I love The Daily Show. I'm a regular watcher, and I think Jon Stewart is a more responsible and effective newsman than perhaps anyone else out there right now. Sometimes, though, even he can miss something.
On the September 24, 2013 episode of The Daily Show Stewart opens by skewering politicians who are opposed to the Affordable Care Act. In the next few segments he interviews Richard Dawkins. During the interview, Stewart says that he believes advances in technology can lead to horrible consequences. He also notes that people are flawed, and technology is used by people, so new technology will at times be put to flawed uses.
I wonder if Stewart makes the connection between the first and second segment. While I agree that many legislators who oppose the ACA seem to have flimsy reasoning, there are very valid concerns about the incentives that the ACA will create. The fact is we do not know what will result from these incentives. September 23rd's Washington Post had an article about some undesirable effects that already seem to be occurring. No doubt there will be more. If Stewart is correct that humans are flawed (he is), and if he is correct that new technology can be used in ways we might not like (again, he is), then why would he imagine that legislators are not flawed and that well-intentioned legislation cannot be turned to undesirable purposes?
On the September 24, 2013 episode of The Daily Show Stewart opens by skewering politicians who are opposed to the Affordable Care Act. In the next few segments he interviews Richard Dawkins. During the interview, Stewart says that he believes advances in technology can lead to horrible consequences. He also notes that people are flawed, and technology is used by people, so new technology will at times be put to flawed uses.
I wonder if Stewart makes the connection between the first and second segment. While I agree that many legislators who oppose the ACA seem to have flimsy reasoning, there are very valid concerns about the incentives that the ACA will create. The fact is we do not know what will result from these incentives. September 23rd's Washington Post had an article about some undesirable effects that already seem to be occurring. No doubt there will be more. If Stewart is correct that humans are flawed (he is), and if he is correct that new technology can be used in ways we might not like (again, he is), then why would he imagine that legislators are not flawed and that well-intentioned legislation cannot be turned to undesirable purposes?
