I think the 'free-rider problem' is really a problem for interest groups for a few reasons. The Edwards book says that the 'free-rider problem' is "The problem faced by unions and other groups when people do not join because they can benefit from the group's activities without officially joining. The bigger the group, the more serious the problem" (Edwards 338). A main reason I think this is a problem is because it will decrease the number of people who participate in or join unions. Unions are organized associations of workers that are formed to protect and further their rights and interests. If less people participate in unions just because they will receive the benefits, then less people will be working to make those benefits available. This could ultimately lead to the extinction of labor unions or other groups that work to do similar things.
I agree with Olson's law of large groups. The larger the group, the more difficult and less likely a group is to reach desired goals that provide optimal good for the collective group. With so many people trying to work together, structure and order is nearly absent and nothing really is accomplished. And when things are actually accomplished, the benefits, when distributed across the entirely large membership, are thinned out and each member reaps very little good. Smaller groups usually work better together and achieve more, and an optimal amount of collective good is obtained.
I also agree with Olson’s law of large groups. When there is a large group of people, it is harder to get things done because of the varying opinions of all of the members. It is hard to take everyone’s opinions into account and create benefits that make everyone happy. Also, when there are more members in a group, there are less benefits given to each individual member. When things get accomplished, many people might disagree with the decisions. Having a smaller group allows for more concise benefits that can be made to please everyone.
I disagree with Olson's law of large groups. Yes sometimes when you have big groups nothing gets done. There can be an opposite to that however, when you get a big group of people focused on one item they can get things done quicker than a small group. More minds and more ideas working on one problem will come up with a solution quicker. I think having a big group can be very helpful.
I think the 'free-rider problem' is really a problem for interest groups for a few reasons. The Edwards book says that the 'free-rider problem' is "The problem faced by unions and other groups when people do not join because they can benefit from the group's activities without officially joining. The bigger the group, the more serious the problem" (Edwards 338). A main reason I think this is a problem is because it will decrease the number of people who participate in or join unions. Unions are organized associations of workers that are formed to protect and further their rights and interests. If less people participate in unions just because they will receive the benefits, then less people will be working to make those benefits available. This could ultimately lead to the extinction of labor unions or other groups that work to do similar things.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Olson's law of large groups. The larger the group, the more difficult and less likely a group is to reach desired goals that provide optimal good for the collective group. With so many people trying to work together, structure and order is nearly absent and nothing really is accomplished. And when things are actually accomplished, the benefits, when distributed across the entirely large membership, are thinned out and each member reaps very little good. Smaller groups usually work better together and achieve more, and an optimal amount of collective good is obtained.
DeleteI also agree with Olson’s law of large groups. When there is a large group of people, it is harder to get things done because of the varying opinions of all of the members. It is hard to take everyone’s opinions into account and create benefits that make everyone happy. Also, when there are more members in a group, there are less benefits given to each individual member. When things get accomplished, many people might disagree with the decisions. Having a smaller group allows for more concise benefits that can be made to please everyone.
DeleteI disagree with Olson's law of large groups. Yes sometimes when you have big groups nothing gets done. There can be an opposite to that however, when you get a big group of people focused on one item they can get things done quicker than a small group. More minds and more ideas working on one problem will come up with a solution quicker. I think having a big group can be very helpful.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete