Comments on: In political debates, numbers are cudgels https://mathforlove.com/2025/04/in-political-debates-numbers-are-cudgels/ Transforming how math is taught and learned. Tue, 20 May 2025 17:13:16 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9 By: Dan Finkel https://mathforlove.com/2025/04/in-political-debates-numbers-are-cudgels/#comment-50496 Tue, 20 May 2025 17:13:16 +0000 https://mathforlove.com/?p=20834#comment-50496 In reply to Tina.

I think you’re right, in that Fermi problems give you a rough sense of what’s going on, and an estimate that’s generally good within an order of magnitude. (I did google a couple of numbers, but not much more than that.) The value is that you can get that good a sense of things without doing much research, spending much time, or even doing too much arithmetic.

To get a tighter estimate would require a much more detailed understanding of the details, and I’m sure this is a complicated topic, well outside my sphere of expertise. Hopefully you find out something interesting!

]]>
By: Tina https://mathforlove.com/2025/04/in-political-debates-numbers-are-cudgels/#comment-50492 Tue, 20 May 2025 09:31:03 +0000 https://mathforlove.com/?p=20834#comment-50492 I love this blog post, and I’m going to ask my teenager to read it because I think the mathematical and logical reasoning contained within are valuable. However, I do think you are making another kind of thinking error. BTW, I think my writing will make it obvious that I’m neither a Trump supporter nor a Trump hater. The thinking error that I would like to point out is that you used only mathematical reasoning with no attempt to ferret out relevant facts. Thus, you are making lots of assumptions, and we know where assumptions lead. In reality, how many judges are there in this field, and how many cases of this type can they actually hear? At one point, you assume 5 cases and one point you assume 10. Granted, a factor of 2 is not going to push the number of years it takes to hear the cases out to 200, but it does raise my BS meter when an argument seems distanced from verifiable facts on the ground. Also, is it a lack of immigration judges that’s causing a bottleneck or other factors within the bureacracy? Thanks for pushing me down the rabbit hole of looking this stuff up later today 😉 I also believe in having court proceedings to decide immigration issues, but I’m interested in what the reality on the ground is in why the system is functioning as it is.

]]>