Every so often I write an article that I look back on and see was a dog and that I didn't put the proper thought into it. Yesterday's post, Life Is Not Fair was a great example.

I mentioned in the first paragraph that I didn't want to come across as callous yet Dustin Kidd remarked that it did indeed come across as callous. And after reading it a few times more, I agree with Dustin.

But I believe in the idea that I can always come back and try to make my points clearer or even change my mind.

Let me first affirm that even though life is often not fair, we should seek to make our society as just and fair as possible. Life is difficult enough for the blind without having to worry about whether they can trust others to not steal from them.

I am still not sure about this particular legal decision and I am not the only one.

"We believe in solving real problems of discrimination — not in doing gimmicks that look like they solve a problem and could make things actually worse," James Gashel, executive director for strategic initiatives at the National Federation of the Blind, said Wednesday. "For a federal court to say that we are being discriminated against is simply wrong."

Julie and Brian made perhaps the best suggestion that technology can be an equalizer in cases like this.

My intention in writing the post actually had little to do with the judicial decision nor really about whether life is fair. My intention was actually to show that often there are problems or societal issues that are all too easy to proclaim a cure for within a vacuum without regards for limited resources.

It is all too easy for politicians to make statements such as "We believe all high school graduates should be taught how to get a 1600 on the SAT" without any regard for the costs to make this happen and what other worthwhile things would have to be sacrificed as a result.

The Copenhagen Consensus Center makes this very point.

The Copenhagen Consensus Center (CCC) is a center under the auspices of the Copenhagen Business School. Through the commissioning and conveying of research, we work to improve the foundation for prioritizing between various efforts to mitigate the consequences of the World's biggest challenges. In particular we focus on the international community's effort to solve the World's biggest challenges and how to do this in the most cost-efficient manner.

The idea is simple, yet often neglected. When financial resources are limited you need to prioritize your effort. Everyday, from policymakers to business leaders, at all levels, priorities are made between investing in one project and not another. However, many times, and particularly at the political level, decisions on priorities are made not based on facts, science or calculations but on which issue gets the most media coverage or is most politisized. The Copenhagen Consensus approach works to improve the foundation of knowledge, to get an overview of research and facts within a given problem, so that the prioritizing of efforts to solve this problem is based on evidence and is comparable with solutions across problems.