Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
there is never a moment where i turn on the news a some crisis is being blown out of all proportion. that is inevitably followed by someone in govt or some politician promising that if we just give them more power and money, they will fix the problem. to me it has become so blatantly transparent, i just don't understand why the majority of people fall for it all the time.
global warming, al qaeda, lead toys, anthrax, water shortages, nuclear energy, obesity, etc. when i refer to the perverse incentives of govt, i mean that it's almost as if govt would be better off if these crises emerge. so, take the tsa for example. i believe that the airlines can more adequately provide airplane security. i believe they can do it cheaper, more securely and in a far better spirit than the govt tsa agents.
if, the said airline security fails, it will be heavily detrimental to that airline. the lawsuits, citations and most importantly, the loss of business would be pwerful incentives for them to insure safety.
the tsa operates under different incentives. if everything is smooth and there are no threats, they will see their budget cut. if however they make a mistake and allow someone with explosives in their underpants to board a plane, they will argue that it is because they have a lack of funding and power. 99 times out of 100, they will see their budget and power grow. thus they almost have an incentive to create crises
The problem with your suggestion is the airlines would quickly realize the threat was so miniscule that their normal insurance would cover the costs of an attack. Then they could concentrate on transporting passengers safely.
Not that I support the TSA. They are just a rabid “police” that is designed to create and reinforce a state of terror and not to prevent attacks.
Wow, er, that only works if you really believe that anyone in the "government" is actually part of a single all powerful massive evil organization that strokes their oiled mustache in joy every time a new penny is allocated to public funds (fake ones for people who don't have one, or need to hide it).
This is a perfect sign another person has joined Alex Jones's tin foil hat brigade to rant about the sheeple.
Wow, er, that only works if you really believe that anyone in the "government" is actually part of a single all powerful massive evil organization that strokes their oiled mustache in joy every time a new penny is allocated to public funds (fake ones for people who don't have one, or need to hide it).
This is a perfect sign another person has joined Alex Jones's tin foil hat brigade to rant about the sheeple.
ok, perhaps the example i gave might lead you to believe that i think 9-11 was an inside job. to clarify, i don't. i was merely pointing out that any failure of govt is generally blamed on a lack of funding, power or both. the private sector cannot rely on this never ending stream of cash from the taxpayer, so they are forced to make more efficient use of their resources. failure for a govt dept means more cash, failure in the private sector, means you lose your job and the business closes down.
dept of education along with state spending on public schooling spends an average of $10000 per student per year. whilst there are successes in the system, if a private school performed that poorly on average, it would shut down. not so for public schools. this administration has predictably come to the conclusion that the failings of public schools is because of a shortage of cash. the solution, give them more money
The problem with your suggestion is the airlines would quickly realize the threat was so miniscule that their normal insurance would cover the costs of an attack. Then they could concentrate on transporting passengers safely.
Not that I support the TSA. They are just a rabid “police” that is designed to create and reinforce a state of terror and not to prevent attacks.
would you fly on an airline with lax security? i went to a nightclub in miami about 10 years ago. the crowd was a bit sketchy and they didn't check for firearms at the door. i stayed for 10 minutes and left because i knew that there were loads of wired people there who might've packing. i, and most of the people i know, try to keep an eye out for danger. i don't make the assumption that someone else has my back. i would not fly on an airline that wasn't thorough in terms of security
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
