tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1763883859696167228.post4209680315931550042..comments2023-11-03T03:37:02.548-05:00Comments on WEBSTER'S BLOGSPOT: When a low-level grunt goes way too farTerry Morrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00166609562028309038noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1763883859696167228.post-9783386425950522002009-11-21T11:12:33.397-06:002009-11-21T11:12:33.397-06:00Flagmen....
That task involves at least three guy...Flagmen....<br /><br />That task involves at least three guys using $40 worth of equipment (which is costed out at more like $300) when it could be done more easily and effectively (and <i>far</i> more safely for all concerned) by one individual using $20 worth of equipment (which would probably have to be costed at more like $1000 because it's 'specialized'). But the whole point of government spending is have as many people sucking the teat as can fit.<br /><br />Well-run crews rotate the flagmen because it's such an obviously stupid and demeaning job. Guys who get stuck there may not be good for much else, but they don't necessarily appreciate the comment on their abilities.<br /><br />But you know, speaking of traffic lights....<br /><br />It used to be that, when the red light (or flag...it was that long ago) went up for one direction of traffic, it was simultaneous with the green light for the other direction. The yellow light was instituted as a (very reasonable) warning, not that the light was going to go red, but that the opposing flow of traffic was about to get the green light.<br /><br />In terms of efficiency, this is fine as long as nobody runs the red light. Even though there are still cars crossing in front of you when you get the green, you can't actually hit them unless you've got fast reflexes, a sports car (or motorcycle) and a death wish. Which combination traffic lights cannot address. On the opposing side, this made the red light naturally self-enforcing, because it was warning of a real danger. People stopped.<br /><br />Then bureaucrats got involved and decided that, to increase the safety of the system, the light should be red for long enough for all the cars to clear the intersection before the other side got a green. As any moderately intelligent person could have predicted, this encouraged people to run the red light, since they knew by experience that they had a few extra seconds. So the bureaucrats tried to solve this by increasing the wait during which <i>nobody</i> had a green light, further increasing the incentives to run the red.<br /><br />Finally, technology intervened and we got traffic cameras to automatically ticket people running red lights. But all this does is establish that any light that doesn't have a camera doesn't 'really' count. Which, in a literal sense, it does not, at least not in the same way that the camera light does.<br /><br />Billions of dollars wasted and widespread scofflawism among the driving public because bureaucrats think that rules don't need a distinct and immediate justification for people to follow them. The story of every government in microcosm.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com