- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 0
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...panies-shut-down-in-federal-safety-sweep.html
Free market would've taken care of this, obvi
Free market would've taken care of this, obvi
The free market would have responded, albeit after a dozen people were killed in an accident...
Statistics about human lives: the bottomless wellspring for justification of government intervention...
One could argue that the lack of information is a direct result of government intervention. I've never taken a bus between cities, but if I did, I would assume the bus is ~safe because there is a government body responsible for this. The only way to be safe is to do one of the following:This looks like an example of a situation where, because of incomplete or obscured information, the customer can't make an informed decision, and the normal market mechanisms don't work to resolve issues.
One could argue that the lack of information is a direct result of government intervention. I've never taken a bus between cities, but if I did, I would assume the bus is ~safe because there is a government body responsible for this. The only way to be safe is to do one of the following:
1) strictly enforce safety standards; shut down everyone who is not in compliance
2) remove all enforcement of safety standards and make it known that people need to look out for their own safety
I don't want to research every damn thing I touch, so I would rather go with #1.
This looks like an example of a situation where, because of incomplete or obscured information, the customer can't make an informed decision, and the normal market mechanisms don't work to resolve issues.
If there is no real competition, customer information is inadequate or incomplete, or the customer simply isn't capable of distinguishing, the market mechanism breaks down and government involvement makes sense.
True, but that doesn't mean that government intervention is necessarily always bad. The more people one can pack into a vehicle and the more potential damage that vehicle can do to others, the more sense it makes to allow government to burn some of our societal wealth trying to prevent some of our societal wealth to be destroyed in burning buses. Government should certainly be watched to make sure it doesn't overstep its bounds, but making sure buses, trains, and planes are reasonably safe seems to me to be a wise bit of socialism.Statistics about human lives: the bottomless wellspring for justification of government intervention...
That's a good point. I'm not a bus engineer. I don't know shit about bus safety.I recall someone suggesting that FDIC insurance should be eliminated because it encouraged people to put their money in bad banks, becauase it was safe anyway.
I guess they figured average people would be able to understand a bank balance sheet... something that judging from the financial crisis even professionals were unable to do.
what exactly has made these buses unsafe? the operators themselves? the maintenance condition of the buses?
what exactly has made these buses unsafe? the operators themselves? the maintenance condition of the buses?
The free market would have responded, albeit after a dozen people were killed in an accident...
The NTSB, in a separate investigation of a March 12, 2011 crash that killed 15 people in the Bronx, found the driver had been hired by a discount operator even though his license had been suspended 18 times and he’d been fired from two previous transportation jobs
I think that Ben Franklin quote about essential liberty for temporary safety applies here. If you're not willing to die so that businesses maintain the right to maximize profits then get the fuck out of our country.
what exactly has made these buses unsafe? the operators themselves? the maintenance condition of the buses?