While considering the abject vacuity of the presidential candidates’ positions on the major issues this election season, I started thinking about some minor issues that might make a difference in my vote.
For example, if either major candidate came out in favor of dismantling the "security" apparatus that the federal government has foisted upon us to make airline travel an aggravation, at best, and an ordeal most of the time, then that candidate would probably get my vote.
Alas, neither candidate has proposed such a dismantling.
Nevertheless, don’t miss this clever-but-serious Jeffrey Goldberg/Atlantic.com article on the utter uselessness of the Transportation Safety Administration’s airport security procedures (prior post here).
Inasmuch as the only two airport-security measures that really matter — fortified cockpit doors and the awareness of the flying public as to what a hijacking can mean — have been in place virtually since the attacks of September 11, 2001, Goldberg zeroes in on the wasteful airport security process that we have allowed the TSA to impose on us at a substantial direct cost and an even greater indirect one.
Moreover, that process does virtually nothing to discourage serious terrorist threats. Rather, the inspection process is "security theater" that simply makes a few naive travelers feel safer about airline travel.
Finally, if all that weren’t bad enough, the worst news is that once a governmental "safeguard" such as the TSA apparatus is adopted, few politicians are interested in dismantling it even when it’s clear that process is ineffective, expensive and obtrusive.
That’s food for thought as we get ready to endure implementation of the next round of governmental regulation of business.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Ken Lay was prosecuted to death for promoting Enron even though he had a reasonable basis for believing that what he was saying about his company was true.
