tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post6019134083052697783..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: The illusion of individual riskKurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-52489286811130445182010-08-25T12:19:35.448-04:002010-08-25T12:19:35.448-04:00But, Anonymous, I have shown precisely that people...But, Anonymous, I have shown precisely that people are members of multiple communities at various levels, each with different expectations and rules. Nowhere do I advocate anything like totalitarian control over people's lives. I'm not requiring anyone to be a member of any community, not that I could.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-20455612387185755452010-08-25T04:01:24.283-04:002010-08-25T04:01:24.283-04:00Given all this I am puzzled by Anonymous's rea...<i>Given all this I am puzzled by Anonymous's reaction. I think a closer read would have satisfied his concern.</i><br /><br />No, I am not that dumb, you are far far away of understanding my point.<br />What I mean is, <b>nobody</b> is 100% a member of one community and one community only.<br />Requiring that anyone be 100% a member of one community and one community only is... <i>totalitarianism</i>!<br />Your "brilliant" post is just a blatant case of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow" rel="nofollow">spherical cow</a>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-90395241478632509182010-08-24T21:50:59.282-04:002010-08-24T21:50:59.282-04:00Just to be clear. I do most of my errands via bicy...Just to be clear. I do most of my errands via bicycle, and as you might have guessed, I always wear a helmet. As I said in the piece, I'm not making any specific case for helmet requirements. But it is a fairly clear cut example of how perceived individual risk doesn't match up with reality.<br /><br />I'm not trying to discourage anyone from riding a two-wheeled vehicle and doubt that I could. A good number of people on scooters, motorcycle and bicycles are wiped out by, you guessed it, cars! If we provide more and more space to the two-wheeled kind of traffic, I think it would be a step in the right direction.<br /><br />I'm sticking with my bicycle though. Much more energy efficient and I don't feel the need to go any faster than I can pedal on a two-wheeled vehicle.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-56759639395902086592010-08-24T15:46:17.661-04:002010-08-24T15:46:17.661-04:00I'm with you Neil21.
Side impact collisions i...I'm with you Neil21.<br /><br />Side impact collisions in automobiles are the number one cause of TBIs in transportation.<br /><br />In contrast, though head injuries from cycling accidents are reduced by helmets, TBIs are unaffected.<br /><br />That's because scratches count as head injuries, and a helmet can protect you from a nasty scrape.<br /><br />Bicycle helmets are only rated to 14mph. So if you're impact is harder than that then the extra kinetic energy is going to your head. And the energy is related to the velocity squared.<br /><br />I agree it's unfortunate to have picked cycling as an example. But it is a good example of how perceived risk and perceived safety can differ remarkably from reality.Weaseldoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12657976442272800800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-73109206931543038402010-08-24T11:50:13.790-04:002010-08-24T11:50:13.790-04:00Just realised my last paragraph was a bit of a non...Just realised my last paragraph was a bit of a non-seq.<br /><br />My point was collective cost could be reduced by discouraging individual four-wheeled transport.<br /><br />For the collective good, a bus every two minutes and a bike in the garage surely make the most sense.neil21noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-80949740500591580162010-08-24T11:47:53.671-04:002010-08-24T11:47:53.671-04:00I appreciate that you simply chose the most readil...I appreciate that you simply chose the most readily accessible example of individual risk / collective cost, but your decision to focus on two-wheeled transport is very unfortunate in the larger context of your argument.<br /><br />In absolute terms, more head injuries occur annually to drivers of four-wheeled vehicles than two-wheeled. If collective cost of care is the issue, that's what to target. Mandatory helmets for drivers. At the very least drivers of convertibles.<br /><br />(Also mandatory helmets for the over-65s at home, another major source of head injuries.)<br /><br />Alternatively, do whatever you can to make two-wheels the easier choice. Allocate as much road space for two wheels as for two feet, for example. Certainly don't put barriers up (such as mandatory safety gear) that might sway the marginal commuter to choose four wheels over two.neil21noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-39923344467376442872010-08-24T04:45:35.122-04:002010-08-24T04:45:35.122-04:00Kurt,
Yours is also a good example of the illusio...Kurt,<br /><br />Yours is also a good example of the illusion of another resource that appears to go to infinity and beyond, namely, the faceless "them" (e.g. premium payers, taxpayers) who are expected to foot the bill for these various "risk shifting" schemes (private health insurance, medicare).<br /><br />As long as there is no face, name, financial background check or specific census of the 1, 2, many others out there who will pay for my bungee cord jumping thrills, it feels as if "they" and their ability to pay stretches out to infinity and well beyond. That is the illusion.<br /><br />Of course we bungee corders know deep inside that no cord stretches forever without snapping. However the tease of winning the "lottery" so to speak in this regard "feels" irresistible that we can easily 'suspend' our disbelief and accept its false premises.Step Backhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06178091823442339760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-75355024404517519372010-08-23T20:16:59.553-04:002010-08-23T20:16:59.553-04:00Perhaps anonymous missed my references to several ...Perhaps anonymous missed my references to several communities. I explicitly mentioned two: policyholders and states. Policyholders are a community of sorts inasmuch as they share a common interest with the insurance company in keeping people in the group healthy so as to keep rates down. That community can extend to just one state or several states or across national boundaries. Insurance companies have statutory powers and policyholders have rights and an opportunity to enforce them through the courts and the state insurance commissioners.<br /><br />I mentioned my state, Michigan, which, of course, is a well-defined community with card-carrying residents (I mean I. D. issued by the state) who share a common government and common interests. The state, of course, has many avenues of enforcement.<br /><br />As for energy, while I was not explicit, energy policy is generally the purview of the state and federal governments in the United States though localities have some powers as well.<br /><br />Given all this I am puzzled by Anonymous's reaction. I think a closer read would have satisfied his concern.Kurt Cobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-22497894585918736102010-08-23T15:26:34.621-04:002010-08-23T15:26:34.621-04:00This is incredibly stupid, because it does not que...This is incredibly stupid, because it does not question <i>HOW THE BOUNDARIES OF THE "community" ARE DEFINED</i> (and enforced...)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-2612485939556146482010-08-22T13:41:54.751-04:002010-08-22T13:41:54.751-04:00That argument already exists for water.
http://...That argument already exists for water. <br /><br />http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/nanaimonewsbulletin/news/99956494.html<br /><br />http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/terracestandard/news/100789049.html<br /><br />I saw an article last week in a local newspaper about how water restrictions were so tight, watering was prohibited.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-759942848260993362010-08-22T13:41:19.691-04:002010-08-22T13:41:19.691-04:00This is a good article, but the problem is the res...This is a good article, but the problem is the restraints, and how they are applied. I still recall an angry letter to the editor from a fellow in DC. He got a ticket because he was already pulling out of a parking space while putting on his seatbelt. He noted that there were crack dealers operating around the corner, unmolested by the police. An acquaintance in Baltimore gets tickets when other people leave bagged trash next to his house. His complaints have no effect. And everyone complains about the difficulty of recourse against parking and traffic tickets in the cities.<br /><br />Even if people were amenable to conservation,they certainly won't welcome another layer of bureaucracy hassling them about it.Donalnoreply@blogger.com