Our leaders throw away billions (our billions) to "protect us" from non-existent risks ("volcanic ash" "swine flu") that appear to be of their own imagining, and whose effects, even if they were as serious as they wrongly suppose, would be far less damaging than the precautions taken to prevent them, while all the time they are ignoring the elephant in the room.
Why not let people, airlines etc, assess for themselves the level of risk they are prepared to take, when there is a potential danger from what they plan to do? Who are you to tell us whether we can or can't carry on our lives in the normal way and risk our lives (as we do whenever we leave the house)?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It's a combination of three things:
1) Most politicians, and all journalists, are innumerate, and therefore cannot themselves assess expert advice;
2) There is an enormous reluctance, in all organisations (private and public), for anyone, however senior and well-paid, to actually take direct responsibility for something, and make a decision;
3) Modern management theory (as developed by American business schools) requires that managers be 'organisers', directing teams of staff towards a defined goal: such managers do not, and are not expected to, have any technical knowledge whatsoever about what the organisation makes or does, and are therefore reliant on expensive consultants (engineers, lawyers, accountants) to provide them with technical advice; if such consultants are asked the wrong question, or take time to report, or provide equivocal answers, then factor (2) above comes into play, and no firm decision can be taken.
Post a Comment