The probability of harm has gone down, not up, with incentives for risk taking <As NASA, Wall Street and lately BP have demonstrated, the probability of harm rises with incentives for risk-taking. >
When people first started flying, they took big risks, flying up into the unknown, and frequently coming back to earth with a fatal thud.
As risks become known, the rewards are able to be obtained while the risks are obviated. Now we have dirty great A380s soaring around the sky, traveling huge distances luxuriously at low cost, high speed and high altitude in almost total safety.
BP can dig oil almost anywhere in almost total safety. They had a major accident, the causes of which are being sorted through and are unlikely to be repeated.
The incentives are not to take risks but to avoid risks.
Despite the media excitement at the BP oil accident, the harm was actually minimal other than to BP's shareholders, insurers, Transocean, others involved and the 11 dead people. The cameras roamed lovely sandy beaches looking for problems of which there were few. They found a few swamps [fashionably called wetlands these days] and some pelicans in trouble. No biggie.
There is still some rearguard action trying to make media hay out of the oil, but it's Game Over unfortunately for them and those who made good bucks and could pose and preen about the terrible terrible environmental catastrophe which has now disappeared into thin air. If that's a catastrophic calamity these days, we don't have much to worry about.
Mqurice |
