Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (100233)	2/13/2005 5:53:04 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) of 793656

karen, how would you define or frame "90% safety"..... Billions of containers come into our ports each year. Since we only examine about 10% of them, perhaps it will be that 4 or 5 of the containers will come in, not be checked, and have materials to cause enough damage and distruction to make many places in our country uninhabitable for decades, if not longer. To say nothing of economic damage worldwide. Is it better to try to do the best we can to think of all possibilities? Or to ignore them? If we spend money for 90% but ignore 10%, and that 10% lets something in that causes great harm, did we wisely spend the money in the first place? Did the mouse family care that the cat was contained 90% of the time, if the cat was out 10% of the time, and ate the entire mouse family in that short time? One was the the public's inability to be rational about risk. He used the term "cognitive illusion" regarding the demand of people and their willingness to overpay for 100 percent safety as opposed to, say 90 percent safety. I've mentioned this often in connection with terrorism risk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next