SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (361933)12/9/2007 10:50:55 AM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577191
 
"It's never easy for a leader to actively do nothing."

There are different ways to do it. My best example is when a bunch of medical waste was washing ashore in the Northeast. New Jersey took the stance that it wasn't a health risk, cleaning it up was going to be really expensive and so they weren't going to do anything. In Delaware, they immediately scrambled teams to evaluate the situation and start a cleanup. They took the position that they were very concerned about the problem, they didn't think there was any health risk, but they were going to start the cleanup anyway although it was going to be expensive. And they provided a dollar figure.

In New Jersey, the debate crystallized over the state risking the health of its citizens to save a few bucks. In Delaware, the debate was over the issue of the expense if the waste provided little or no health risk.

So, guess what happened?

Same waste, same area, different responses. One state took the stance that they get to make the decisions and had decided no action was required. The other took the stance that there was concern and were taking action, was transparent about their findings, and allowed the citizens to decide.

One state wound up spending a lot of money and had their citizens pissed at them. The other spent far fewer bucks and the citizens felt they were taken into account.