Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Flying the Quiet Skies
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3139583" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>1) I doubt whether it actually increases security. I doubt it seriously, in fact.</p><p>2) Even if it does increase security, I doubt whether it's the most efficient use of the money. If something costs a billion dollars per year, and identifies one potential threat a year, and another program costs the same billion dollars per year, but identifies ten (legitimate) threats per year, where should the funding be sent? Assume--unlike fed.gov seems to think--that money is a limited resource. Remember that economics is the study of scarcity; in a real-world scenario, where resources (capital and otherwise) are scarce, it seems only sensible that they should be allocated to the most productive ends. Any third-grader can understand that; pity we can't send third-graders to fed.gov service (not a dig at you, but at the idjits in DC).</p><p></p><p>I think the program is a waste of time, manpower, and money. I think that of TSA generally, and of this "hey, let's stalk people without any probable cause" program specifically.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3139583, member: 13624"] 1) I doubt whether it actually increases security. I doubt it seriously, in fact. 2) Even if it does increase security, I doubt whether it's the most efficient use of the money. If something costs a billion dollars per year, and identifies one potential threat a year, and another program costs the same billion dollars per year, but identifies ten (legitimate) threats per year, where should the funding be sent? Assume--unlike fed.gov seems to think--that money is a limited resource. Remember that economics is the study of scarcity; in a real-world scenario, where resources (capital and otherwise) are scarce, it seems only sensible that they should be allocated to the most productive ends. Any third-grader can understand that; pity we can't send third-graders to fed.gov service (not a dig at you, but at the idjits in DC). I think the program is a waste of time, manpower, and money. I think that of TSA generally, and of this "hey, let's stalk people without any probable cause" program specifically. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Flying the Quiet Skies
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom