- Joined
- May 8, 2017
- Messages
- 2,546
- Reaction score
- 688
- Location
- New York City area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
The invention of the automobile and the creation of modern high-speed highways were a great stimulus to the nation's economy, from enhanced productivity and the connection of remote markets to each other. Far less time was wasted with the uncertainty of horse, bicycle or train transportation. I would argue that the low-inflation boom of the 1950's and 1960's largely resulted from making the automobile truly useful. Ditto air travel.
LOW SPEED LIMITS
The environmental movement, unofficially kicked off with Earth Day in April 1970 marked a certain guilt that many had with our affluence. There were gains, so to speak but did we deserve them and/or were they worth the cost?
What followed was the National Maximum Speed Limit ("NMSL") of 55 mph (first 50 as imposed by Nixon). The initial impetus for that was the "energy crisis," also self-inflicted but the topic for another thread. Parenthetically Nixon had urged a low speed limit for some time before his "excuse" arrived in the form of the Arab Oil Embargo. The NMSL was supposed to be temporary but didn't end until December 1995. I suspect the real motive was a "hair-shirt" mentality; that self-abnegation may feel good for the soul and for the conscience if not for the economy.
CELL PHONE USE RESTRICTIONS
Back in the 1950's there were "car phones" but they were hard to get and expensive. A story, which may be apocryphal, has Lyndon Johnson envying Sam Rayburn's (Speaker of the House) having a car phone, and pined for the day when he could call Mr. Rayburn from a car phone, when he could get one. Finally that day arrived and he made the call to Mr. Rayburn. Mr. Rayburn answered and said "hold on a minute, I'm on the other phone."
Few care to remember the days of the use of payphones when out of the house, or having to ask a business or personal host to "borrow" the phone, incurring message unit or toll charges. Cell phones became ubiquitous by the mid-1990's and smart phones, in the form of Blackberries, not too long after. The gains in productivity were immense. People could actually work while traveling. They could make or return business calls, set up meetings, and let people know when they were running behind schedule. This, plus other aspects of the high-tech revolution has caused a 1950's and 1960's like boom, and also without inflation. Times, except for the 2008-9 sharp recession have been good.
America's instinct for Puritanical self-doubt and guilt led to a similar "hair-shirt" mentality, followed first by laws against use of hand-held cell phones, which made and make little sense, and then more sensible laws against texting behind the wheel. But the law makes no distinction between texting, hand-held use of a cell phone for talking or changing a music selection, which is much like changing a radio station. Nobody ever discussed restricting car radios back in the day. Maybe people had more cajones then and wouldn't accept a nanny state.
CONCLUSION
Sensible safety laws are fine. But they should be tailored to allow activities that are safe, and not be used for either "feel-good" expiation of guilt, or to fill localities' coffers.
LOW SPEED LIMITS
The environmental movement, unofficially kicked off with Earth Day in April 1970 marked a certain guilt that many had with our affluence. There were gains, so to speak but did we deserve them and/or were they worth the cost?
What followed was the National Maximum Speed Limit ("NMSL") of 55 mph (first 50 as imposed by Nixon). The initial impetus for that was the "energy crisis," also self-inflicted but the topic for another thread. Parenthetically Nixon had urged a low speed limit for some time before his "excuse" arrived in the form of the Arab Oil Embargo. The NMSL was supposed to be temporary but didn't end until December 1995. I suspect the real motive was a "hair-shirt" mentality; that self-abnegation may feel good for the soul and for the conscience if not for the economy.
CELL PHONE USE RESTRICTIONS
Back in the 1950's there were "car phones" but they were hard to get and expensive. A story, which may be apocryphal, has Lyndon Johnson envying Sam Rayburn's (Speaker of the House) having a car phone, and pined for the day when he could call Mr. Rayburn from a car phone, when he could get one. Finally that day arrived and he made the call to Mr. Rayburn. Mr. Rayburn answered and said "hold on a minute, I'm on the other phone."
Few care to remember the days of the use of payphones when out of the house, or having to ask a business or personal host to "borrow" the phone, incurring message unit or toll charges. Cell phones became ubiquitous by the mid-1990's and smart phones, in the form of Blackberries, not too long after. The gains in productivity were immense. People could actually work while traveling. They could make or return business calls, set up meetings, and let people know when they were running behind schedule. This, plus other aspects of the high-tech revolution has caused a 1950's and 1960's like boom, and also without inflation. Times, except for the 2008-9 sharp recession have been good.
America's instinct for Puritanical self-doubt and guilt led to a similar "hair-shirt" mentality, followed first by laws against use of hand-held cell phones, which made and make little sense, and then more sensible laws against texting behind the wheel. But the law makes no distinction between texting, hand-held use of a cell phone for talking or changing a music selection, which is much like changing a radio station. Nobody ever discussed restricting car radios back in the day. Maybe people had more cajones then and wouldn't accept a nanny state.
CONCLUSION
Sensible safety laws are fine. But they should be tailored to allow activities that are safe, and not be used for either "feel-good" expiation of guilt, or to fill localities' coffers.