frostbiker
Saying “Drivers can use their eyes and ears to help them avoid danger”
DOES NOT MEAN
Pedestrians, therefore, have no responsibility.
It’s like you’re reading words, and conjuring all kinds of meaning that is not there.
If you read my comments in this thread you will see me explicitly saying that it is a good idea for pedestrians to look both ways, several times in fact.
My brother.
Literally nobody doesn’t understand that.
And yet we see drivers speeding on a daily basis in densely populated areas with tons of foot traffic. Several pedestrians have been killed in the past decade in an intersection next to where I live. No, they were not "jaywalking", in every instance the drivers were speeding and ran over people on the sidewalk.
Apparently, for some people the answer is a resounding “no”, with a slight resonating harmonic of “and how dare you”
Perhaps being part of the community of people who are being killed has something to do with it.
When a distracted pedestrian bumps into another, it is resolved with a "sorry!". However, a collision between a pedestrian and a motor vehicle means broken bones or worse.
Since the car is what turns collisions into tragedies, education campaigns should primarily focus on reminding drivers that they are operating a vehicle that can easily maim and kill, so they must be in the lookout for unprotected people.
Want to remind children to look both ways? Great. Because they are children. But when it comes to adults the campaign should remind drivers.
People can choose to stand on moral high ground and say pedestrians have the right of way, or just realize all it takes is one distracted driver to either end their life
You can and should do both.
And when a collision happens, the blame should lie on the person operating the heavier vehicle unless proven otherwise.
Education campaigns should reflect this: they should primarily focus on reminding drivers that they are operating a vehicle that can easily maim and kill, so they must be in the lookout for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians.
Children steamrollers do not belong in cities.
Edit: Can you think of a better backronym for SUVs? Street Unsafe Vehicle? Super Unsafe Vision? Severely Unsafe Vehicle? Striking Unsuspecting Vulnerables?
But you know why is Sweden in the crosshairs of extremist Muslims? Because of an Extremist Dane/Swede Rasmus Paludan that has been harassing Swedish and Danish Muslims with impunity under “freedom of expression” rules
So a guy saying something "offensive" excuses a bunch of fanatics murdering innocents? How is that proportional? Are you equally lenient with white supremacists who murder innocents as well, or do you have a double standard depending on the color of the skin of the murderer?
The point of a pension fund is for the ongoing contributions of currently working folks to bring in enough new capital that people withdrawing don’t feel the effects of their contributions from 40 years ago having lost value against inflation.
No, that is not how long term investments work. Try reading about the subject and improve your own finances along the way. Investments typically grow faster than inflation, so the longer the original investment was made, the more money you have today.
I have described a system that would have prevented the problem in the first place while still providing the actuarial benefits of pooling resources.
I am not offering a solution for how to transition from the current system where the young pay for the old.
What I don't like is the hyper-neoliberal approach where each person lives in an island and resources aren't pooled at all, because it benefits the rich at the cost of the poor.
Why would you assume that the fund would be kept in cash? That's not how pension funds work.
What if we created one pension fund each year? Every person born that year contributes into that fund during their working years and withdraw from it in retirement. It seems like a solution that is fair to everybody, avoiding inter-generational wealth transfers.