Great Moments in Unintended Consequences: Driving Days, Boat Taxes, Ghost Flights (Vol. 6)
Good intentions, bad results
HD Download"Great moments in unintended consequences"—when something that sounds like a great idea goes horribly wrong. Watch the whole series here.
Part 1: Driving Days
The year: 1989.
The problem: Terrible air quality in Mexico City!
The Solution: Keep traffic down and improve air quality by prohibiting one out of five cars from driving each weekday, based on their license plate numbers.
Sounds like a great idea with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong?
Citizens got around the ban by buying a second car—often a cheaper, older, and less efficient car. Having more, crappier cars in circulation failed to fix the problem and, according to a number of studies, air pollution actually increased after the restrictions were imposed.
But not to worry, politicians saw the error of their ways and in 2008….expanded the program to include Saturdays. Wait, really?
Part 2: Boat Taxes
The Year: 1773.
The problem: Britain needs money!
The solution: Collect port and lighthouse fees on merchant ships based on their length and width.
Sounds like a great idea with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong?
It turns out people don't like paying taxes. Since ships were charged by width and length but not depth, shipbuilders maximized cargo capacity while minimizing taxes by building deep, sluggish, flat-bottomed, flat-sided vessels—a recipe for instability. While Britain's Navy was ruling the sea, their unsightly and unmanageable merchant ships were a laughingstock.
On the plus side, the taxman can't reach you on the bottom of the sea.
Part 3: Airplanes Fly Empty
The year: 2020.
The problem: A global pandemic straining the American airline industry.
The solution: A $60 billion bailout to rescue airlines and maintain continuity of service.
Sounds like a great idea with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong?
With concerns over COVID, air passenger rates plummeted as much as 95 percent. But since airlines were mandated to maintain a minimum level of service to qualify for the emergency government funding, airlines were forced to continue flying planes…even if there was no one on board. Voila! American skies were quickly filled with "ghost flights"—nearly empty planes crisscrossing the country so the industry could qualify for billions of taxpayer funds.
Written and produced by Meredith and Austin Bragg; additional research by Natalie Dowzicky; narrated by Austin Bragg.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The year: 2021.
The problem: a global pandemic after the escape of a genetically modified pathogen.
The solution: waive safety requirements on an experimental gene therapy and accept manufacturer data at face value.
Sounds like a gr- whoever thought this was a good idea needs to be shot.
After joining in the grandest drug trial of all time, participants found that the experimental gene therapy not only lost efficacy quicker than it was safe to renew, but was shockingly unsafe at most any dose, and was associated with a 40% increase in premature death among otherwise healthy insurance subscribers. Symptoms encompassed a vast list of 1,291 symptoms, as detailed in a manufacturer report that was supposed to be hidden for 75 years, ranging from mycardia, nerve damage, cancer or even reproductive harm; every organ seemed deleteriously affected.
And all this under the premise that you cannot sue the manufacturer...
UK gov't still seems to be on the hook for pennies on the pound. If Pfizer is found guilty of fraud, their immunity goes too.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10556213/Covid-vaccine-claims-hit-110m-920-compensation-applications-filed.html
> The solution: waive safety requirements on an experimental gene therapy and accept manufacturer data at face value.
Except that's not what happened. And you know it.
Really? What did they waive then to speed up the process so much?
They waived nothing on gene therapy
You sure?
https://shtf.tv/bayer-executive-says-mrna-vaccines-are-gene-therapy/
[JOIN NOW] I really make A LOT OF MONEY ($200-$300/hour) online from my laptop. Last month I received almost $50,000. this line work is simple and straightforward. qcr You don’t need to go to the office, it’s online work from home. You become independent after joining this position. I really appreciate my friend who pointed.
...
It out to me SITE….., http://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
A Swedish study finds that COVID vaccine converted to DNA via reverse transcription in the liver.
thewashingtonstandard.com/bombshell-swedish-study-proves-mrna-covid-injections
Class what triggers the inflammatory response? Anyone?
Answer, the presence of foreign proteins.
Gee, I wonder why one of the most serious side effects of the vaccine in the young, who have the strongest inflammatory response, is inflammation of the cardiovascular system?
The liver is highly vascularized, and feeds directly into the largest vein, the inferior vena cava, just a a short distance from the right atrium.
Crickets. Absolutely stunning crickets is all this gets.
These drugs should have been canned ages ago with the little bit of mortality data we had before. Learning that the breadth of unintended consequences continues to widen nearly every week should have been another screaming red flag to stop.
But no, triple down.
Another thing that came out this week was a recent real world study of effectiveness of the vaccine in children found that it didn't change hospitalization rates at all, and didn't decrease infection rates past one month post vaccine. Not only didn't decrease infection rates, but the vaccinated kids actually had a statistically significant increase in test verified infections. The study didn't address children deaths, likely due to the number being so small that no conclusions could be drawn from the data. The study was conducted during the height of the omicron spike.
Heard plenty of theory on the jab's issues with non-neutralizing receptors, but it's surprising to see it so quickly in kids.
Not just miniature people in terms of treatment...
They waved all the bureaucratic nonsense, so we got the approval in six months rather than six years.
I work in the medical field, and doing to testing is just a tiny tiny part of the approval process. There's all the bureaucratic nonsense to get approval to test, then all the bureaucratic nonsense after the test is done. Actually studying the data to determine safety and efficacy is very tiny part of the whole process. Signatures must be counted and allotted and graphed with endless meetings of nonsense, with more audits to count even more signatures.
I am old enough to remember just a few short years ago when libertarians were calling for fast track approval of drugs and technology. Now we got it during an emergency situation and suddenly these same so-called libertarians are shitting a brick that we didn't spend the usual ten year process approving a vaccine. We had a million people die in this country from COVID-19, and you think we should have spent the full ten years in a study process? WTF?
Why is Pfizer getting sued over their trial results by an internal whistleblower? They didn't have any corners cut at FDA to allow the trials to not be investigated?
Yes, I strongly believe they should have spent the time to test these drugs.
5.5% died OF Covid. This percentage is already almost twice that recorded by others, such as Italy reporting 3% died OF Covid.
The death rate rose after the jab was introduced, especially for other causes of mortality. A 40% increase in unexpected death rate NOT attributable to Covid, per insurance agency reporting.
It is NOT normal for kids to have heart attacks and strokes. 1,291 side effects to get rid of a cold is a bad deal.
And, as Jesse mentioned, any preliminary testing was irreversibly compromised by Pfizer's unethical, unblinded trials. Our gov't accepted safety data at face value from the people selling the product.
"Nuh uh, liar!" is the best rebuttal.
High quality denial at Warp Speed!
And since all safety protocols were followed, where are my years of long-term safety data?
What are the year three repercussions of myocarditis following an injection? Is the doctor's advice to avoid sports and shoveling snow going to wear off before or after the 4month resistance window the boosters provide?
American skies were quickly filled with "ghost flights"—nearly empty planes crisscrossing the country so the industry could qualify for billions of taxpayer funds.
Well, at least we don't have coal-laden trains passing each other in opposite directions like those goofy Soviets!
"good intentions" is a HUGE assumption
Most people think they are good people. As a general rule people don't go around doing things to be mean and evil. Sure there are psychopaths, but most people really believe they're doing the right thing. That's what the expression "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" is all about. People with good intentions can be fed bad information and do terrible things, while meaning well the entire time. People blinded by intentions often ignore results, and blame the bad on everything other than their own well-intentioned actions. "I meant well. How could this terrible catastrophe be the result? I must find a cause that's not me."
Instead of ascribing evil motivations to anyone who disagrees with you, instead of being Ken, try giving people the benefit of the doubt. Try looking from their point of view without assuming evil motivations. Maybe they really think they're doing the right thing, but you can articulate to them how they're wrong. Instead of telling them they are terrible people, tell them why they are misguided. You're not going to persuade anyone by telling them they're stupid and evil.
Instead of telling them they are terrible people, tell them why they are misguided.
"'Misguided'?! So you think I'm *stupid*!!"
I've encountered plenty of people who take "ignorant" to be an insult. I have yet to figure out how to have a productive conversation with people who take it as an insult when you tell them something they don't already know (which is sadly easy with people take pride in not knowing stuff).
You surely have taken to being called ignorant as an insult. See your mute list for an example.
Good comment. I find proggies are generally advocating "for someone's own good." In other words, "I find it helps me. I am inspired by my values - Christian, whatever - to do good for others.
Therefore, they should also do what helps me because I'm so much more intelligent or well read or educated than them." My standard response is usually, "I may find something works for me, but I'm not about to send armed government agents to impose on other people who aren't violating my rights."
Take the politics out of it. If you want to persuade someone that is.
You are correct, up to a point. Because after a certain point the self-righteousness takes over. The true believer ends up doing all sorts of horrible things because the ends truly do justify the means for them. They do not think they are evil, but if forced to stop and think they would have to admit that their actions were evil.
A good example was waterboarding and torture. A whole bunch of otherwise Christian and God fearing people were engaged in torture. They didn't feel the least bit guilty about it because it was a for a good cause.
People are very good at twisting things around in their heads to justify themselves.
They did it with the best intentions.
That's my point.
You're not going to persuade anyone by attacking their intentions.
Yes you are correct. What bugs me with my conservative and liberal friends, is that they think that good people with good intentions in office will solve all the problems. This is simply not true. We also need people to understand that the ends never justify the means, that the means themselves must be moral.
I like Ken. As much as we disagree, I think he means well. I think he's a good person. He wants what is best for everyone. So what if he muted me. His loss.
However his strategy of dehumanizing everyone who disagrees with him is not going to convert anyone. It will only create enemies.
Then why did you follow him around for months trolling him?
As opposed to the crew I have on mute, they will reveal themselves as they respond to this comment, who I do not like because they're dishonest dickheads.
The people quoting your past stances that you deny are the ones being dishonest? Huh. That's an odd take.
There's one!
There's one!
I find it hilarious you knew you were a hypocrite and tried to fabricate a defense against it when you realized it.
SQRLcasmic hates it when people remember.
He's drinking his serious business schnappes this month. Game face on.
"the ends never justify the means"
No so. Some ends justify some means.
The problem is that people who use "the ends justify the means" as justification actually mean that their end justifies any means necessary without limit.
Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
OTOH
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve.”
― H.L. Mencken, Minority Report
“All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted”
-Frank Herbert
Indeed. Power attracts the corrupt, who then abuse that power and use it to gain more power.
Indeed. It's not that power corrupts, it's that power attracts the corruptible.
aye
"What the fuck is wrong with that kid? He thinks he is being sarcastic, but he is really just a polemic."
-Frank Herbert
Not to mention:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
― C. S. Lewis
Call me a cynic, but I don't usually believe when someone says they have good intentions for doing something bad. Usually I assume there's some ulterior motive, often one that's fairly obvious--e.g., Amazon pushing for $15 minimum wage isn't altruistic on their part, it beats down competition that cannot afford the higher wages and payroll taxes that come with them--or more reasonable than the stated reasons. For example, lots of people want power and to be able to force others to OBEY, claiming to be doing something "for their own good" is a simple ruse to garner that power.
This cynicism is triggered almost immediately whenever someone asks the government for help in forcing people to "do the right thing" or "for their own good".
Want to do something good, like say, feeding the homeless? Volunteer in a soup kitchen, or donate money directly to same. Make some sandwiches and hand them out in a homeless encampment. Want me to assume you've got an ulterior motive behind your stated desires to "feed the homeless?" Lobby for government action, taxes, etc. in the name of "feeding the homeless". I'll assume there's something in it for you.
"Want me to assume you've got an ulterior motive behind your stated desires to "feed the homeless?" Lobby for government action, taxes, etc. in the name of "feeding the homeless". I'll assume there's something in it for you."
A lot of times what's in it for them is simply the smug satisfaction of having "done something" without the hassle of actually doing anything
I agree somewhat. There are those at the top who cleverly and strategically manipulate people. However I believe the manipulated people, the followers, are acting with good intentions based upon what they have been told.
Instead of ascribing evil motivations to anyone who disagrees with you, instead of being Ken, try giving people the benefit of the doubt.
This fundamentally misunderstands politics. The most successful modern method of political "persuasion" is calling people racist, and this is even more successful when the targets are not racist than when they are. This is because the goal is not to persuade the other party in the discussion, but rather the much larger group of people listening.
I wouldn't be too quick to take advice from someone who results to "I fucked your mother" taunts when and then lectures other people about decorum.
Sounds like a great idea with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong?
Again, NOT the 'best of intentions'. The intent was to take money from merchants against their will.
Looking forward to GMIUC vol.7.
Has Reason even discussed the Surgeon General's demand from the tech companies to provide data on COVID 'misinformation'? Or are we sticking with the 'they're private corporations and therefore do whatever they want' line?
The SG set a 'deadline' of May 2. Is it just my old-fashioned, now-outdated libertarian sensibilities or is this scary as fuck? That an unelected bureaucrat can make these kinds of demands and no one blinks.
I did my part by reporting the 'leaders' for their misinformation.
To the *Surgeon General*, though?
I'm not entirely clear on how the set of "All misinformation related to COVID" doesn't include Hunter Biden's hard drive.
That an unelected bureaucrat can make these kinds of demands and no one blinks.
"Show me where in the Constitution ...."
Of course, Congress enables much such behavior.
If they didn't do it for the federal police investigating parents dissenting at local school board meetings, why would they do it for this?
I'm more disappointed that most of said tech companies probably won't have any objections to handing said data right over.
Objections? I strongly suspect they excited about the prospect. They've given every indication that they want to outsource their "good faith moderation" over to the Biden administration.
Actually, they did...https://reason.com/2022/03/03/vivek-murthys-demand-for-data-on-covid-misinformation-is-part-of-a-creepy-crusade-to-suppress-dissent/
On the plus side, the taxman can't reach you on the bottom of the sea.
Build Back Better budgets for a submarine fleet for the IRS. Curse you, Joe Manchin!
I wasn't concerned about covid and would have flown all over
On the plus side, the taxman can't reach you on the bottom of the sea.
Au contraire:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-44302476
When a ship has been discovered, the country where the ship was registered can point to something called sovereign immunity (in addition to claims of ownership). This refers to a specific category of ships that are immune from legal proceedings by another state.
Under the sovereign immunity principle in 2009, a judge in the US ruled the court lacked jurisdiction over a case involving a treasure hunting company called Odyssey Marine Exploration and the wreck of the Spanish ship the Nuestra Senora de las Mercedes.
The US company found 17 tonnes of coins off the coast of Gibraltar and transported them to the US.
But the company was ordered to give back the haul - an estimated half a million coins and other artefacts - to the government of Spain.
Odyssey said they found the wreck in international waters and claimed salvage rights. Spain said it had never relinquished ownership of the ship's cargo and the coins were part of the country's national heritage.
The origins of contents of a ship may also be disputed. For example, in the case involving Odyssey and the Mercedes shipwreck, Peru submitted claims to US courts that stated that the origin of the precious cargo was Peru where the coins were mined and minted while it was part of the Spanish empire.
Libertarianism has no consequences at all, intended or unintended. But for libertarians, that's not a bug, it's a feature.
Problem : President Trump.
Solution : President Biden.
What could possibly go wrong?
I have one more suggestion for this list, related to British merchant shipping.
British Economy was largely funded by it's overseas trade, conducted via it's massive merchant fleets. To protect this fleet, especially in wartime, required a large, powerful navy. During the French Revolution and the subsequent Napoleonic wars, British merchant fleets were especially exposed. Large navies cost money. During the intermittent peaces during those two conflicts, England would draw down their navies heavily, and pay off their trained crews. Sounds good. Those sailers, however, sought work in the merchant fleets. When the wars invariably restarted, the Royal Navy required huge drafts of seaman, via impression, to man their ships of war, but also needed the merchant fleets to support the wartime economy. So, they impressed the merchant sailors back into military service, decreasing skilled sailors in the merchant fleet, and began boarding neutral vessels, most notably American, and impressed any sailor they suspected of being British subjects (and they used a very loose definition of who were British subjects). The result, America declared war on England, and with 6 frigates, played havoc on British merchant shipping.
Before America's Civil War, Siamese customs charged a boat tax based on the width of a vessel. Foreign ships were wide, paid more, and had to unload their cannon before proceeding upstream. As an added precaution Siam had two kings, only one of which could be approached by bloodthirsty Europeans at any time. The "spare" king prevented coups by assassination or kidnapping.
Broken download link, points to xml file