[From Rick Marken (2006.11.21.1745)]
Kenny Kitzke (2006.11.21.1909EST)
Mike Acree (2006.11.21.1030 PST)
CONTROLLED CHAOS
European Cities Do Away with Traffic Signs
Dare we assume that people can "behave" responsibly without Big Brother being their schoolmaster?
I certainly assume that. But I didn't know you did. I thought you believed that there had to be a Big Brother in the sky acting as the schoolmaster; the one who made the signs that say things like "Don't eat the shellfish" and "Danger: Homosexuals ahead"
Actually, it isn't traffic rules per se that are removed, it is just the plethora of traffic signs.
Exactly. People are still controlling for rules and they have to have whatever signs are necessary to follow those rules. We can't follow the rules at intersections, for example, without having traffic lights. If you want to get rid of traffic slights, for example, you have to organize traffic in a a way that makes unnecessary, as in a roundabout.
There is a difference, I think, between wanting to reduce the number of traffic signs and wanting to eliminate them completely. Wanting to reduce the number of traffic signs because so many are distracting, confusing, incoherent or eyesore, seems like a reasonable goal. Wanting to eliminate all traffic signs because of a belief that there should be no externally imposed rules on oneself seems, well, childish. If you've ever come to a busy intersection during a power failure you'll know that traffic signs can be your friend.
Is there any possibility of this happening in America with a Democratic controlled Congress?
No, I think the Democrats show every sign of being responsible members of society. They'll keep the signs, though I hope they work to improve their functionality so that whatever signs they make (like the tax laws) help the whole community, not just a tiny subset thereof.
Best
Rick
···
---
Richard S. Marken Consulting
marken@mindreadings.com
Home 310 474-0313
Cell 310 729-1400